Re: The Football Chat (cont) : Wed May 02, 2012 10:33 am  

Clueless Rob. It's one thing posting a joke on a tiny hidden-away internet forum, but splashing that across the biggest selling rag in the country is out of order. Yet another reason in the long long list why you shouldn't buy that second rate privy roll.

Re: The Football Chat (cont) : Wed May 02, 2012 10:44 am  

Cibaman wrote: From a City perspective its entirely irreleveant how good United are, other than in their ability to pick up points. City have taken maximum points off United but clearly are powerless to stop them taking points off of the rest of the league. And they've been very good at that. If United win the league they'll probably need 87 or 89 points, compared to the 79 points that their treble winning team earned. It might be argued that indicates that 1999 team were competing in a stonger league, but a look at the 1999 table: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998%E2%80 ... ague_table doesnt seem to bear that out. Then, United were up against a strong Arsenal side, but apart from them? The teams just outside the top 2 seem to me to be much stronger today. And I dont remember Derby (8th), Boro (9th) and Leicester (10th) being out of the ordinary. The teams in the boottom half of the table also dont appear to be stonger than today, certainly not 8-10 points a season stronger. If United's 1999 team played their 2012 team my money would definitely be on the 1999 team. But when it comes to accumulating points, particularly converting draws into wins, the 2012 version is superior. And as far as City are concerned, that's all that counts. The challenge for City isnt to beat United at their poorest. The challenge is to secure 89 points. That's 18 points more than last season and, by any objective criteria, a tough ask. If we fall a point or two short I'll be very disappointed but it certainly wouldnt affect my optimism about the future. As for "all we have to is beat Newcastle and QPR" a trip to St James's Park for a must win game would be daunting for any team. Nobody could guarantee a win in that game. Ironically, those 3 teams you mentioned all took points of us in the treble season, including a home draw against Leicester and a home defeat to Middlesbrough

Cibaman wrote: From a City perspective its entirely irreleveant how good United are, other than in their ability to pick up points. City have taken maximum points off United but clearly are powerless to stop them taking points off of the rest of the league. And they've been very good at that. If United win the league they'll probably need 87 or 89 points, compared to the 79 points that their treble winning team earned. It might be argued that indicates that 1999 team were competing in a stonger league, but a look at the 1999 table: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998%E2%80 ... ague_table doesnt seem to bear that out. Then, United were up against a strong Arsenal side, but apart from them? The teams just outside the top 2 seem to me to be much stronger today. And I dont remember Derby (8th), Boro (9th) and Leicester (10th) being out of the ordinary. The teams in the boottom half of the table also dont appear to be stonger than today, certainly not 8-10 points a season stronger. If United's 1999 team played their 2012 team my money would definitely be on the 1999 team. But when it comes to accumulating points, particularly converting draws into wins, the 2012 version is superior. And as far as City are concerned, that's all that counts. The challenge for City isnt to beat United at their poorest. The challenge is to secure 89 points. That's 18 points more than last season and, by any objective criteria, a tough ask. If we fall a point or two short I'll be very disappointed but it certainly wouldnt affect my optimism about the future. As for "all we have to is beat Newcastle and QPR" a trip to St James's Park for a must win game would be daunting for any team. Nobody could guarantee a win in that game. Ironically, those 3 teams you mentioned all took points of us in the treble season, including a home draw against Leicester and a home defeat to Middlesbrough

Re: The Football Chat (cont) : Wed May 02, 2012 1:15 pm  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

If you can't win the title from this position then Mancini clearly isn't up to the job.

Rubbish.

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

Whether he should be sacked depends upon who they could get to replace him. If Mourinho wanted the job, and was willing to sign a contract that ties him to Citeh long term, then Mancini should be sacked even if he wins the title.

No thanks.

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

If you do screw this up, you really think that Mancini will be able to do a job next season when Citeh have screwed up so bad this year? I think there could be a Liverpool type collapse after they went close to the title. The title was there for them, they screwed it up and they never got over it. Citeh's screw up would be even worse. The only difference would be that you could try and buy your way out of the funk, but it'd be expensive.

There were lots of factors at play with the season after for Liverpool, namely squad investment and the team's response to that lack of backing e.g. not getting another striker to go with Torres.

It seems that you would like City to take on the Chelsea musical chairs approach so that we don't capitalise on these years of opportunity. Well, hopefully our owners aren't as wrapped up as much in their own ideas of what football is and leave the professionals to do what they're good at.

Re: The Football Chat (cont) : Wed May 02, 2012 6:03 pm  

Lord God jose mourinho - Man city aren't chelsea. The owners view it as a project and want to build longevity and stability. They aren't hell bent on one tangible end goal e.g. winning the champions league, and won't throw the toys out of the pram when it doesn't happen. That is chelsea's undoing and why, despite all the millions, man united have still won more titles in the time since roman took over, and throw in a better CL record too.

