Ronald Koeman discussion

[kenada_blue]

Behave, Sigurdsson wasn't remotely fit and Klaassen has literally just joined the league.

They brought on £50m man Sterling who is not only fit but has played in the prem for years, and that's ignoring the two other lads they brought on that cost north of £50m. We also started with Holgate, Davies and DCL, compared to positionally, £50m Walker, £55m De Bruyne and £32m Jesus.

You're actually mad if you're trying to say that their spending over the last 5 years hasn't decimated ours. They are YEARS ahead of us in their development as a squad.

Again... Burnley put 3 passed Chelsea last week in the same circumstances as us last night. The gap there being wider.

We can argue about players and money spent, but surely you think we shouldve played better in that 2nd half with a goal and a man advantage. Even Koeman recognises this.

 

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

Got the first half right I felt but probably didn't quite get the second half right from a tactical perspective considering they had 10 men

That being said, I think he's putting together a good squad, and he's still undefeated against Pep since he took over here. Not many current managers in the league can say that

 

[kenada_blue]

Koeman said last night that he wasn't happy with how deep we sat. He was constantly trying to push us up the pitch in the second half as well.

People are also ignoring what Pep did in reaction to our change.

When we initially switched to a 4 at the back we looked threatening - Klaassen was pushing forward well and Gylfi was linking up on the left.

Pep brought on Danilo and Sterling went central. That was the big change. We couldn't deal with Sterling's pace there and that was that.

In an ideal world, I think Koeman should have brought on Kev ahead of Gylfi in that situation, but of course there's no guarantee that'd have worked.

True. We needed pace. Something Koeman seems a little reluctant to use.

 

[BlueToff]

Again... Burnley put 3 passed Chelsea last week in the same circumstances as us last night. The gap there being wider.

We can argue about players and money spent, but surely you think we shouldve played better in that 2nd half with a goal and a man advantage. Even Koeman recognises this.

Difference being they weren't the same situations at all?

Chelsea were all over the place and lacking confidence.

City were dominating already. There's a difference.

Yes, I'd have liked to see us get more on the front foot, but I don't think that's down to a lack of trying.

Initially, our switch to a 4 worked and it pushed us up the pitch, and we completely negated Pep's 'wing back' tactic.

The issue came when Danilo came on. Sterling basically became a spare man in the middle and we lacked the pace to stretch the game.

 

[BlueToff]

True. We needed pace. Something Koeman seems a little reluctant to use.

He's not reluctant mate.

I think he just wanted us to get on the ball at that point and set our own tempo.

Issue is Gylfi wasn't sharp and we didn't get on the ball enough to get him into the game.

That being said he whipped in two crosses that really should have resulted in better things for us.

For me, Kev was probably the change, but there's no guarantee we wouldn't have got exactly the same result anyway.

Sandro was a miss last night in that he could have come on and added that pace and pressing. Hopefully he isn't out too long though I can't see him being fit to face Chelsea.

 

[KevMirallas]

Koeman said last night that he wasn't happy with how deep we sat. He was constantly trying to push us up the pitch in the second half as well.

People are also ignoring what Pep did in reaction to our change.

When we initially switched to a 4 at the back we looked threatening - Klaassen was pushing forward well and Gylfi was linking up on the left.

Pep brought on Danilo and Sterling went central. That was the big change. We couldn't deal with Sterling's pace there and that was that.

In an ideal world, I think Koeman should have brought on Kev ahead of Gylfi in that situation, but of course there's no guarantee that'd have worked.

Thank the good effing lord someone else saw it.

 

[bicycleheader]

Koeman said last night that he wasn't happy with how deep we sat. He was constantly trying to push us up the pitch in the second half as well.

People are also ignoring what Pep did in reaction to our change.

When we initially switched to a 4 at the back we looked threatening - Klaassen was pushing forward well and Gylfi was linking up on the left.

Pep brought on Danilo and Sterling went central. That was the big change. We couldn't deal with Sterling's pace there and that was that.

In an ideal world, I think Koeman should have brought on Kev ahead of Gylfi in that situation, but of course there's no guarantee that'd have worked.

