Manchester City v Leeds United Match Thread

[Clitheroe White]

Today shows we can stay up with a better manager

Totally agree

[Cjay]

Today shows we can stay up with a better manager

Would agree

Just proves we are better when Daniel Farke is forced into change

Like playing Gnonto from the start rather than cameos season 1.

Like dropping Meslier because his howlers were too much after months of refusing.

Like swapping Piroe and Rutter over

Like bringing Tanaka and Rothwell in because of injuries.

After still setting up his way from kick off (his initial chpice) he was forced to change by the fact we were awful.

It's not like these changes were his 1st instinct

We are literally praising him for playing the style the squad was built for in nearly December

[The Subhuman]

And we've been doing it since before the season started ...

[The Subhuman]

Would agree

Just proves we are better when Daniel Farke is forced into change

Like playing Gnonto from the start rather than cameos season 1.

Like dropping Meslier because his howlers were too much after months of refusing.

Like swapping Piroe and Rutter over

Like bringing Tanaka and Rothwell in because of injuries.

After still setting up his way from kick off (his initial chpice) he was forced to change by the fact we were awful.

It's not like these changes were his 1st instinct

We are literally praising him for playing the style the squad was built for in nearly December

Like benching Rothwell for Gruev, the biggest change to our fortunes end of last season

[CHAPELALLMAN]

This happens when you replace steinnsson with a guy who has never been in the role before at any level. It was obvious that they gambled that the red bull connection would help him secure signings, I don't feel he has the black book of contacts or the manipulative/charisma that even orta did to sell a move to leeds.... In reality there were a couple of good signings and we way overpaid on others with panic buys like signing cl on a big contract for three years.

Perri while I'm not complaining was not value for money..... Neither was okafor..... Or Justin..... Or Calvert lewin.....

We secured no loans either which was mental.

Stach was a good signing, as was gudmundsson and Long staff but I think what we overlooked was that last year our squad was threadbare as it was.

Too many players who have no ability to play at prem level and IMO no potential to improve to be but are on big money..... Piroe, Aarronsson, Gruev, Meslier, Harrison even Gnonto..... The best sides sell while the price is high on players like these while we're at the level we are.

Bijol I think will come good but again is there better in the championship for less? Considering how Sunderland's championship players have stepped up.... Quite possibly....

Xhaka..... Grealish..... They're the type of signings that instantly improve a side and provide results. Instead we're being linked with another injury prone, sub par signing in Phillips who while nostalgic offers nothing to improve us.

I think we were hampered by a lack of long term strategic planning and Farkes football/team building which works in the championship but doesn't translate to the prem like other sides do.

It's worth remembering that Aaronson is the second most expensive signing in the club's history....

[Morpheus]

Has he been sacked yet?

[weasel]

Would agree

Just proves we are better when Daniel Farke is forced into change

Like playing Gnonto from the start rather than cameos season 1.

Like dropping Meslier because his howlers were too much after months of refusing.

Like swapping Piroe and Rutter over

Like bringing Tanaka and Rothwell in because of injuries.

After still setting up his way from kick off (his initial chpice) he was forced to change by the fact we were awful.

It's not like these changes were his 1st instinct

We are literally praising him for playing the style the squad was built for in nearly December

That would be the change that saw both of them produce less after it happened? Rutter's production in particular fell off the edge of the cliff.

He wasn't forced to change and could easily have simply brought on another defender and tried for damage limitation - I'm sure at half time many were fearing the worst and would have settled to only lose by 3 or 4 goals.

[Barlow Boy]

Has he been sacked yet?

Not a prayer after that.

[The Subhuman]

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/arti ... 847x43jz3o

[Cjay]

That would be the change that saw both of them produce less after it happened? Rutter's production in particular fell off the edge of the cliff.

He wasn't forced to change and could easily have simply brought on another defender and tried for damage limitation - I'm sure at half time many were fearing the worst and would have settled to only lose by 3 or 4 goals.

Ignoring the fact Rutter played injured and then was rushed back from a hernia the fact he's never been played as a striker again nor did Farke change it again after suggests it was the right call eventually and he knew it.

Piroe went on to win Championship top scorer as a striker.

He wasn't forced in the sense nobody can actually force him, but what choice did he have?

He'd tried his same 4-3-3 sit back style first half and been absolutely battered (officially the highest xG Man City have had in a half this season).

He could have tried to add another defender and go even more defensive.

And yes after the first half most would have taken a 3, 4 defeat but that wouldn't do Farke any good, fans would still have wanted him gone and he still looks like a 1 trick pony.

He was in a no lose situation imo, go for it and it works he can claim a plucky effort as he has for half hour narrow defeat etc (on paper anyway).

Doesn't work we get battered as we were 1st half then he's tried something new and can claim it shows his flexibility and worse case he gets sacked which seems pretty inevitable anyway.

