Uwe Rosler’s Grandad Mk XIX

Onwards and upwards, bring on Napoli

400 thoughts on “Uwe Rosler’s Grandad Mk XIX

  1. Thanks for the heads up Bellers. I had noticed though.
    I see Gordon Taylor appears to be backtracking in his support for the little Argie toe rag.
    Time for City to slap him with a write for breach of contract?

  2. Val… getting close to 400 posts again, perhape time for a new page ?

    Alph. If i’m touching on a raw nerve, read no further but I think your coherent explanation was of your support for Mancini and your fabled ability to see good in everyone / everything (Tevez excepted …for now)

    As usual we agree on the key issue, which I believe to be Pressure.
    I think most would agree that City are most likely to score goals by applying pressue rather than being on the recieveing end.
    Where we differ, is I see no reason for delaying applying said pressure.

    The reasons you started for this delay were “getting comfortable on the ball and absorbing opponents initial pressure”
    2 fine reasons and your support of Mancini in this does you credit.

    I would counter that. Would it not be preferable to get comfortable by keeping posession and passing the ball around rather than chasing after it ?
    Surely this is what we intend to be doing later anyway.

    Would it not be advantageous to spend more time in the opponents half, thereby increasing our scoring chances and reducing the threat to our goal ?

    As far as absorbing initial pressure goes.
    Why are you assuming City will always be the ones under pressure at the start ?
    City are the home side half the time and the stronger team most of the time, so why is it a given that City will be on the recieveing end, rather than dishing out the initial pressure ?
    The only reason I can think of is because we choose to surrender the initiative by sitting back.

    I can think of only one good tactic which can benefit from sitting back and drawing opponents on, fast counter attack.
    If that’s what City were doing…or even attempting, I could understand.
    That’s not what City are doing. We just sit back in a holding pattern.
    We don’t get our passing game going and as we are mostly chasing the ball or kicking it clear so it’s not even going to tire our opponents out.
    We simply seem (to me) to do it because it’s what we do. That we don’t benefit from it, seems not to matter.
    Then after 25 mins or so it’s all change. The forward players are pushed up into their attacking positions and the effect is almost instant.
    Suddenly we have options, we keep the ball, we apply pressure, we create chances. It’s not so much a gradual change, it’s more like a light being switched on.

    All i’m saying is, if City have to take time to settle, there is a better way of going about it and why should City need more time to settle than anyone else anyway, they just get on with playing while we have to settle.

    To me, this is just a phase Mancini is going through, a leftover from last season when City would sit back for entire games. Once he fully appreciates the players at his disposal, he will abandon it. He’ll have to, Barca would be 4-0 up before we get started.
    This City squad could give Barca a real test but not so much if they play for 90 mins to our 60.

    We are so close to something very special here and great credit goes to Mancini for that but there is another level yet to come.

  3. Goals for Luca Scapuzzi and Harry Bunn last night. Dickie has been fulsome in his praise of Scazza, nice to hear, on top of the excellent impression that he made against Wolves it’s a good sign perhaps, of things to come?

    The EDS took another beating losing the away leg at Parkhead in the NextGen Series. Results wise the competition has been a disaster, but I am told that it is considered a real wake up call for the Academy and in particular its Brit contingent who despite a great deal of hype, simply are not good enough. The stand out players have been Roman, Suarez and Rekik.

  4. Calgary Blue:
    So Tev thinks that because he tried to contact Mankers (unsuccessfully) that it was still OK to bugger off home. Seriously!

    I bet Gordon Taylor feels betrayedby our mercurial Argie now that he’s done another bunk. Welcome to the club, Gordon!

    Tevez was clearly instructed on both times he asked for consent to fly home for the week that he may not. Before any apologist bleats on his behalf that this was just the club being antsi, the reasons given by the club are that he was way behind on his fitness schedule mainly as a result of not taking it seriously.

    As for that mealy mouthed apologist Taylor, he is the man who liaised with City Management throughout, stood up and publicly intimated that the PFA would support additional action, then represented the player and made the PFA decision to reject the club’s punishment.

    He is now made to look a complete twat and deservedly so.

    bell boy:

    Alph, yes this “let’s muck about for a bit” tactic has worked so far, it will continue to work, provided we score 3 or more in the last hour of every game.
    It’s the games where we don’t score in the last hour that will be the ones where we regret wasting that time.
    Because we can do it and still win does not mean we must do it, in order to win, nor that we will win if we do it.

