holts a tosser if jose had dropped an in form attacker and put in a defensive midfielder he would have decried him an enemy of football prick
Manchester City under Pep Guardiola | Pep on City v Liverpool ref: "He likes to be special"
- Thread starter Adisa
- Start date
As usual Pep overthought it, analysed the 3-4 for days and weeks and came up with a perfect theoretical masterplan in his head instead of doing the tried and tested and it backfired spectacularly in practise.
I can't decide who's worse. Holt or Guillem Balague. Both are so far up Pep's arse it's incredible.
Surely Ballache is worse since he's an Espanyol supporter?
If that was a Jose side last night against pool, he would have been slaughtered in the press today?.. seems there' nothing about st pep and the way he set his team up and the way they played? Pool deserved to win and by that margin.. only thing in press is about the bus, and expect a city backlash... If the best us on Sunday the game will be brushed under carpet,.. did he have a plan B.?looked like No...
Majority of the same group of fan who are calling guardiola a failure right now are adamant mourinho was a success last year due to winning EL and the carling Cup. The hypocrisy is astounding.
He's worse because of this tweet.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
What a terrible tweet that is.
That's such an injustice to Liverpool by describing last night as simply chaos.
Eurgh, what a complete cnut. Bet he was proud as bunch when he came up with that bullshit analogy.
St Pep is too arrogant for his own good. Last night he only had to keep it tight, chip it over the predictable gegenpress and nick a goal.
But he’s always got to be scientific about everything. He’s the fecking Heston Blumenthal of the football world. Pretentious, bald, annoying and overrated.
But he’s always got to be scientific about everything. He’s the fecking Heston Blumenthal of the football world. Pretentious, bald, annoying and overrated.
What a disrespectful journalist he is. Chaos and Order. Why does the loser have to be badly exposed? Man City simply lacked the mentality and were overwhelmed by the crowd and pressure. It was too much for them. And Pep messed with his lineup and made some bad choices. That's it. We have to wait for the 2nd leg now and Man City are by no means out of it but I hope City lose again. It'll be interesting to see what BS he comes out with to defend them again.
There is way too much irrational hate for Ballague on here. He has been on the record praising Klopp before like many other journalists. He is overly critical of Mourinho for the same reason most football in the past 15 years have been, his football simply leaves very little room for any benefit of the doubt.
Chaos here does not mean anything negative. It simply implies that Klopp's football is more about raw emotions and intensity than tactical precision. I would describe all of Klopp's sides like that and I loved his Dortmund. I would describe our 1999 team the same way and think it is for me personally the most thrilling type of football. It's not a criticism but a simple recognition of how pro active football can come in different shapes with both deserving of admiration.
As for the point that the loser gets badly exposed, I think the evidence of the past few years shows that's exactly true. When you play reactive football, you very rarely if ever lose by a big margin. This is why 10 years ago, big hammerings between the big clubs were such a rarity (except with Arsenal). If you look at the past few years however, you will see Dortmund hammering Real, Bayern to Barcelona, Barcelona to Bayern, Real to Bayern, City to Liverpool, Liverpool to City, PSG to Bayern and many more. When you play pro active football either through Klopp's "chaos "or Pep's "order", the upside is that through sheer commitment to it and insistence on it, you become as good as those teams get. The downside is when it goes bad, it goes really bad.
Chaos here does not mean anything negative. It simply implies that Klopp's football is more about raw emotions and intensity than tactical precision. I would describe all of Klopp's sides like that and I loved his Dortmund. I would describe our 1999 team the same way and think it is for me personally the most thrilling type of football. It's not a criticism but a simple recognition of how pro active football can come in different shapes with both deserving of admiration.
As for the point that the loser gets badly exposed, I think the evidence of the past few years shows that's exactly true. When you play reactive football, you very rarely if ever lose by a big margin. This is why 10 years ago, big hammerings between the big clubs were such a rarity (except with Arsenal). If you look at the past few years however, you will see Dortmund hammering Real, Bayern to Barcelona, Barcelona to Bayern, Real to Bayern, City to Liverpool, Liverpool to City, PSG to Bayern and many more. When you play pro active football either through Klopp's "chaos "or Pep's "order", the upside is that through sheer commitment to it and insistence on it, you become as good as those teams get. The downside is when it goes bad, it goes really bad.
Last edited:
Ballbag is awful. All of the criticism is justified.
This is a guy who has been claiming Ronaldo is on the decline for the last 3 years! All because he loves Messi. A guy who's columns disappear over the summer transfer windows because he knows zero about player movements! Yes they actually do I look for them because originally I trusted his insight! He's a clown and I'd rate a percentage of the Cafe to write better articles! That says it all!
