You need a lot of luck but the reason I give Liverpool a chance is because they will come with the same approach that was giving Man City problems before Mane's red card in the last game. You can't say the same about United for example. We won't beat City with the cowardly tactics we showed a couple of weeks back.
18. European record is Pep's Bayern with 19.How many wins in a row now?
Better teams in the Premier League or geternally? I'm curious what team was better than Manchester City in the premier league?
This is also taking into account that the premier league was a counter attacking league almost exclusively for its first 12 years then became extremely negative after Rafa Benitez and Jose Mourinho landed on English soil.
Teams now are better defensively and better at being more compact both vertically and horizontally. There is less space for attackers to attack.
Manchester United 2006-2009
Chelsea 2004-06
Chelsea 2009-10 (Ancelotti)
One can also argue Pellegrini's first season/Liverpool with Suarez were also pretty entertaining.
Again just my opinion. For you this may be the best PL side ever, not for me.
Step 1 explains why they are superior to most teams in the league and would explain them leading a title race, it does not however, explain them being on the verge of the all time record of consecutive wins, winning the league by Christmas and playing on the front foot dominating territory and possession in every single game.How to beat city's game in 5 easy steps and how they relate to today's game.
Step 1: Have your own contingent of world class players. Newcastle: The City starting XI cost 2x the purchase cost of Newcastle, so 0/1
Step 2: Have your players intelligent and quick enough to move into the space left when they bring a 2nd or 3rd man to press. Newcastle: Not enough movement, no one showing for ball. 0/2
Step 3: When you do win the ball back, EVERYONE needs to move as a spring in the other direction. Newcastle: Too static/rigid. 0/3
Step 4: Don't concede. Newcastle: Did. 0/4
Step 5: Score Newcastle: Didn't. 0/5
Manchester United 2006-2009
Chelsea 2004-06
Chelsea 2009-10 (Ancelotti)
One can also argue Pellegrini's first season/Liverpool with Suarez were also pretty entertaining.
Again just my opinion. For you this may be the best PL side ever, not for me.
I don't belive in best teams generally. They are certainly the most dominant and they have to deal with more compactness than any of those teams. The space between the lines in the premier league in those years was much bigger.
I don't belive in best teams generally. They are certainly the most dominant and they have to deal with more compactness than any of those teams. The space between the lines in the premier league in those years was much bigger.
Just pass/pass/pass and bore everyone is also a specialty which much be appreciated.
Ancelloti's Chelsea belong nowhere near this. They only won because Rooney was injured in the run in and we were adjusting to life after Ronaldo which led to a poor start. This City team would thrash them
United 2007-09 won the title three times, the CL once, making successive finals 08,09. City have to better that to better that team. Bottom line
It wasn't an entirely serious post besides 2 and 3 tbh.Step 1 explains why they are superior to most teams in the league and would explain them leading a title race, it does not however, explain them being on the verge of the all time record of consecutive wins, winning the league by Christmas and playing on the front foot dominating territory and possession in every single game.
Step 2 and 3 are exactly why some coaches are valued more than others. Being able to do those things with efficiency is a very difficult task. In fact, the only one capable of doing it without sacrificing another is Guardiola. It is the reason he was the most sought after coach in the world and why the likes of Klopp, Pochettino and others are struggling to reach the balance required to make playing like that efficient.
Step 4 and 5 are surely a joke?
You're trying too hard to discredit them.Manchester United 2006-2009
Chelsea 2004-06
Chelsea 2009-10 (Ancelotti)
One can also argue Pellegrini's first season/Liverpool with Suarez were also pretty entertaining.
Again just my opinion. For you this may be the best PL side ever, not for me.
No united team in that cycle was as dominant. City are scoring more, having more of the ball, playing in the opposition half and creating more chances and winning more games. In terms of dominance no premier league team has ever approached this leve of dominance in every measurable metric.
The league was essentially a counter attacking league and the team with the best counter attacking players won.
The spaces on that era was so much larger on averge. The compactness players have to deal with today is mich higher which is why automatisms have to be used.
In terms of greatness I agree. This Manchester City team needs to win important trophies to even be put in the discussion. That Manchester United team for me are the greatest premier league side.
I think Liverpool at Anfield would present City as much problems as Everton under Big Sam.
You're trying too hard to discredit them.