    Bellers!
    An entirely unworthy mis-representation of Mancini’s tactics; his very successful tactics, and my (I thought) entirely coherent explanation of same!

    Alph

  5. So Tev thinks that because he tried to contact Mankers (unsuccessfully) that it was still OK to bugger off home. Seriously!

    I bet Gordon Taylor feels betrayed by our mercurial Argie now that he’s done another bunk. Welcome to the club, Gordon!

    BTW – Antofagasta is definitely NOT on my “must return to” places. Off to BA tomorrow – hey I might bump into Tev. If I do, I’ll tell him the regulars in the G&P think he’s an absolute shit!

  6. Nevermind Israelgate, the cheeky fucking Tory gits have plugged the loophole that allows Amazon and HMV to sell me cheap CD’s from Guernsey.

    Utter cunts.

  7. I think that we are making the same point Bellers albeit you’ve used more words.

    I’ve long held the view that Big Dave is actually a lot more Tory than he holds out and would love it if we set the jocks adrift (60 odd less seats to worry about and ta ta to Nick) as well as the EU (several bill per annum back in the treasury coffers to spend on warships). He just doesn’t want it to be his idea in case it all goes a bit Theresa May. Best bet is to drip feed us these sort of tit bits so that the object of our escalting anti Euro angst can be personified by Blatter, Sarkozy, Salmond and some Danish Refs. When we all storm the citadel demanding referenda he can smuggly point to the fact that it woz uz wot did it.

    The remarks made by the Gallic dwarf will be water of the back of a duck a l’orange to Netanyahu. Most of his electrorate say far worse of him to his face. Still it does beggar belief that La Bruni gives hubby house room with or without orthotic hi-risers.

    I remain

    Berko.

  8. Now what is Tevvez up to ?
    More mistranslation ?
    City say “No, you can’t go back to Argentina, report for training, with the stiffs again, on Wed’s”
    But he hears.
    “No problem, just try to get here at the same time the internationals report back”

    It’s getting silly now.

  9. Alph, yes this “let’s muck about for a bit” tactic has worked so far, it will continue to work, provided we score 3 or more in the last hour of every game.
    It’s the games where we don’t score in the last hour that will be the ones where we regret wasting that time.
    Because we can do it and still win does not mean we must do it, in order to win, nor that we will win if we do it.

    Berko, isn’t it more to do with who is telling us not to wear Poppies ?
    The current climate is all about blaming Europe for all our woe’s.
    That means, there is no public appetite for Europe sticking it’s oar in to any part of british culture, let alone one as nationalistic as the England team.
    It’s worth considering, that last Century similar political/ economic events, Inflation, Depression, Unemployment, Civil unrest, and increased Nationalism along with reduction in Britain’s defence spending, led to the 2 World wars, which in turn led to the creation of Poppy day.

    The reason for the ban is clear enough, it’s designed to prevent causing offence to minorities, however thin skinned one would have to be, to be offended. If the F.A had decided not to have the poppy on the kit, there would have been some rumblings but to be banned by Europe, after all the trouble “they” have caused…. who do they think they are ?
    Like it, or not, understand it, or not, there are those who are offended by the Poppy symbol. Those who associate it with percieved injustice at the hands of British Forces. I don’t believe the Poppy is regarded in the same way all over the world. International organisations tend to take things like that into account.
    That needn’t stop us from thinking it’s stupid.

    Bloodaxe, looks like you were right. French must be the language of diplomacy, hard to imagine getting away with calling Netanyahu a liar, in English.

  10. berkozboy:
    I find “Poppygate” the most disingenuous debate instigated by the FA and others as little more than an attempt to paint the FIFA rogues as global villains.

    It seems that the players will wear poppies on their training kits and on the undershirts. The ground hoardings will display poppies as will the scoreboards. Wreaths will be laid by FA delegates prior to the game and the players will wear them in transit. It may also be the case that they will be worn by the children who act as mascots when the teams come out onto the pitch. Finally scores of additional poppy sellers have been asked to attend the ground to sell the poppies and raise money prior to and after the game.

    To make this a debate about the potential slur to our armed forces and our country is unsavoury and the ultimate disrespect to those that gave their lives and continue to serve. I’m narked and may even find myself at odds with the Mail on this one.

    Oh and how are Johnson and Walker better FB options than Micah?

    I remain

    Berko

    I concur.

    Alph

  11. I find “Poppygate” the most disingenuous debate instigated by the FA and others as little more than an attempt to paint the FIFA rogues as global villains.

