My take on the game

[ron obvious 1,711]

I only watched on a pretty crappy stream, so it''s quite possible I''ve got it all wrong, so please enlighten me where wrong.

We started in fairly tidy fashion. ManC were doing most of the attacking without any signs of panic from us; we had one or two forays - I remember one involving a lovely turn from Pilkington, beating his man by letting the ball do the work, which unfortunately then fizzled out.

BJ misplaced a pass, trying to thread it through for Olsson/Pilks (I think). Now I''m not trying to scapegoat him, but it just shows how important accuracy is against quality teams, because it ultimately lead to the goal.

The goal itself was extremely unlucky. There can be no other term for a clearance that hits the back of a player''s head & balloons back over the goalie. Reminded me of an England game years ago when our defender just got into block a long shot from a German (who else!), which looped over a furiously back pedalling Shilton & slotted through a football plus fag paper sized gap ......... now who''s fault was that??

John Ruddy did not play well today I remember seeing him go up for a catch, which he seemed to make comfortably, before spilling it - or was that my stream playing up? The 2nd goal was arguably the worst, as it was eminently saveable. To get anything at ManC you need several of their players to be off form & all our players to be on top of their''s - & you don''t want 4 of your best players out.

We tried to look undisturbed, but it was getting harder now, mainly because they had their tails up. The 3rd goal was another deflection, not as bad, but it wrong-footed Ruddy anyway.

The 4th was offside, pure & simple. 2nd half was irrelevant really; Elmander should have scored, but we were totally demoralised & ManC attacked at will. Bassong was far too casual for one of the goals. Free kick pretty unstoppable.

Honestly, please say if you disagree with any of this.

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

It wasn''t a game, a match or a contest.

[Rudolph Hucker 0]

Man City will get more competition from the cones they run round in training.

[ron obvious 1,711]

Thanks for that. Really useful info.

[JF 694]

There were so many goals I can''t remember the 2nd but I don''t think Ruddy was at fault though. Did drop one cross but made some outstanding saves to prevent an even higher score.

[ron obvious 1,711]

I don''t quite what''s going on here. I''ve just explained how it looked to me, & it looked to me more like rank bad luck & some poor individual performances against a top team than anything else.

Now I''m perfectly prepared to accept my stream was so bad that I missed a lot of other stuff, but so far nobody has offered any better explanation - could we have pressed them more? Used different players? A different formation ? Tactics?

Anything. Other than the "Hughton is a clueless c**t" comments, which contribute nothing.

[ron obvious 1,711]

don''t quite *know* what''s going on here

[Cerberus 0]

Ron,If you thought that bad luck was anything other than a small contributory factor to today''s performance, your stream must have been really weak. There was no passion, no strategy, no teamwork, no belief. Man City hardly ever got out of first gear and were literally walking the ball around for lareg parts of the game. They scored three goals in the second half after easing off the gas from an already moderate pace. If City had needed to win by 10 or more goals, I got the feeling that they could haev achieved this simply by trying a little harder. I am struggling to recall a Premier League game in recent years where one team has so simply been outclassed. We loooked like a L1 or L2 team out there.This was a seriously troubling performance and even someone normally upbeat like Adrian Forbes on CC couldnt pretend anything otherwise. As for the reasons and remedies, I am less certain. Equally, I really cant see how extra hard work on the training ground (starting tomorrow) is going to turn this around. We really have got to change some fundamental issues about how we approach games. In all seriousness, we might as well stop picking a striker and simply add another defensive midfielder to the team (if we have one) because it is pointless playing the Wolf/Hooper or Elmander up front in thsi formation.Today was very depressing indeed - let''s hope that this is the catalyst for fundamental change.

[Aggy 944]

The main problem was that we didn''t compete. Man City did not get out of 2nd gear today. They weren''t at their best. But we let them pass it around us. How many times did one of their players receive the ball, turn, run 20 yards and STILL not have a Norwich player within 10 yards of him? - Answer; far too many. How many times did Yaya Toure get the ball and have 20 yards of space to pick a pass? Answer; far too many. It didn''t even matter where they were on the pitch, we gave them too much space on the halfway line, we gave them too much space on the edge of our box, we gave them too much space down the flanks.

I think it was their second (maybe third, it all became a blur) where they had two players on our right wing both of whom had 15 yards to put a cross in, and we didn''t even bother going out to close them down. It was as though we were willing to let them put the ball into the box. As it was, the cross came in, picked out Nasri (I think) superbly, and he finished.

I can remember seeing a piece on MOTD about Southampton which showed them closing down from the front, giving City no room whatsoever and really making it hard for them. We didn''t do that. We basically stood still and let them pass it around us.

Now, City are quality. But it doesn''t matter how good they are, you can still press and try to make it hard for them. We just stood still and made it as easy as possible for them. And let me stress again - they did not get out of 2nd gear today. Nowhere near. A Man City fan on the way out said that Toure could have had a bed in the centre circle and still run rings around us.