But he's answered some critics by making early subs, making a tactical change, win , lose or draw it gave him some ammunition

He had to change the narrative somehow.

It's nearly December and finally DF puts his ego aside and goes to a style that the squad was designed for, hardly a move that earns much credit.

Expect it saves him from the sack for now but good odds he goes back to his style and 4-3-3 vs Chelsea.

[weasel]

Ignoring the fact Rutter played injured and then was rushed back from a hernia the fact he's never been played as a striker again nor did Farke change it again after suggests it was the right call eventually and he knew it.

Piroe went on to win Championship top scorer as a striker.

He wasn't forced in the sense nobody can actually force him, but what choice did he have?

He'd tried his same 4-3-3 sit back style first half and been absolutely battered (officially the highest xG Man City have had in a half this season).

He could have tried to add another defender and go even more defensive.

And yes after the first half most would have taken a 3, 4 defeat but that wouldn't do Farke any good, fans would still have wanted him gone and he still looks like a 1 trick pony.

He was in a no lose situation imo, go for it and it works he can claim a plucky effort as he has for half hour narrow defeat etc (on paper anyway).

Doesn't work we get battered as we were 1st half then he's tried something new and can claim it shows his flexibility and worse case he gets sacked which seems pretty inevitable anyway.

But he's answered some critics by making early subs, making a tactical change, win , lose or draw it gave him some ammunition

He had to change the narrative somehow.

Expect it saves him from the sack for now but good odds he goes back to his style and 4-3-3 vs Chelsea.

I merely said that both Piroe and Rutter produced less after the change, not opinion just fact.

Personally I think Piroe works better off another striker, whether that is a second striker or 10 is largely down to people's interpretation. Would like to see him being played alongside DCL or Nmecha.

I just believe in trying to be balanced. I think Farke deserves praise for his changes and similarly I thought his decision to play both Justin and Gnonto on the left side was foolish given neither was match sharp and neither had familiarity with each other. For me that was asking for trouble and misunderstanding as to who was marking who, complimenting each other's play etc. Like I said though the changes he made, at half time, deserve praise as it was bold to actually still look to attack rather than opt for damage limitation. That it had the City players totally flummoxed makes me interested as to whether we will see Farke making changes earlier in matches. Last week many were quick to lay into Farke after Emery's half time impact was lauded so it is only fair to give Farke praise. I would however have preferred to see Piroe brought on instead of Aaronsen as Piroe is surely more likely to score.

So praise and criticism rather from me.

[pandagirl]

All i will say is this match isnt the problem
The last match wasnt the problem either

Its when we play against utter trash teams that we should be beating like burnley and dont put up any fight, thats the problem

Even v west ham we almost gave it up to 2-2

If we had half this fight that we had against city, we would stay up

I get the hard luck stories like today, but theres ZERO EXCUSE against the lower table teams (and yes i know theres no easy guys in the premier league) when we dont put up any fight!

[Cjay]

1)I merely said that both Piroe and Rutter produced less after the change, not opinion just fact.

2)Personally I think Piroe works better off another striker, whether that is a second striker or 10 is largely down to people's interpretation. Would like to see him being played alongside DCL or Nmecha.

3)I just believe in trying to be balanced. I think Farke deserves praise for his changes and similarly I thought his decision to play both Justin and Gnonto on the left side was foolish given neither was match sharp and neither had familiarity with each other. For me that was asking for trouble and misunderstanding as to who was marking who, complimenting each other's play etc. Like I said though the changes he made, at half time, deserve praise as it was bold to actually still look to attack rather than opt for damage limitation. That it had the City players totally flummoxed makes me interested as to whether we will see Farke making changes earlier in matches. Last week many were quick to lay into Farke after Emery's half time impact was lauded so it is only fair to give Farke praise. I would however have preferred to see Piroe brought on instead of Aaronsen as Piroe is surely more likely to score.

So praise and criticism rather from me.

1) Fair enough, may be right I didn't check was just making the point I don't think if they did produce less goals or assists it proves it was wrong to switch them. Just the evidence suggested it was right regardless.

2) Would agree I think we discussed this before, Piroe would do best as a second striker working off someone. That would of course require a change.

3) I could see the logic with bringing in Gnonto (less so Justin) but it was just swapping the pieces around. It became clear the tactics were the same ones that hadn't worked away from home all season. And as you say Justin and Gnonto wouldn't even have any understanding either so was a double wammy for both. I don't disagree it was good he made the changes, he deserves credit for it and it worked well for 30 minutes which is to his credit. I just don't think it was some tactical masterclass as I (and others) have said for a good while we suit a more direct style and a back 3. I made a post a while ago highlighting the difference in our performance when we go more direct so it's data DF will have but has chosen to ignore for a number of games as The Athletic said this week.

It's also a style our players are suited to as again The Athletic said this week and was highlighted on here before.

