Its hardly bad luck. They're just massive bottlers.PSG have some rough luck. They have the best attackers in the world yet can't seem to get the job done when it matters.
Its hardly bad luck. They're just massive bottlers.PSG have some rough luck. They have the best attackers in the world yet can't seem to get the job done when it matters.
(One of the) best attacker in Mbappe. That's about it. Neymar has shown time and time again he doesn't give a feck anymore. Yes he'll do some fancy flick and people around the world will do their best shocked Pikachu face, and then he'll proceed to do sweet feck all.PSG have some rough luck. They have the best attackers in the world yet can't seem to get the job done when it matters.
But if you listen to half the muppets on this forum, ole doesn’t know what he’s doing. 4 wins to peps 3 say otherwise... tIt was a defensive 442. I understand you don't go toe to toe with Pep in midfield but you could have just copied Ole's template. Pretty sure it had some success. Ole had success by playing both 352 and 4231
Ole's problem has never been on big games though. He is a master at defend and counter.But if you listen to half the muppets on this forum, ole doesn’t know what he’s doing. 4 wins to peps 3 say otherwise... t
Neymar was excellent in the first half. It's harsh to blame him for the second half shitshow when they couldn't evade the press and get him on the ball at all.(One of the) best attacker in Mbappe. That's about it. Neymar has shown time and time again he doesn't give a feck anymore. Yes he'll do some fancy flick and people around the world will do their best shocked Pikachu face, and then he'll proceed to do sweet feck all.
They can't get the rest of the team to play at the required level so end up getting as far as those attackers get them.PSG have some rough luck. They have the best attackers in the world yet can't seem to get the job done when it matters.
We have a fantastic record v non top 6 sides since Bruno came in. We havent been defend and counter for a long time now.Ole's problem has never been on big games though. He is a master at defend and counter.
Yes and no - when you take over a team like he has at PSG - you should at least be expected to win the league fairly easily. With all due respect to Lyon and Lille, they should not be anywhere near PSG. If we take Lille - every single season, they lose 1-2 quality players - and have 3 seasons in a row had a positive net spending of €40-60 million. Bissouma, Pepe, Thiago Mendes, Rafael Leao, Gabriel and Victor Osimhen - some of the players they have lost over the last 3 years - still they are able to fight PSG for the title.It's probably a bit harsh to judge him on his time at PSG so far given he had no preseason and took over in a weird season with Covid but I'm not sure he's an upgrade on Tuchel and overall I do agree with you that so far he's proven to be a very good manager but not one of the elite managers (at least yet) despite people wanting to anoint him as one.
We weren’t really defend and counter the last time we beat city, same when we beat them in the league cup. Some countering but wouldn’t call that what we mainly did.We have a fantastic record v non top 6 sides since Bruno came in. We havent been defend and counter for a long time now.
I thought they got it spot on in the first half. Apart from a couple of moments they got it forward quickly, closed City down quickly. Almost perfect.PSG were simply not set up well enough to better City. Plus they were very wasteful with their chances.
He is Djemba Djemba, not Massimo TaibiNon parli italiano? Prova google traduttore.
Aussi, pensez à choisir la bonne langue ...
Yes, but there are not patterns of play, innit?But if you listen to half the muppets on this forum, ole doesn’t know what he’s doing. 4 wins to peps 3 say otherwise... t
Lack of competition in domestic league.I don't understand why PSG are so fragile. There's something about their dressing room culture or spirit that's off. Maybe the CL thing has become too much of a desperation and seen off many managers, that it's taken its toll.
They arent fragile, they're just not very good.I don't understand why PSG are so fragile. There's something about their dressing room culture or spirit that's off. Maybe the CL thing has become too much of a desperation and seen off many managers, that it's taken its toll.
If you don’t think Neymar is one of the best attackers in the world then I’d suggest that you choose another sport to follow (maybe tennis?) because you clearly don’t have much of a clue about this one(One of the) best attacker in Mbappe. That's about it. Neymar has shown time and time again he doesn't give a feck anymore. Yes he'll do some fancy flick and people around the world will do their best shocked Pikachu face, and then he'll proceed to do sweet feck all.
Seen this argument many places and it’s quite obviously nonsense. Last night Jason Cundy on the radio was trying to say that City have better conditioning than PSG because their league games are tougher every week. If that’s so, then why don’t Man City win the Champions League every year? Instead of losing to teams like Lyon? People need to drop the silly bias and really think about what they’re saying.Lack of competition in domestic league.
They are a bunch of snowflakes.
Yeah might not be the season to use this argument.Lack of competition in domestic league.
It’s nothing to do with any of that IMO. The last team to win the Champions League/European Cup for the first time in their history was Chelsea in 2012. You’ll probably remember that they spent a bucketload of money and had numerous heartbreaking losses before they finally got over the hump. Before that, the last team to win it for the first time was Borussia Dortmund 25 years ago.I don't understand why PSG are so fragile. There's something about their dressing room culture or spirit that's off. Maybe the CL thing has become too much of a desperation and seen off many managers, that it's taken its toll.