That's good to hear. Didn't hear his interview.

 

[CahillsCornerFlag]

Again... Burnley put 3 passed Chelsea last week in the same circumstances as us last night. The gap there being wider.

We can argue about players and money spent, but surely you think we shouldve played better in that 2nd half with a goal and a man advantage. Even Koeman recognises this.

I've already said that we played poorly in the second half in my previous post, that response was purely because he wanted to use figures to justify his point.

 

[Lanolin]

Behave, Sigurdsson wasn't remotely fit and Klaassen has literally just joined the league.

They brought on £50m man Sterling who is not only fit but has played in the prem for years, and that's ignoring the two other lads they brought on that cost north of £50m. We also started with Holgate, Davies and DCL, compared to positionally, £50m Walker, £55m De Bruyne and £32m Jesus.

You're actually mad if you're trying to say that their spending over the last 5 years hasn't decimated ours. They are YEARS ahead of us in their development as a squad.

But this is the whole point - I'm not. You're arguing a point I'm simply not making.

Is city's squad better than ours? Yes of course it is. Has their spending dwarfed ours? Yes of course it has.

I gave an example of a game which has gone down in folklore as the time moyes said something unforgivable. City brought on Milner and balotelli in that game, pretty much the equivalent of the subs they made last night. We brought on vellios and drenthe who are absolutely not the equivalent of our subs last night.

I'm trying to be balanced not critical, but some people seem to have emperors new clothes syndrome - they're so determined to believe that everything is a sign of us getting better that they refuse to accept any suggestion that some things haven't really changed.

 

[neil999]

i think mirallas instead of siggurdsson would have been better, mirrallas is actually pretty good tracking back and his pace may have helped..all hindsight tho isnt it

 

[CahillsCornerFlag]

But this is the whole point - I'm not. You're arguing a point I'm simply not making.

Is city's squad better than ours? Yes of course it is. Has their spending dwarfed ours? Yes of course it has.

I gave an example of a game which has gone down in folklore as the time moyes said something unforgivable. City brought on Milner and balotelli in that game, pretty much the equivalent of the subs they made last night. We brought on vellios and drenthe who are absolutely not the equivalent of our subs last night.

I'm trying to be balanced not critical, but some people seem to have emperors new clothes syndrome - they're so determined to believe that everything is a sign of us getting better that they refuse to accept any suggestion that some things haven't really changed.

You're clearly missing my point just as I'm apparently missing yours, and I can't be bothered going round in circles.

 

[Thomasc]

I was more surprised he did not bring on Lookman when we were under the cosh in the second half, if it was pace we were looking for and an option to give City something extra to think about, then surely he was the outlet.

But, he got the plan spot on for me, we set up not to lose and to frustrate City and that is exactly what happened.

City were very impressive second half even with 10 men.

 

[Titus Bramble]

Mixed feelings about last night. I'm sure most of us would have taken a draw before kick off, but I can't help but feel it was an opportunity missed to get the win. Reminded me a bit of our game away at Utd last season, defending well but too deep which inevitably led to a mistake.

Having said that, not many teams will pick up points at the Etihad this season and I can't single anyone out for having a poor game, city are just too strong even with 10 men.

Progress on Thursday and we've had a very good first 6 games of the season

 

[Prevenger17]

We were very poor. Lucky to get the goal, luckier for them to have a man sent off and still didn't even look like we'd get anything out of the game.

 

[Lanolin]

You're clearly missing my point just as I'm apparently missing yours, and I can't be bothered going round in circles.

I'm not missing your point though - it's that the gap between our squad and city's squad has got bigger in the past 6/7 years. I understand you loud and clear, I simply disagree.

Do I think we should expect to beat city away? No. Do I think we should expect to beat city away when 1-0 up and against 10 men for the 2nd half? Still no. Do I think we should expect to have more control of the game and cause them more problems than we did last night? Yes, absolutely.

My point was simply that last night was classic kitap1. It's fine, we know you get the odd draw with those tactics, we've been doing it for years. I thought we'd got past it that's all.