Champions League Page 455

  • Page

    of 687 First / Last

  • imamazed 5 Dec 2012 10:23:33 5,620 posts
    Seen 33 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    @nickthegun Channel 5 lost the rights to the Europa League for this season, ESPN and ITV only
  • kalel 5 Dec 2012 10:27:39 87,687 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    fergal_oc wrote:
    We competed whilst playing decent football for 20mins in Madrid and most of a half in Amsterdam
    I just can't take you seriously when you think things like this are valid points in the face of spending over 900m since your current owners took over.

    That and the whole suddenly becoming a huge City fan and an expert on football the minute your club became the richest in the world thing.

    Sorry again, I know I'm not being nice (or perhaps even constructive), but there it is.
  • nickthegun 5 Dec 2012 10:29:37 59,937 posts
    Seen 59 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    imamazed wrote:
    @nickthegun Channel 5 lost the rights to the Europa League for this season, ESPN and ITV only
    Thats not really the point but, but thanks for the correction.

    Edited by nickthegun at 10:29:47 05-12-2012

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    someone say something funny

  • imamazed 5 Dec 2012 10:33:08 5,620 posts
    Seen 33 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    @nickthegun No problem
  • fergal_oc 5 Dec 2012 10:38:04 2,763 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    kalel wrote:
    fergal_oc wrote:
    We competed whilst playing decent football for 20mins in Madrid and most of a half in Amsterdam
    I just can't take you seriously when you think things like this are valid points in the face of spending over 900m since your current owners took over.

    That and the whole suddenly becoming a huge City fan and an expert on football the minute your club became the richest in the world thing.

    Sorry again, I know I'm not being nice (or perhaps even constructive), but there it is.
    I don't think you're being harsh. I think your perception of me all of a sudden becoming a huge City fan is incorrect, but that's your perception and you're entitled to it.

    I liken City to the Welsh rugby team. Full of excellent players but not quite getting it right. Wales have lost 7 consecutive test matches, which on the face of it is appauling form, especially given the expectations. But I then look a little deeper and see that most of those games have been lost in the last few minutes or by less than 7pts. I can see that they are competing but they're missing something, maybe it's their coaching or over coaching but something is missing.

    As for City, well I can't do anything about the 900m spent. I try to be objective and look for positives. I'm a glass half full guy and I understand that being so rubs some people up the wrong way. For that I am sorry.
  • kalel 5 Dec 2012 10:41:13 87,687 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    I suspect you have plenty to look forward to as a City fan, so the whole "clutching at positives where you can find them" thing is probably unnecessary.
  • nickthegun 5 Dec 2012 10:45:45 59,937 posts
    Seen 59 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    basically, if fergie doesnt move himself upstairs by the end of may, you will never have to clutch at straws again and will probably have won the competition by 2014.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    someone say something funny

  • The-Bodybuilder 5 Dec 2012 10:49:57 14,199 posts
    Seen 16 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    kalel wrote:
    THFourteen wrote:
    It was also one of the toughest groups i can ever recall in the history of the champions league.
    Huge overstatement. Real yes, but City should be cruising past teams like Dortmand and Ajax. Good teams yes, but really shouldn't be a threat for City.

    Genuinely don't think it was much harder than our group a few years back - Inter (who were CL champions), Bremen (who were as good then as Dortmand are now)[n/] and Twente (who had finished about Ajax that season). We won that group.
    They really weren't. Even Twente aren't as good as the Ajax side of today, if you compare player-for-player.

    However, your point is still valid. Dortmund are 11 points behind Bayern, and Dortmund were beating by us last season, when essentially they were better. City and Madrid should've qualified.

    I don't understand the whole "they need more european experience". Virtually the whole team have european experience, with at least 2 having CL medals (Toure and Maicon). Plus they vast amount of sums should negate any kind of "inexperience" they have.
  • kalel 5 Dec 2012 10:55:51 87,687 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    That's the point. There are no excuses for City, so people making them are annoying. City have greater resources than even Madrid do. City were the team that made every other team in that group (including Madrid) go "oh fuck". For then to come bottom is laughable.
  • kentmonkey 5 Dec 2012 10:59:50 20,686 posts
    Seen 22 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    It is hard to compare one team to another and declare which is better, even when they play each other, let alone when you're comparing a team from one year to another. That said, Ajax were going through a massive period of decline during that time and Twente, in my opinion, won the league through others not being competitive, rather than being a decent side themselves.