    It seems that the players will wear poppies on their training kits and on the undershirts. The ground hoardings will display poppies as will the scoreboards. Wreaths will be laid by FA delegates prior to the game and the players will wear them in transit. It may also be the case that they will be worn by the children who act as mascots when the teams come out onto the pitch. Finally scores of additional poppy sellers have been asked to attend the ground to sell the poppies and raise money prior to and after the game.

    To make this a debate about the potential slur to our armed forces and our country is unsavoury and the ultimate disrespect to those that gave their lives and continue to serve. I’m narked and may even find myself at odds with the Mail on this one.

    Oh and how are Johnson and Walker better FB options than Micah?

    I remain

    Berko

  12. bell boy:

    Val, I didn’t see the incident as you described the first goal.
    Are you saying that Micah left his zone and then failed to mark Bothroyd ?
    If so, are you saying that if Micah had stayed in his zone he would have done a better job ?

    Bellers, what I am saying is:
    1. Micah and Les swapped zones – at Les’s insistence.
    2. Micah was outjumped.
    3. It had slightly less than the cube root of bugger all to do with problems inherent to a zonal marking system. It was all down to human error, which could easily have happened had a man marking system been imposed.

    What happens when they put 2 men in one of your one man zones ? “Not my problem mate, you mark them both but as soon as one one of them steps across this imaginary line, he’s mine”

    Bellers, a properly operated zonal marking system is more flexible than that. The zones are not separated by chain link fences. If a Zone 2 attacker moves to join his mate in Zone 3 of course you move with him. You don’t just stand there saying “Eez not my problem”. It’s actually much easier in a M-for-M system for a back 4 to get pulled out of shape by mobile strikers and that’s why zonal was invented. The biggest advantage of zonal marking is its flexibility. When the team regains possession of the ball, players are still in their positions and can start an attack more quickly. Communication is very important when zonal marking is used, to ensure that no gaps are left in the defensive coverage. Re this, I’m sure we missed Kompo as much for his communication skills as for his bite in the tackle.

    In any case, whatever players you play, whichever system you deploy, if Bothroyd and Helguson can exploit huge gaps in it…. it needs looking at. On that at least, we should be able to agree.

    Afraid not. What we need to do is minimize human errors. Bugger the differences between zonal v M-for-M, a defender who doesn’t compete in an one-on-one is not a defender. In the same way as I habitually say “strikers who don’t strike aren’t strikers”.
    It’s not a failure of the system; it’s a failure of the individual.

  13. That we score more in the 2nd half, is an indisputible fact.
    In my opionion this is largely down to sitting too deep for the first 20-30 mins.

    This is a recurring theme of your posts as is my opposition to this view. We can carry on ad infinitum saying the same things but I will repeat once more, we get comfortable on the ball, we absorb the initial pressure from our opponents, we then press increasingly until they crack. Until Saturday we had not conceded first in the 10 previous league games, clear evidence that the man Mancini’s tactics work. I rest his case.

    Andy

  14. Alph, no idea if it was Micah’s 200th, it doesn’t matter to me.
    Would Micah have been made Capt if Kompo was playing ? I doubt it.
    Is the intent to make whoever is having such an “anniversary” Capt for the day ? Again, I doubt it.
    It’s not professional behaviour.

    That we score more in the 2nd half, is an indisputible fact.
    In my opionion this is largely down to sitting too deep for the first 20-30 mins.
    This is a recurring theme. It’s hard to score when you isolate your front man and order his support to hang back.
    Limit your atticking options and you have to expect it to reduce your scoring opportunities.
    Interestingly, the notable exception was at Fulham, where we went for it, scored 2 quickly… then went to sleep, instead of carrying on doing what was working.
    In most other games, we give ourselves just over an hour in which to win the game.
    The 1-0 thing, I didn’t see the full quote but it struck me as being characteristic of Mancini to highlight clean sheets above the incredible goal threat City now pose. We can score against anyone, so a clean sheet, although desireable, is of less importance than it used to be when City struggled to score.
    The Mancini philosophy, seems to be. “Keep it tight early on, then work our way into the game, gradually gaining ascendancy and eventually taking control”
    There is merit in this IF you are facing opponenents who pose a serious threat and will take effort to overcome. I submit, Swansea and QPR not to mention that shambolic Villareal side, are not good enough to fall into this category.
    I further submit, that we don’t even do it very well.
    When we sit back we don’t stifle the opposition and erode their spirit, rather we encourage them to attack and increase their self belief, this only makes them harder to beat once we do decide to attack. It also means we run the risk of being behind before we even get started.
    I concede we did defend pretty well against Utd early on, when we let them have their spell but as a general rule we don’t look impregnible by any means.