Yea I figured. It's not just about the players though. A lot of teams have great players. Barcelona, PSG and Real have a level of individual quality that I would call decisive in the sense that on its own, would make a difference. But after that, the level between the top 6 in England, Bayern, Atlético, Juventus, is much closer than is being made out. The difference is made up of the coaching, how long the players have been together, the clarity and precision of profile with which they have been assembled and other factors like confidence and momentum. The thing is at the moment at least City score higher than anyone else in those aspects.It wasn't an entirely serious post besides 2 and 3 tbh.
I remember the Arsenal team of the late 90's/early 00's uncoiling like I mention. 10 men streaming forward once they had possession. It was terrifying tbh. Literally the entire team sprinting forward. It's probably the closest to what I mean but yeah, you need an incredible set of players to pull it off and obviously a great coach.
By whom? Barca lost one league title because they lacked hunger and motivation and went up against an almost equally incredible team, then bounced back to win it with 100 points. In CL, they were countered by -a volcano and an injury to iniesta, abysmal finishing, and their manager suffering from cancer and Messi getting injuredBarca were eventually countered, probably one of the best teams in history if not the best.
There's no way you can honestly believe all those sides were better or more entertaining than this side. You've gone over the top with some of them especially the Chelsea sides. Also pretty strange that you don't have the invincible's there.You're trying too hard to interpret my post. Never discredited them. But if you want me to admit that this city side is the best since bread and butter then I can't.
There's no way you can honestly believe all those sides were better or more entertaining than this side. You've gone over the top with some of them especially the Chelsea sides. Also pretty strange that you don't have the invincible's there.
Pointless arguments all round.Manchester United 2006-2009
Chelsea 2004-06
Chelsea 2009-10 (Ancelotti)
One can also argue Pellegrini's first season/Liverpool with Suarez were also pretty entertaining.
Again just my opinion. For you this may be the best PL side ever, not for me.
'The question has to be asked: are City unbearable?'
'The question has to be asked: are City unbearable?'
You can talk about dominance in terms of one season, 3 seasons or a decade. Over one .. surely there has been none that can touch this City side so far this season. Their only defeat (CL) has been with their reserve side, and even that was close.I will say one of the most efficient. Dominance cannot be achieved over one season. If they continue doing this for another year or so then hell yeah but giving them the most dominant side ever is very premature.
It's an obnoxious complaint to hear from pep, sky and some (not all) city fans given the embarrassment of riches they have."We did absolutely everything but it is difficult to play when the other team doesn't want to play," said Guardiola.
Pointless arguments all round.
How would anyone ever prove that their nominated team is better than another from a different era? They will never play each other and comparing numbers of honours proves longevity but not brilliance on any given day.
Arguably the talent pool from which top English teams draw is deeper these days as we have the money to scoop up almost all of the world's top talent in respect of players, coaches and even administrators so it would follow that this league would take more winning. Training methods, diet and fitness are also ever improving.
The older teams mentioned would maybe have the advantage of greater continuity and possibly more diehard loyalty to the team as players and top Managers moved around a bit less and greater bonds were forged to a particular club.
You can talk about dominance in terms of one season, 3 seasons or a decade. Over one .. surely there has been none that can touch this City side so far this season. Their only defeat (CL) has been with their reserve side, and even that was close.
Well you're right, of course, but most folks sugar coat the performances and strengths of their favourites and will highlight any weaknesses of a team who they despise.You may not be able to prove but you can always count on your own eyes of what you have seen. Which is why I said it is my personal opinion and no one need to agree with me.
Well you're right, of course, but most folks sugar coat the performances and strengths of their favourites and will highlight any weaknesses of a team who they despise.
It's only natural.
That's the thing. I don't have an opinion because it would be pure guesswork on my part.In this case it's not even the case of despising pep or city. They are doing a fabulous job and just because I support united I cannot deny that. Just that I cannot call them the best ever in the PL , just for the reason they need to do this on a consistent basis. If they go on to remain unbeaten in the league then surely this side is better than the arsenal invincible who I always found overrated which is why I didn't put in my list. Trust me there was nothing to favour about a chelsea side from 2004 to 06. I despised them more than this city side but I still remember they were one tough nut to crack especially because of Jose. We may never the see the same Jose but that was one crazy side. Call me biased but for me the United side from 2006 to 09 will always be the best. To win 3 Pl titles on the trot is not a mean feat but that side could do that.
Again all these are my personal opinion. If you feel this city side is the best (and being a city supporter you have a right to feel that way) then fair enough.