PS..the Money vs Pep thing earlier this season is perhaps one of the worst tag lines I've ever read about a footballing rivalry.....all because, again, he loves Pep..
Adds nothing to the discussion
1111eleven!!!
I am not sure why would you expect journalists to be accurate about transfer speculation. A lot of transfers can be indeed at advanced stages only for them to fall apart, it doesn't mean the journalist was lying or making it up. The problem is that fans are looking for precision because they naturally want to get that inside scoop which is simply impossible in the world of transfers. That's of course not to say that journalists don't flat out lie and make things up but I genuinely don't think any of the reputable ones do that. I can't be certain though as I generally don't really care for transfer speculation until it is in the advanced stages.
As for your point about Ronaldo, are you really saying that unless someone is hundred percent correct in their predictions or evaluations, they cannot be listened to? He, like virtually every sport writer in the plant gets it wrong plenty of times. You are not supposed to take what they write as a higher truth. You are supposed to analyse it and maybe discuss it if you care to do so as the good ones generally can have a different perspective from the armchair fan. It doesn't make any of them right but it makes the good ones interesting.
Sounds like he has read the first chapter of Jordan Peterson's new book.
So why is someone regarded as a higher voice than your average cafe poster for saying Ronaldo is on the decline when he clearly was not and is not.....he was saying it years ago...his game has changed ok!...he'll be right eventually mind! Manchester United vs City is Money vs Pep....sorry but give the man a history book of our club and quite frankly Man City since their cash injection....it's insulting to our club and city....he knows nothing about the English leagues and the history of the clubs and that comment highlights both. He's a tool! A club who built itself up over 50 years of success deemed to be "money"....an attack like that should have been met by a social media department which evidently doest really exist for our club....mocking him and that comment!
This is an excellent post that is unfortunately too nuanced for the purposes of this thread.
LOL try-hard wanker. Nothing worse than pseudo-intellectualism. Him and Brendan Rodgers should chat.
The criticism Ballague recieves on this forum is hardly irrational, he has earned it through utterly relentless praise of his false idol Pep, whilst condemning those of whom would oppose him. Take a stroll back through this thread if you feel there is a lack of evidence to support this claim.
Yeah, that pretty much sums up my thoughts.
I find Balague as irritating as anyone, but the chaos and order analogy is a sound one, it just doesn't need to be taken literally. I've always referred to it as chaos and calm - you can have both in a single game. In fact Liverpool did - chaotic first half (high energy, forcing mistakes, rousing the crowd) and calm in the second half (pragmatic, dropping off, defending in numbers). It's as much about involving and controlling the emotions of the crowd to help influence the game. If Liverpool had contested the second half in the same fashion as the first, they'd have struggled to press, left space and conceded. So taking the sting out of the game (order) was logical. The crowd recognised what Liverpool were doing in the second half and weren't tempted to demand more, because in that situation it would've been counterproductive.
Pep should he called out for getting it wrong. He made some stinkers for that game.
Laporte looked lost at Lb and removed a lot of the usual threat of sane by sitting too deep, leaving a duo vs 3 Liverpool players, preventing overloads. He was also positionally poor defensively and is just as culpable for the first goal as walker and otamendi.
That change made us weaker both offensively and defensively.
His second mistake was gundogan playing and pushing kdb wide. This had the same result as the opposite flank but for very different reasons. Kdb condensed the pitch, meaning walker had to over commit and with gundo sitting deep, again no overloads and spacial dominance.
It also led to gundogan ending in a lot of defensive positions fernandinho would be in, and he doesn't gave the heart or fight to win tackles or foul like fernandinho does. Perfect example being the second goal.
That's the first two goals IMHO down to peps changes which also hugely nullified or usual danger from the wings.
The 3rd goal was a typical goal for us to concede, cb comes bombing forward, gets dispossessed, quick coubter, we are at sea defensively. Thus goal I can live with as its a standard goal to concede from our play style
While the players didn't cover themselves in glory, the first half in particular was on Pep IMHO.
Laporte looked lost at Lb and removed a lot of the usual threat of sane by sitting too deep, leaving a duo vs 3 Liverpool players, preventing overloads. He was also positionally poor defensively and is just as culpable for the first goal as walker and otamendi.
That change made us weaker both offensively and defensively.
His second mistake was gundogan playing and pushing kdb wide. This had the same result as the opposite flank but for very different reasons. Kdb condensed the pitch, meaning walker had to over commit and with gundo sitting deep, again no overloads and spacial dominance.
It also led to gundogan ending in a lot of defensive positions fernandinho would be in, and he doesn't gave the heart or fight to win tackles or foul like fernandinho does. Perfect example being the second goal.