This is why, if man city don't win the title this season, they will keep the same manager, the same team - with minor changes and in all probability win the title next season.

Your assertion that if they don't win the title this season it could somehow cause a collapse and irrepairable damage is just fanciful, you're in cloud cuckoo land with that one. They aren't going away.

It's academic anyway because as far as im concerned they'll do what's needed against newcastle and qpr and win the title this season.

Re: The Football Chat (cont) : Wed May 02, 2012 6:17 pm  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

Whether he should be sacked depends upon who they could get to replace him. If Mourinho wanted the job, and was willing to sign a contract that ties him to Citeh long term, then Mancini should be sacked even if he wins the title.

That's barmy. Mental. I could understand the suggestion of getting mourinho, but getting him even if mancini wins the title?

It seems the crazy decisions of the chelsea hierachy rubs off on their fans as well.

Re: The Football Chat (cont) : Wed May 02, 2012 6:52 pm  

Catalancs wrote:

City are obvious favourites now but it isn't over. United need to win both games and fingers crossed someone puts up a fight against City.
Liverpool join a heady bunch who have been beaten by Fulham at home in the Premier Lge this season. QPR, Bolton and Wigan Athletic. I was going to have a dig, but at least one of their players got on the scoresheet this week.

If you're bothered about our result last night then you have real problems considering most LFC fans weren't bothered.

Beaten by Fulham with a reserve team or letting an 8 point lead slip to the noisy neighbours who will now win the PL. Oops.

Re: The Football Chat (cont) : Wed May 02, 2012 7:46 pm  

Wilbred T Pricklepop wrote:

That's barmy. Mental. I could understand the suggestion of getting mourinho, but getting him even if mancini wins the title?

It seems the crazy decisions of the chelsea hierachy rubs off on their fans as well.

Mourinho is to Mancini what Mancini is to Mark Hughes.

With the squad that Citeh have, they should have won the league already. If Ferguson or Mourinho had the Citeh squad they would have.

Inter Milan could see that Mourinho was a class above Mancini and they replaced a manager who'd just won three titles with them. The CL win shows they were correct in their assessment.

Re: The Football Chat (cont) : Wed May 02, 2012 9:03 pm  

cracking goal that

Re: The Football Chat (cont) : Wed May 02, 2012 9:06 pm  

Lord Tony Smith wrote:

If you're bothered about our result last night then you have real problems considering most LFC fans weren't bothered.

Beaten by Fulham with a reserve team or letting an 8 point lead slip to the noisy neighbours who will now win the PL. Oops.

Yeah, all the fans booing at end weren't bothered at all. You pop up when United hit a bad spell, bit of an exodus as we were building up the lead and Liverpool were still getting bummed at home by pub teams. Then conveniently pop up when you have a cup final. Superb stuff.

Re: The Football Chat (cont) : Wed May 02, 2012 9:28 pm  

Wilbred T Pricklepop wrote:

Lord God jose mourinho - Man city aren't chelsea. The owners view it as a project and want to build longevity and stability. They aren't hell bent on one tangible end goal e.g. winning the champions league, and won't throw the toys out of the pram when it doesn't happen. That is chelsea's undoing and why, despite all the millions, man united have still won more titles in the time since roman took over, and throw in a better CL record too.

Roman Abramovich has said about 50 words since he bought Chelsea. The Sheikh has said about 150 since he bought Citeh. You don't know what he's going to do. And getting rid of Hughes when he was on track for CL qualification and general improvement would be pretty much an exact template for getting rid of Mancini for Mourinho.

Longevity and stability is a definite goal, but you're always going to be better off if the man in charge is the best at what he does. Mourinho is, Mancini isn't.

Man United beat us in a penalty shoot out. Other than that we've had a pretty similar CL record to United. And that's with us continually coming up against Barca and the scousers.

This is why, if man city don't win the title this season, they will keep the same manager, the same team - with minor changes and in all probability win the title next season.

There is clearly a chance that will happen. But there clearly is a chance that not winning the league when the league was there for the taking will have a major psychological effect on them. There is a clear chance that the Citeh players will see Mancini as a nearly guy and not want to play for him in the way that Chelsea players don't play for someone they don't respect.

Your assertion that if they don't win the title this season it could somehow cause a collapse and irrepairable damage is just fanciful, you're in cloud cuckoo land with that one. They aren't going away.

I never said they would go away. But winning a title requires an enormous amount of work. If that Citeh squad can't beat Newcastle and QPR to take a title, then really are they going to put in the extra effort throughout the season to win the league?

It's academic anyway because as far as im concerned they'll do what's needed against newcastle and qpr and win the title this season.

You've made 50 different predictions on the title race this season. Given that you've covered every outcome you will get it right some time. It could be with this. They certainly should be able to take the title from here.