[Aggy 944]

And let me say here as well that the result didn''t bother me today. I was thoroughly expecting a loss. I wasn''t even expecting a close scoreline - 3 or 4 goal loss I had predicted. But I thought we''d at least try and make it difficult for them. But the energy and determination to even try and put them under any pressure was simply not there.

As these have been two very negative posts, I will just mention Murphy. Looked raw, a few poor touches, BUT he added an energy and urgency which nobody else on the pitch had today. Certainly got great potential.

[Indy 3,471]

After watching Newcastle and now the City game, I n room and noticed we set up with two banks of 4, and defended sapce, never close to players and allowed Man City time to play and pass. They are a quality team but so are Chelsea and Newcastle were at them from the first minute!

 

We look tired and unsure when under attack, our defenders are good but not great and with this amount of pressure will concede. We just need to instill into the players to run with the players, mark them and stop them before they get anywhere near the box.

 

Additionally we defend so deep, maybe pushing up the pitch might compress the play and stop the opposition have so much room and time on the ball.

 

One positive Murphy is bloody quick and will scare the pants off a lot of good defences.

 

Just my view from today.

[Hackedoff 0]

No positives bar Murphy getting a bit of PL exp. For a team that bossed the game the atmosphere was shocking. My 1st time at the Etihad and they didnt start singing till they were 5 up.

[Cerberus 0]

Sorry Indy, we didnt set up with two banks of 4. We had a bank of 4 and 6 for most of the game, not that this should be confused with a defensive approach since we were simply happy to conced possession on the flanks and outisde our area. Our entire defensive strategy was based upon defending the penalty box, which is always doomed to failure with quijck ninble players like Nasri, Silva and Aguero who will simply play through the line. The scoreline today could have been much worse had the other City had really wanted a big score.

[Jim Smith 2,602]

I noticed at Spurs we seemed to play a zonal marking system and it did not work there either. If you let good players have time and space on the ball in your half then they will hurt you. Simple as that.

[Indy 3,471]

I can''t argue with that Louis! It was a bank of 4 and 6 at times. But that''s my point, we don''t have defenders good enough to defend the box for 90 minutes. Surely today we should have compressed the field, even though we might have been caught on the break, Olsson and Martin are quick enough to cover their wingers.....by sitting so deep it gave them the time to attack the wings, centre and whatever they wanted, it was like attack v defence practice match!

[ron obvious 1,711]

Thanks indeed for your replies.

My stream was too much of a slide show to be able to judge the speed of the game - players (ours & theirs) seemed to be ambling about, then miraculously jump 20 yards! Even so, some of their movement looked ridiculously good.

I''m just praying Hughton can start to motivate them from now on. If we can bring a superior manager in, that''s fine. I don''t want another post Worthington Peter Grant sit-yu-ash-un arising again though. None of the usual suspects touted on here fill me with much joy, but I would imagine McNally''s got his thinking cap on.

Fingers crossed for next Satdee. OTBC!

[Cerberus 0]

Indy - completely agree. When I was watching the macth the thing that kept going through my head was first team vs youth team practice game, with the youth team told to think of nothing other than defending the area and conceeding all other possession. The trouble with this strategy (ably played by Hull so far this season) is that is relaint upon not conceeding and nicking a goal. We dont seem to be good at either at the moment.However, on the bright side of things, we are increasingluy in a select group of five (Palace, Mackems, Cardiff and Fulham) whereby a comapratively low points total may mean escaping the bottom three.

[Empty Mirror 0]

Ok. Maybe we were unlucky against City. Seven times. And, clearly, unlucky against Cardiff with our 3,100 shots on goal. And against Arsenal, obviously, where the final score flattered them. As it did Chelsea, where with a bit of luck we could have drawn. And we were unlucky against Villa, where a bit of bad luck about who takes the penalty cost us the game. And against everyone else.

Napoleon apparently said that he didn''t care whether his generals were any good: he just wanted to know if they were lucky. If this is all down to luck, then we have an unlucky general. And that may be reason enough for him to go.

[Cerberus 0]

Ron,Martin O''Neill reunited with john Roberston and Steve Walford would be a completely different proposition to waht we saw at Sunderland. Think of Brian Clough without Peter Talor. Plus I sense that O''Neill has unfinished busienss with both us, and more critically, the Premier League. He wouldn''t want Sunderland to be the last mark on his CV and his record before then was very good indeed.

[Bws Cat 0]

I love the fact people use ''goalkeeping errors'' as almost unavoidable accidents, as if they just happened and it''s not our fault.

Well I''m sorry, but ruddy is part of the squad too. He was crap today. Same as everyone else.

[Waveney Canary 0]

Just got back from the game. 85 quid down, a day wasted took a soaking and all to watch another abismal away performance

I have nothing but contempt for hapless and am amazed I am back home and he has still not been sacked. How bad does it have to get?

There were so many of us there today and it was one of the most humiliating experiences of my life having to sit there and take the stick from the citeh fans. Then having him clap us after the game, was he taking the P or what

[ron obvious 1,711]

Just seen the "highlights" on MOTD.

We were absolutely awful.