Jump to content

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, newbster said:

Fulham went after City in the last round and lost 3 nil.. Not many teams go after City.. Many play like we did and get battered 


I totally get that

 

But go after them at 1-0 

 

We had the right game plan u til we started losing 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, TodwickOwl said:


Not read my post have you fella 

 

Im saying once we were losing 

Well, you do start a lot of threads, so sometimes i skim read :wub:

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, McRightSide said:

What we’re you expecting against one of the best team on the planet?

 

The players were absolutely dead on their feet at the end. How do you summon the energy to try and get, retain and then create against a team like that?

 

That said, the substitutions killed us.


Unless he was injured there was no reason to waste one on Börner.

 

Unless he was injured there was no reason to remove FF and leave the hapless Da Cruz strolling round the pitch like a Jay Bothroyd on spice.

 

Hunt did really well. Should be comfortably above JP in the pecking order now.

 

So, no complaints for the team...just a shame we wasted our first 2 substitutions

Think he took Borner off cos we could have been easily 3/4 -0 down from him switching off.  Lees did well coming on . 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TodwickOwl said:


Did you even read my post? 
 

Not a problem with keeping it right - but at 1-0 down with ten minutes to go? 
 

We still don’t even pull away and push some men up? 
 

Why? We had no composure, no outball, no threat at all from inplay or dead ball situations - what made us think we could have one chance? 
 

 

Pathetic 

 

The amount of energy required to limit Manchester City to a single goal is immense - most of our players were dead on their feet for the latter part of the game and simply didn't have it in them to take the game to City.

 

Regardless of that, going gung-ho would most likely have resulted in us conceding more goals.

 

If Fletcher had managed to stretch that extra inch or so to get on the end of Hunt's cross, the game-plan would have worked brilliantly.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TodwickOwl said:

Basically for all those that don’t understand - you can’t score a goal if you don’t attack 

 

which we didn’t - not even at 1-0 down. 

You can’t attack if you don’t have the ball. City dominate the ball against pretty much every team they play against. 
 

They want you to press them. When Iorfa lost his head and pressed their left back, 2 passes and they nearly scored. 
 

it’s frustrating at times watching a performance like that but, to a man I though the application was fantastic and, it will be a massive boost going in to the weekend knowing we kept City to just the 1 goal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Plus points Wildsmith,Iorfa, Fox,Hunt. As for the rest very poor,Kieren Lee finished, Bannan,I'm at a loss to know what his role is and tactically going forward not a clue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If we had pushed up in the last 10 they would have crucified us. 

 

If we had won would have had Magpies away. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, kingsidney said:

Couldn’t disagree more. 
 

a hardworking performance against a superior team. 
 

what were you expecting?

A hardworking performance at the least.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The most passes we strung together tonight was 5

 

We desperately need some energy in midfield. Bannan, Lee and Pelupessy all need moving on this summer

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

When Oxford played City in the League Cup, City included Sterling, Aguero, Bernardo, Foden, Mahrez, Cancelo and Zinchenko in the starting line up. Gundogan replaced Rodri and Jesus replaced Angelino just after the hour mark. 

 

Oxford had 18 shots on goal in the 90 minutes. 

 

I'd presume that with the quality they were facing they were also tired. 

 

So what's our excuse? 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, 0wl18 said:

You can’t attack if you don’t have the ball. City dominate the ball against pretty much every team they play against. 
 

They want you to press them. When Iorfa lost his head and pressed their left back, 2 passes and they nearly scored. 
 

it’s frustrating at times watching a performance like that but, to a man I though the application was fantastic and, it will be a massive boost going in to the weekend knowing we kept City to just the 1 goal.

 

There were spells in the game when City were clearly trying to get us to move up the field to give them some room in behind. Given that we all feared a humiliation I thought the tactics were understandable and I'm not too disappointed. More of an attacking threat would have been nice but most of the team had worked so hard, they just couldn't find the energy for that kind of pressure.

 

Some people don't see beyond the glamorous, exciting parts of attacking play but there's a lot more to football than just that. Monk arguably didn't get his substitutions right, but given the standard of recent performances I think we can consider this an outcome far better than it might have been.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, g-owls said:

When Oxford played City in the League Cup, City included Sterling, Aguero, Bernardo, Foden, Mahrez, Cancelo and Zinchenko in the starting line up. Gundogan replaced Rodri and Jesus replaced Angelino just after the hour mark. 

 

Oxford had 18 shots on goal in the 90 minutes. 

 

I'd presume that with the quality they were facing they were also tired. 

 

So what's our excuse? 

 

 


Thank god someone has come with stats

 

Yeah but - city dominate every team mate?

 

Pathetic the responses on here shooting me down for how pathetic we were in response to going down

 

Weve nothing to lose here - nothing, yet we go out on a whimper with one shot on target? Was it? Did we have a shot on target? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Christ we are not a non league team we are a team at home playing a team a league above and not to have a go at them for a full 90 mins was so embarrassing. 20% possession, no shots on goal, a total digrace

Link to post
Share on other sites

Newport Man City last year - managed more shots and at least a goal, against a strong side.

 

We didn’t concede 4 - but they STILL managed a goal in last ten. 
 

Zero excuses for tonight - feel sorry for all those that paid money to watch us defend for 90 minutes. It’s a game we were never gonna win, just have a bloody go for 5 minutes 

32FBD0A6-1979-4652-95F3-C4EA556C1F10.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

In reality we were never going to win this game and on the face of it 0-1 seems to be a good effort but sorry, hand on heart I don’t think it was. In the league where goal difference can make or break a season I can see why we’d play this way, but in the 5th round of the FA cup and even allowing for the quality we were playing surely we could have shown more ambition. We’d got nothing at all to lose near the end, we might as well have chucked players forward and lost 0-2 but it was as if we were content that it was only 0-1. The problem is that in the cup 1-0 or 5-0 it doesn’t matter, you’re either in or out.

 

Sorry if this seems negative I’m not usually but hanging on for 90 minutes even after we’ve gone behind just seems bizarre to me.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Something sadly wrong, did you see the coaching staff  glum faced as though they were awaiting sentence for a lengthy custodial. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, kingsidney said:

People read your post. 
 

they just thought it was moronic. 


Just wondering why Newport and Oxford can put up more of a fight than we can? 
 

Looking forward to your response 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TodwickOwl said:


Thank god someone has come with stats

 

Yeah but - city dominate every team mate?

 

Pathetic the responses on here shooting me down for how pathetic we were in response to going down

 

Weve nothing to lose here - nothing, yet we go out on a whimper with one shot on target? Was it? Did we have a shot on target? 

 

At the time it was the most shots a City team has faced in any game with Pep as the manager. It probably still is. 

 

Oxford United. 

 

Let that sink in. A team with a three sided ground, Karl Robinson as the manager and Jamie Mackie up front managed to cause City more problems than what our so called good players did. 

 

We've got a team that's pedestrian at best, with little spark or creativity and a boring manager. 

 

Some big changes are needed. 

 

On a positive though, Iorfa looked every bit the part tonight. Wednesdays man of the match by a mile. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...