    Val, I didn’t see the incident as you described the first goal.
    Are you saying that Micah left his zone and then failed to mark Bothroyd ?
    If so, are you saying that if Micah had stayed in his zone he would have done a better job ?

    To me zonal marking, as City play it at least, leads to defenders standing still, strikers on the move and getting a run on the defenders. Therefore if the defender does somehow end up next to the striker he has the disadvantage of a standing jump as opposed to the strikers running jump.
    Of course man to man is not perfect, if someone misses an assignment but I just don’t like seeing holes in the defence, holes with strikers in them and defenders stood still hoping the ball comes into their zone, rather than watching where the ball is going and what the strikers are doing. Is this an over simplification ? yes, otherwise it would take too long but you get the gist.
    Zonal marking is fine for Basketball where the zones are an arms spread apart. For me defenders should attack the ball, particularly so from set pieces. Mark your opponent, decide where the ball is going and if your opponent seems able to get to it, get there first. To allow him to run away because the ball is going to land in another zone, when you could head it clear yourself…. well I must be old school because that just seems dumb to me. What happens when they put 2 men in one of your one man zones ? “Not my problem mate, you mark them both but as soon as one one of them steps across this imaginary line, he’s mine”

    In any case, whatever players you play, whichever system you deploy, if Bothroyd and Helguson can exploit huge gaps in it…. it needs looking at. On that at least, we should be able to agree.
    On the point about forwards running about and making it difficult to pick them up these days.
    Good strikers have done that for years.
    I hate that defenders choose to counter this by wrestling with the attacker, it should be a penalty every time.
    The bottom line is, an attacker can make all the brilliant runs he likes, in order to score, he still has to get to the ball Defenders seem to have decided to prevent them getting to the ball, rather than trying to get to it themselves. That’s a general observation, not specific to City.

    Bellette is on the move in the FF, it’s about time someone applied some pressure…. or are you all sitting back for a bit and seeing how things go for a while before making your moves… Mancini style.

  15. Bellers, have to take issue there. For their first goal we WERE man-marking. I re-ran it to make sure. Lescott pulled Richards out of his zone and sent him to mark Bothroyd the player in the centre, god knows why*. Micah obliged and got left flat-footed.

    I think the main problem wasn’t that we sat back but that we strolled forward. For much of the first half we meandered upfield, then probed for openings that didn’t come instead of creating them. And they stifled us. Any midfield that has JB in it is sure to be ‘in yer face’ and Shauny doesn’t shirk. The QPR mid-4 grafted unstintingly and Warock has always produced sides that can defend. Mancini must have noticed the same thing for when we came on after half time we immediately doubled the pace going forward and looked much more dangerous.
    Their second was an aberration – Jonners didn’t track back, Richards had a brain seizure, Savic didn’t get close enough to his man and there were 2 lousy reffing decisions to compound matters. Again, nothing to do with zonal marking.

    Incidentally, I’ve played both systems. Last team I played in (about 12 years ago, long after I should have given up) had a zonal marking system and it worked very well. You do need intelligent players though. We did – 4 members of the side are now (the Irish equivalent of) QC’s. The disputes on training nights were the stuff of legend! – “I submit, my lord, that it was a fucking nailed-on penalty.” “My learned friend is talking though his arse. These are the facts…”

    * I think Les was having trouble with his studs. Kept slipping and couldn’t get off the deck. He changed them shortly afterwards. Turf looked quite long, though not Stoke corn-field long.

  16. It’s true that nothing is perfect and althopugh this is the best ever City side IMO, there are areas to be worked on. However, I do think that some erroniuos opinions are held and you hold many of them bellers.
    Smile Smile Smile

    Richards made captain ?: I don’t see it, maybe the plan is long term and the hope he’ll grow into the job. Is he the best choice right now ? No… should have been Barry from that 11.

    I would agree but wasn’t this a landmark match for Micah in his City career? 200th match or similar?

    We are more vulnerable when we sit back. ( See start of games against Utd, Swansea and Villareal and how much easier things became when we pushed on) So allowed QPR, with inferior players in a basic (old fasioned) 4-4-2 to swamp us with our better players in our flashy new 4-2-3-1 (or whatever it was).