Yeah I think that plays a part, but the Champions League is just a very difficult trophy to win, and even the best teams need a good amount of luck. Hence you didn't see Barcelona win it more than they did, even though they were the best team around at the time, while Real Madrid won it several times without necessarily being the best team around. Generally I feel you need to be a good team for a sustained period of time until luck goes your way. There's a lot of teams who have already won it, and most of those teams still attract the best players so I think that explains why there's so rarely a new winner.It’s nothing to do with any of that IMO. The last team to win the Champions League/European Cup for the first time in their history was Chelsea in 2012. You’ll probably remember that they spent a bucketload of money and had numerous heartbreaking losses before they finally got over the hump. Before that, the last team to win it for the first time was Borussia Dortmund 25 years ago.
The Champions League (like the World Cup) tends to be won by teams that have won it before. Just check the list of winners. The reasons for this are debatable, but I think it’s a lot to do with belief and the notion that you have the ‘right’ to win it or that you ‘belong’ at the top table. Such feelings can permeate through a football club.
I think PSG and Man City have both had this problem to a large degree
The French League cup was discontinued this year so no longer exists, but they are in the semi Final of the French Cup and obviously right in the mix in the league, although not leading as you'd expect from PSG.Oh well, he still got a chance to win the league cup right? Won’t be suprised of he leaves Paris with zero titles. That would be an achievement itself
Because he doesn’t know how to win. The fact he won nothing with that Spurs team was criminal.Cowardly and stupid tactics from Poch last night. Why the feck would you sit back on a 1-0 lead after 45 minutes when your defence is as poor as theirs is right now?
I think that’s a good assessment of the game. PSG were phenomenal in the 1st half but then looked like a different set of players in the 2nd and fatigue (maybe combined with Poch’s anticipation of fatigue) is the simplest explanation for that. Man City’s depth and ability to rotate seamlessly this season is unparalleled and a significant advantage over pretty much ever other club in Europe. The fact that they looked fresher in the 2nd half is part and parcel of that.Yeah I think that plays a part, but the Champions League is just a very difficult trophy to win, and even the best teams need a good amount of luck. Hence you didn't see Barcelona win it more than they did, even though they were the best team around at the time, while Real Madrid won it several times without necessarily being the best team around. Generally I feel you need to be a good team for a sustained period of time until luck goes your way. There's a lot of teams who have already won it, and most of those teams still attract the best players so I think that explains why there's so rarely a new winner.
Anyway, it's crazy the recency bias we're seeing right now. Obviously the end result is what counts, but last night at half time everyone was gushing about PSG and how well they were playing. Then the other half goes City's way, and two somewhat fluky goals later PSG are rubbish. It's all really slim margins, even last year's final could have easily gone PSG's way and I wouldn't say the bottled it either.
I wonder what happened last night though. Did Pochettino instruct them to sit deeper in the 2nd half, thinking that would give them more space to counter? Maybe he knew they didn't have energy to keep going the way they did in the first half, but they completely lost control and just invited pressure.
That's a bit of a high standard, no?Seen this argument many places and it’s quite obviously nonsense. Last night Jason Cundy on the radio was trying to say that City have better conditioning than PSG because their league games are tougher every week. If that’s so, then why don’t Man City win the Champions League every year?
Yeah it's easy for me to say PSG shouldn't have given City so much control, when City are so good at taking control. In hindsight sitting back was the wrong thing to do, but on another day that could have been exactly the right approach. City would chase an away goal, and PSG could have sent Neymar and Mbappe on their way with a long ball. For the most part PSG were solid at the back. Even against Bayern, who threw the kitchen sink at them, they mostly conceded lots of half chances rather than huge chances.I think that’s a good assessment of the game. PSG were phenomenal in the 1st half but then looked like a different set of players in the 2nd and fatigue (maybe combined with Poch’s anticipation of fatigue) is the simplest explanation for that. Man City’s depth and ability to rotate seamlessly this season is unparalleled and a significant advantage over pretty much ever other club in Europe. The fact that they looked fresher in the 2nd half is part and parcel of that.
Pep definitely made some good adjustments to regain control of the match but City were still limited to dominance of the ball with little else. They didn’t really create anything of note until Navas gifted them a lifeline and then their wall inexplicably parted like the Red Sea for Moshez’s free kick. So I’d probably say PSG lost the game yesterday rather than City winning it with Gueye’s sending off kinda typifying that.
It should make for a great game next week though. An early PSG goal and City will feel that Champions League semi-final déjà vu again.
yeaI thought they got it spot on in the first half. Apart from a couple of moments they got it forward quickly, closed City down quickly. Almost perfect.
Second half they panicked and sat way too deep too early. They should have carried on as they were.
And defence, imo.Their midfield is extremely ordinary for a top side.