That's the first two goals IMHO down to peps changes which also hugely nullified or usual danger from the wings.
The 3rd goal was a typical goal for us to concede, cb comes bombing forward, gets dispossessed, quick coubter, we are at sea defensively. Thus goal I can live with as its a standard goal to concede from our play style
While the players didn't cover themselves in glory, the first half in particular was on Pep IMHO.
Exactly! I wouldn't call Liverpool's second half display entirely orderly though. I mean Klopp himself came out and expressed how unhappy he was with how little they played and how far deep they were pushed. It is never a good idea to sit that deep and have that much of the game being played so close to your goalkeeper even if the opponent don't threaten like City did because all it takes is a slip, a bad pass or a piece of individual brilliance. Basically, I don't think Liverpool wanted to play like that. Mourinho, Conte or Benitez don't mind doing that, they would even look for it. Klopp's team was simply pushed back and failed to "play football" as he put it because they are either not good enough to keep the ball or because they were knackered after that brilliant first half. Klopp seems to think it is the former based on his comments that if they could manage the ball better, they would be closer to City in the league.
What the hell is this ? Just admit that Klopp outsmarted Pep and move on, Ballbag. I even hate Klopp more than Pep but that's reality.
You're probably right, though whether it was by design or not, Liverpool playing the second half the way they did was a good thing - I don't think they'd have kept City out had they carried on playing the same way as in the first half. Fatigue would've crept in and there would've been untold space for City to operate. Considering their past issues, Liverpool defended brilliantly, but it wasn't last-ditch stuff, it was controlled. They never look rattled and when you're tiring, it's easier to defend in numbers than to continue pressing. As you say, it was just in possession that they lacked composure.
As you mentioned, Liverpool aren't as adept at defending for long periods of time, so they'll have to go to the Etihad with a view to scoring. City could easily find themselves 2-0 up at half-time. And then anything can happen.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
@FujiVice
Yep, City have yet to face an elite team this season, and looks like they will not be able to because they have an uphill climb to get to the CL semis.
In order to be the best you have to prove yourself against the best.
Yep, City have yet to face an elite team this season, and looks like they will not be able to because they have an uphill climb to get to the CL semis.
In order to be the best you have to prove yourself against the best.
This reminds me of Barca 15/16 getting knocked out by Atletico in the CL and allowing Real Madrid to come very close to them in the league table, in a matter of what 5 games?
What a bunch of pathethic little whiny cnuts, I was enjoying watching them cry ever since our third goal
Shat on their parade. The way their fans were chanting ole to every pass in the first half thinking it was in the bag.
They’re gonna win the league by over a dozen points but season still fizzling out and still the same small time bottlers.
Too many teams have sat back in awe of them this season. League should be ashamed they’re so far ahead.
They’re gonna win the league by over a dozen points but season still fizzling out and still the same small time bottlers.
Too many teams have sat back in awe of them this season. League should be ashamed they’re so far ahead.
Shame it has taken until April for the rest of the league to acknowledge that this Manchester City are exactly like Pep's Barca and Bayern teams - same frailties, same weak-spots, same sh*t attitude in adversity.
He builds greats teams that opponents are beguiled by - thus making his job easier.
He builds greats teams that opponents are beguiled by - thus making his job easier.
The sheer amount of points they accumulated through late goals didn't help us much.
The wheels do seem to be coming off though, consecutive losses to Liverpool and arch-rivals United in a matter of days, a daunting trip away at Spurs next weekend following the visit of Liverpool midweek in a season defining CL tie. Who knows, we may just be witnessing the start of an epic fall from grace.
This City team are nothing like that Barca team. Get in that Barca's teams face and Messi will dribble past you and 4 other players and chip the keeper.
This City team are the worst of every Guardiola team, largely because its the worst set of players he's inherited. The Barcelona and Bayern teams were completely stacked to the gills with world class players. This City team have a few world class players, which is good enough to be the best in the PL.
I wasn't referring to personnel nor did I imply this City team was better. But rather, all of Guardiola's have the same vulnerabilities.
Run at Barca, you'll unerve them. Run at Bayern, you'll unerve them. Run at City, you'll unerve them.
Frustrate any of Pep's team and they are easier to beat - essentially, they don't like it up em! They get tetchy. They consider it an offence to challenge them.
Nobody is suggesting every team ought to press against City (most can't), but you can at the very least kick the crap out of them. If that gives you even the slightest advantage, then so be it.
Last edited:
Thank God Messi signed that deal.
The lack of a supreme talent like Messi is what separates Barca from City/Bayern and why he hasn't won another CL.
The lack of a supreme talent like Messi is what separates Barca from City/Bayern and why he hasn't won another CL.
Agree on the point but I'll exclude Barca from this tbh.