    I think you start from a long held prejudice and there’s no shaking it. IMO Mancini builds from the bottom up, he has established his defence soundly and put the icing on the bhun afterwards. The side sets out to establish a rhythm, gets comfortable, extracts the sting from the opposition and builds pressure until the bubble pops and we can witness that 80% of our many goals are scored in the last 20% of the game; Pareto Style!!

    Aguero is better as a striker
    Dzeko is better with support
    Yaya is so much better when allowed to attack it’s unreal….. so why ruin all that.
    Also it was reported in the press that Mancini wants us to start winning 1-0.
    Surely he must mean, we need to be able to hold onto 1-0 at times or be patient and accept it when we have to… not set out with 1-0 as our aim.

    Who ever said that 1-0 is Mancini’s aim? That is pure prejudice. What I have heard him say is that you don’t lose any games when you keep a clean sheet and so clean sheets are his starting point. He has said that we need to learn how to win ugly on occasions, that 1-0 is never comfortable, that we must always press for the second goal and that we must be able to close a game out at 2-0. I also refuse to criticise his selections or subs, or the roles he dishes out, he sees what is happening on the training field, DJ is not fully fit, he’s struggling and starting with YYT alongside Barry isn’t wrong, it’s just not ideal. That is not to say that his reasons for doing it are not good or that he has no plan to change that when appropriate.

    Even older issue: Zonal marking. I don’t care if the stats say it works, we don’t make it work. Particularly with a makeshift CB pairing, we ought to be marking players… not areas where a player could be, mark the players where they actually are. Both goals conceded from headers and 3 other very takable headed chances which, if taken, would have seen us beaten out of sight.

    A difficult one this, I grew up with man marking but in those days you could do anything to a forward and not get penalised. What happens these days with man marking is that all fwds run around like manic chickens shaking off their markers. The argumant for zonal marking is that you attack the ball when it comes into your space not the player. When it is done well it works well, a bit like anything I suppose.
    The comment re ‘if they’d taken all of their chances’ is highly selective. If you look at the stats we had more chances both on and off target so if all of the chances for BOTH sides had been taken we’d have still won.

    Nice arguing with you bellers old son, never change matey Smile

    Alph

  17. I thought it was a very nice touch that Sunderland let Utd win on Fergies big day… even if they had to score an OG to make it happen.
    The other nice touch… Sunderland wore pale blue so that there would be one game where Utd beat a team wearing pale blue to go on their end of season DVD.

  18. Blimey, an away win, 3 goals scored and yet not all in the garden is seen as rosey….. I’m feeling a bit emotional.

    I agree, it was a win but a somewhat flawed performance, most disappointingly, we made it harder than it should have been.

    Things that struck me as odd.
    Richards made captain ?: I don’t see it, maybe the plan is long term and the hope he’ll grow into the job. Is he the best choice right now ? No… should have been Barry from that 11.

    Centre backs : OK Kompo was out (here’s the technical bit) City tend to play with one CB who attacks the ball and one who sits off and clears up. Normally Kompo takes the first job, Les the other. (leaving aside that this doesn’t seem to make the most of their respective attributes)When we have used different CB’s Kolo has done the Kompo job and Savic the Lescott.
    I accept that Kolo has not been in top form and has an issue hanging over him but it seems a lot to ask from Savic who is only 20 and still in his first Prem season to switch roles.

    Tactics/ formation : An old issue this but it keeps coming back to haunt us. We set up with attacking players in holding roles and hand the initiative to the opposition. We are more vulnerable when we sit back. ( See start of games against Utd, Swansea and Villareal and how much easier things became when we pushed on) So allowed QPR, with inferior players in a basic (old fasioned) 4-4-2 to swamp us with our better players in our flashy new 4-2-3-1 (or whatever it was).
    Aguero is better as a striker
    Dzeko is better with support
    Yaya is so much better when allowed to attack it’s unreal….. so why ruin all that.
    Also it was reported in the press that Mancini wants us to start winning 1-0.
    Surely he must mean, we need to be able to hold onto 1-0 at times or be patient and accept it when we have to… not set out with 1-0 as our aim.

    Even older issue: Zonal marking. I don’t care if the stats say it works, we don’t make it work. Particularly with a makeshift CB pairing, we ought to be marking players… not areas where a player could be, mark the players where they actually are. Both goals conceded from headers and 3 other very takable headed chances which, if taken, would have seen us beaten out of sight.

    In closing, there is still much more good than bad but those few bad things could cost games against better teams with top strikers, face it, QPR’s front two are barely Prem class.

    PS I also picked up on the foul count. In a normal game you’d assume that in order to concede 25% of the fouls, you’d need to have around 75% posession. It would seem the Ref was looking to penalise one side, more than the other.