    And Dortmund really are very good. Their play doesn't suit against some teams, which is where they drop points, but if their style works against a team, there are very few teams that can compete with them. Going completely against my original point, I would say that they're significantly better than Bremen were back then, individually and collectively.

    Real Madrid and Inter comparison is more difficult. Inter were on the decline that season, in fact they were on the decline the year before arguably, but still won the CL. A bit like Chelsea last year - not the best team in it by a mile, but arguably were because they won the thing. However the year after they really weren't that great. That said, individually this Real Madrid team is still extremely good, but as a team they're just not clicking at the moment. Arguably a lot like City in some regards.

    Both were tough groups, but I'd still prefer Spurs' group from that season than City's this season. And I don't think Arsenal would have done much better than they have. But then I'm a glass is half full, been dropped, smashed into a million smithereens and shat on kind of guy. Which irritates some.
  • kentmonkey 5 Dec 2012 11:03:19 20,686 posts
    Seen 22 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Still agree with the point that City should have done much better though.

    It's not surprising to think that Arsenal would have struggled, but City ain't Arsenal, and a good half or two against Ajax and Madrid shouldn't, and isn't, good enough.

    That was a tough group, but City are far superiour to Spurs of then and us of now (or in any time in the last seven-eight years for that matter).

    In real terms, Spurs' group was probably just as difficult due to them not being on City's level at this stage. All things considered, the challenge was perhaps the same, as while I still believe City's group is harder, they should be one of the best teams in the world with everything they've spent both on players and the coaching/development/management team.
  • kalel 5 Dec 2012 11:03:43 87,687 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    The biggest difference between the groups being compared, is the gap between that Spurs side, and this City side.
  • nickthegun 5 Dec 2012 11:07:03 59,937 posts
    Seen 59 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    look at celtic. They had, arguably, a harder group and they have had a very respectable run.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    someone say something funny

  • kentmonkey 5 Dec 2012 11:16:18 20,686 posts
    Seen 22 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    All depends on what you mean by harder group.

    Team vs team, City's group is by far the hardest I've seen in a number of years. I'm struggling to recollect one that on paper was more difficult actually, although there may well have been. However it should have been most difficult for Ajax - they're the ones that should feel hard done by being drawn in that group.

    But ability vs the group, Celtic have performed wonders. They've outperformed themselves and I really hope for them that they get through - it would be huge money for them if they make it through to the next round.
  • kalel 5 Dec 2012 11:16:57 87,687 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    City's group is so hard because City are in it. That's the point surely.
  • TVoJ 5 Dec 2012 11:22:34 1,895 posts
    Seen 10 hours ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    Sorry but not winning a game in the CL despite winning the league last season IS embarrassing.
  • kentmonkey 5 Dec 2012 11:26:23 20,686 posts
    Seen 22 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Partially yes. But even taking them out it's a horrible group.

    For Ajax it's much harder than City, but even for City (i.e. removing them and comparing the other three)...that's not a group I'd want.

    But then I'm saying that as an Arsenal fan. As a City fan I'd have more confidence in my team to perform against those teams.

    As I've said, team vs team that's a tough group. A really tough group. However taking into account City's individual and collective ability, they should be qualifying out of that group. And therefore considering Celtic's ability versus their opponents in their group, they've done brilliantly.

    It's hard to compare though. As somebody said the other day: Celtic drew with Arbroath, which means that using playground logic, Arbroath are better than Barcelona. And in using that logic, Vitesse are better than City. And therefore that's logic I'm not going to disagree with.
  • kalel 5 Dec 2012 11:29:01 87,687 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    It's a tough group but I still think how tough is being overstated. I think we're all agreed on City being an embarrassment anyway so it's moot really.
  • kentmonkey 5 Dec 2012 11:37:23 20,686 posts
    Seen 22 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Agreed.

    Toughness of the group is merely perception. City being an embarassment is fact.
  • imamazed 5 Dec 2012 11:40:00 5,620 posts
    Seen 33 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    And without any co-effecient points from the Europa League, it's all gonna happen again next year. Means even if they luck out on an easier oponent in pot 2, they'll always have to face a top, top club from pot one.
  • Kay 5 Dec 2012 11:42:57 17,888 posts
    Seen 8 minutes ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    By next year they really shouldn't be worried about who they'll face in the CL (which is the whole point of this argument anyway).
  • nickthegun 5 Dec 2012 11:44:37 59,937 posts
    Seen 59 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    The point is that city should be able to do over anyone. With the players and resources they have you would expect them to have a shot at qualifying in a group of real, barca and bayern. So co-efficient or no, the expectation is there to at least qualify from any group they land in.