So whilst praising the changes you also imo have to question why DF has tried to press on with his way for so long.

I can understand the bringing Aaronson on for legs, but City scored before he came on and would agree on Piroe.

But it does beg the question why hasn't he tried this before? In easier games? Why wait to a game we expected to lose and get battered in to try something new?

Pressure off sort of thing?

I applaud the change and suspect he has got himself a bit more time.

But it's a change many of us called for long before.

Would be extremely disappointed though if this is a 1 half thing and we go back to the same old on Wednesday

[Pullhard]

Heidi in the crowd on MoTD again

[The Subhuman]

Daniel Farke this morning

Right I'll show them, I'll play the players they've been screaming for, early subs, go 5 at the back for a bit and then say told you so when it fails big time and we concede 7

Daniel Farke this evening

s**t, that actually worked.

[weasel]

1) Fair enough, may be right I didn't check was just making the point I don't think if they did produce less goals or assists it proves it was wrong to switch them. Just the evidence suggested it was right regardless.

2) Would agree I think we discussed this before, Piroe would do best as a second striker working off someone. That would of course require a change.

3) I could see the logic with bringing in Gnonto (less so Justin) but it was just swapping the pieces around. It became clear the tactics were the same ones that hadn't worked away from home all season. And as you say Justin and Gnonto wouldn't even have any understanding either so was a double wammy for both. I don't disagree it was good he made the changes, he deserves credit for it and it worked well for 30 minutes which is to his credit. I just don't think it was some tactical masterclass as I (and others) have said for a good while we suit a more direct style and a back 3. I made a post a while ago highlighting the difference in our performance when we go more direct so it's data DF will have but has chosen to ignore for a number of games as The Athletic said this week.

It's also a style our players are suited to as again The Athletic said this week and was highlighted on here before.

So whilst praising the changes you also imo have to question why DF has tried to press on with his way for so long.

I can understand the bringing Aaronson on for legs, but City scored before he came on and would agree on Piroe.

But it does beg the question why hasn't he tried this before? In easier games? Why wait to a game we expected to lose and get battered in to try something new?

Pressure off sort of thing?

I applaud the change and suspect he has got himself a bit more time.

But it's a change many of us called for long before.

Would be extremely disappointed though if this is a 1 half thing and we go back to the same old on Wednesday

1 and 2) Rutter's first half of the season stats were okay, his second half abysmal. The injury might have affected him, similarly the pressure or the fact he played a full season but I think as he was further away from goal he had less of a goal impact. He's not a 9, he probably is a 10 but similarly Piroe isn't really a traditional 9 or modern 10 either. Personally though I feel it was all down to Bamford having his purple patch after the PEterborough goal. This saw him having a run in the team and Paddy was a 9 so it made sense to switch Rutter to 10. Would have been interesting to see what a Paddy/Prioe combo could have done.

3) Not claiming it to be a tactical masterclass but it was a brave decision rather than one forced on him - the easy decision would have been to simply park the bus at half time and take a modest beating - he could have then celebrated the achievment like Jesse Marsch did after just losing 3-0 to City. In terms of the data stuff and effectiveness of being more direct I'm sure similar things could be said about Bielsaball and how we seemed to convert our chances at a better ratio in matches where we had less possession. Whether Bielsaball would work long term if it went to lower possession regularly I would doubt.

You can argue that a direct style is one that the players are suited to but the majority of our players have played the Farke way for 2 seasons so they will I feel be more suited to the Farke way which is more akin to how football is played by most clubs these days. Given the success (albeit at championship level) of the Farke way for the last 2 years I think the sensible option is to play that way and make subtle changes - this is by and large what has happened. At 2-0 and being torn apart then a drastic change was probably called for, rather than say carrying on like against Arsenal. It was almost a nothing to lose option and a chance to see if it could work.

Yeah that was the point I was making re Aaronsen. We were at that point 3-2 down and Piroe would likely have given us a better chance to get a 3rd.

[The Subhuman]

Reading Weasel v CJay is a bit like a Wagner opera.... hours of boredom punctuated by great 5 minutes

[The Subhuman]

Going round in circles
Directions all messed up
Go to ground on a bottle of wine
Drown myself in the flood

[whiteswan]

We seem to be looking at teams around us, every weekend.

Makes me irritable!

But every supporter will be doing that. Arsenal fans will be looking out for City results, City fans will be looking out for Liverpool and Chelsea results.....its human nature to look at the teams results around you, whether you are at the top of the league or at the bottom. Wet Spam fans will be looking at our results, as will Wolves and Forest and Burnley.

[Overman]

Reading Weasel v CJay is a bit like a Wagner opera.... hours of boredom punctuated by great 5 minutes

That's a pretty accurate analogy. There's a lot of tedious blustering at times, when it can be summarised in a few sentences.