  19. Just re-watched the game, the whole thing not the MOTD bits. Came to the conclusion I had been a bit hard on Milner, his work rate was astonishing. I still think Mancini would have been better off replacing him with Nasri to get a bit more subtlety and pace. Once we upped the tempo after half time we were always going to win, cockups notwithstanding.

  20. Watched the game on ESPN
    The referee and linesmen were abysmal 5 free kicks to us 14 to them!
    QPR fans were out of order, why do they hate us?
    Never mind, still 3 goals a game and we’ll boost that against the Barcodes, boy are they punching above their weight.
    Still don’t know why we are away after every CL game and Nited are home!

  21. Never thought I’d ever ever ever feel sorry for Neil Warnock but his very decent footballing side deserved a draw. And the Man Who Might Have Been a Future England Captain was my MOM, he glued everything together for them.
    I was shouting for Dzeko to be taken off when he scored. Richards was very poor, walkabout again. A poor game from Barry but, hey he’s been so good we can cut him a bit of slack. Calgers, I can’t agree re Milner, a lot of work but he never seemed to be getting to grips in midfield and produced hardly a pass of note. Jonners produced a little cameo showing why Mancini gets on his back so much – no tracking back when they scored their second. Kolo should have come in. Kun left his shooting boots at home. I still think Savic will prove excellent but he was shown up a lot today – still very young. I thought the defence & midfield failed to hold a high line today + first half hour we simply played too slow and deliberate.
    And there’s no doubt these narrow grounds with raised grass don’t suit our style of play.
    Nice to show we can ‘grind out a result’ but if we play ike that against the Arse I’m afraid we’re stuffed.

  22. Greetings from Chile! Well it was a battling win wasn’t it and if we can still continue to grab all three points when we play the way we did (for most of the first half and then a nervy last ten minutes) we should be OK. Some observations well I guess are obvious. Vince is the glue in that defence and when he’s not there we look very vulnerable. Lily was caught out a few times, Alex was about as good as he can be as a defender and Les was his usual self as well. Micah seemed to go missing – a lot.

    Milner was all over the park – rapidly becoming one of my favourites – who knew? The rest was a bit curates egg-like. Not sure what Mankers was thinking in his substitutes but overall it seemed to work.

    So, all in all it’s another three and maintaining our distance from the pack. The good news is that manyoo seem to be stuttering too although ‘toon seem to keep defying the pundits and keep winning. Hopefully Fulham can do us a favour tomorrow.

    One last thing, I was watching the Spanish screening (that Goooooooooaaaaaaaal business gets a bit tiring after a while, let me tell you) and they were going on about the Posnan and how we adopted it. Seems they were quite fascinated by it.

    Well, that Carmeniere won’t drink itself so I’m outta here.

  23. I think the best pundit pairing would be Lee Dixon and Gary Neville, about the only two with anything insightful to contribute.

    Curious Fact of the Day is that, on the day Taggart started at OT, the bottom four in the table were Newcastle, City, Chelsea and United – today the top 4.

    Should win today – my prediction Q Prangers 2 City 5 Q (SWP, Barton (pen) – Balotelli 2, Nasri, Aguero, Kolarov. With Joey getting sent off.

  24. bell boy:
    So when do they announce Mancini as Manager of the month ? They did the leagues already.

    By the way, who decided Roy Keane was an appropriate pundit for a game featuring City ? Have they forgotten or forgiven what he tried to do to Alfe Inge Hangeland ? One thing is for sure, City fans never will.

    My thoughts entirely, and whilst I have nothing against Gareth Sarfgate, why choose him? It was a City v Johnny Foreigner game, no need to even pretend to be even handed, I’d have had Peter Reid and KK, good for a larf Smile

    This was ITV, they probably thought, “Ooh Roy Keane, he played for Manchester, he’s unemployed, he’ll do nicely!”

    Alph

  25. bell boy:
    So when do they announce Mancini as Manager of the month ? They did the leagues already.

    By the way, who decided Roy Keane was an appropriate pundit for a game featuring City ? Have they forgotten or forgiven what he tried to do to Alfe Inge Hangeland ? One thing is for sure, City fans never will.

    My thoughts entirely, and whilst I ghave nothing against Gareth Sarfgate, why choose him? It was City v Johnny Foreigner game, no need to even pretend to be even handed, I’d have had Peter Reid and KK, good for a larf Smile

    Alph

Comments are closed.