    As I said, pound for pound, celtics group was a far bigger ask for them and they havent embarassed themselves at all.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    someone say something funny

  • kalel 5 Dec 2012 11:48:56 87,687 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Kay wrote:
    By next year they really shouldn't be worried about who they'll face in the CL (which is the whole point of this argument anyway).
    They shouldn't have been worried this year.

    The only way they can improve any more by next year will be by getting Mourinho in, which I'm sure will happen.
  • imamazed 5 Dec 2012 11:49:10 5,620 posts
    Seen 33 minutes ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Of course they shouldn't struggle as much as they do, but being in pot three each year ain't helping matters either. Manchester United haven't been great in Europe in some of the previous seasons, but have still managed to get out the group stage regardless because of the quality of their group. Of course, last year they were truly awful in both CL and Europa.

    I do agree though, city should be doing a hell a lot of better. Unless the cluv changes in a major way though (I'm thinking manager I suppose) I don't think any amount of new signings or domestic success will make things easier next year. Europa League success could have helped a little...

    Edited by imamazed at 11:50:01 05-12-2012
  • nickthegun 5 Dec 2012 11:51:55 59,937 posts
    Seen 59 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    kalel wrote:
    Kay wrote:
    By next year they really shouldn't be worried about who they'll face in the CL (which is the whole point of this argument anyway).
    They shouldn't have been worried this year.

    The only way they can improve any more by next year will be by getting Mourinho in, which I'm sure will happen.
    As I say, the only way that wont happen is if fergie shuffles himself upstairs at the end of the season.

    From his press conference and other bits and bobs, you definitely get the feeling Man u is the job he wants, so it would be crazy for Man U to let him go again.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    someone say something funny

  • kalel 5 Dec 2012 11:56:09 87,687 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Unless the Glazers have a change of heart about spending, I can't see Mourinho being their choice of replacement for Fergie. He's incredibly expensive in terms of fees and will want to sign hugely expensive players as well. David Moyes seems an infinitely more likely choice to me.

    With City and PSG fairly likely to need new managers soon, I just can't see Mourinho going to United.
  • fergal_oc 5 Dec 2012 11:57:01 2,763 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    City suck against counter-attacking teams. We play too far up the pitch and don't have enough pace behind, especially when missing Clichy and Richards. All 3 teams did what most prem teams do against City and park the bus.

    The problem with the CL is that the teams doing it against us have a lot more quality going forward than Villa, Wigan, Fulham et al and they see City as a scalp and raise their game much like Celtic did against Barcelona.

    Yep I agree, City are an embarrassment.
  • nickthegun 5 Dec 2012 12:08:29 59,937 posts
    Seen 59 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    I can. I really can. And he didnt spend *that* much when he was at inter, certainly no more than fergie is currently spending.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    someone say something funny

  • kalel 5 Dec 2012 12:22:20 87,687 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    nickthegun wrote:
    I can. I really can. And he didnt spend *that* much when he was at inter, certainly no more than fergie is currently spending.
    2008:
    Hernan Crespo
    Victor Obinna
    Ricardo Quaresma
    Sulley Muntari
    Mancini

    2009:
    Diego Milito
    Samuel Eto'o
    Marko Arnautovic
    Denis Alibec
    Goran Pandev
    Kerlon
    Wesley Sneijder
    Thiago Motta
    Lucio

    I reckon wages would be in another league to the kind of signings Fergie's made in recent years, although actually yeah, in terms of fees perhaps comparable. The sheer number though. He sure likes to make a team his own.

    Besides, is the lure of United really so great these days? Of course the name is huge, but if there's the option of going to City and spending however much he likes, that has to be appealing.

    My impression of Mourinho is as good as he is, he likes to move where he knows he'll get success. Going to United today isn't like it was ten years ago. I even think a return to Chelsea is more likely than United.
  • nickthegun 5 Dec 2012 12:37:16 59,937 posts
    Seen 59 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    I think the lure of united is enough, to be honest. Im fairly sure of it, to be honest. As I say, its nothing concrete, just the impression I get from him and the way he took the piss out of mancini.

    If he gets utd, then all he needs to do is finish his career at bayern and the set is more or less complete (I know thats nothing to do with anything).

    I would be willing to stick a cheeky tenner on him being uniteds manager by the summer.

    Edited by nickthegun at 12:37:54 05-12-2012

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    someone say something funny

  • Page

    of 687 First / Last

Log in or register to reply