The Official Manchester United Thread [vol 7]
Discussion
Sparkyhd said:
anniesdad said:
G Nev has hinted at it but City really are dirty t
ts when winning the ball back. Symptomatic of Guardiola teams of old. So predictable. 
Added to which this match is dull as dishwater. Chelsea parking buses and City incapable of delivering more than 1 shot on target in 45 minutes. What a load of ste.
Slight exaggeration to say we're parking the bus. We haven't got it out the bus depot yet. ts when winning the ball back. Symptomatic of Guardiola teams of old. So predictable. Added to which this match is dull as dishwater. Chelsea parking buses and City incapable of delivering more than 1 shot on target in 45 minutes. What a load of s
te. Oh, and no shots at goal.
gadgetmac said:
I think the problem is that City, Liverpool and Tottenham are all so good now at retaining possession and pressing that the rest have to try and catch up with this.
The old adage that you can’t score if you don’t have the ball is true so it follows that a 75/25 split of possession will usually end with the team on 75% winning.
Possession isn’t everything but with a game finely balanced I’d bet on the team in control of the pace of the game every time.
Spoken like a true Louis Van Gaal. The old adage that you can’t score if you don’t have the ball is true so it follows that a 75/25 split of possession will usually end with the team on 75% winning.
Possession isn’t everything but with a game finely balanced I’d bet on the team in control of the pace of the game every time.
anniesdad said:
gadgetmac said:
I think the problem is that City, Liverpool and Tottenham are all so good now at retaining possession and pressing that the rest have to try and catch up with this.
The old adage that you can’t score if you don’t have the ball is true so it follows that a 75/25 split of possession will usually end with the team on 75% winning.
Possession isn’t everything but with a game finely balanced I’d bet on the team in control of the pace of the game every time.
Spoken like a true Louis Van Gaal. The old adage that you can’t score if you don’t have the ball is true so it follows that a 75/25 split of possession will usually end with the team on 75% winning.
Possession isn’t everything but with a game finely balanced I’d bet on the team in control of the pace of the game every time.
gadgetmac said:
anniesdad said:
gadgetmac said:
I think the problem is that City, Liverpool and Tottenham are all so good now at retaining possession and pressing that the rest have to try and catch up with this.
The old adage that you can’t score if you don’t have the ball is true so it follows that a 75/25 split of possession will usually end with the team on 75% winning.
Possession isn’t everything but with a game finely balanced I’d bet on the team in control of the pace of the game every time.
Spoken like a true Louis Van Gaal. The old adage that you can’t score if you don’t have the ball is true so it follows that a 75/25 split of possession will usually end with the team on 75% winning.
Possession isn’t everything but with a game finely balanced I’d bet on the team in control of the pace of the game every time.
Sparkyhd said:
Alpinestars said:
Out of the champions league and out of the champions league, all in the space of the next 10 days.
Oh, and no shots at goal.
Going out of the Champions league is so bad you had to say it twice? Oh, and no shots at goal.
Sparkyhd said:
Alpinestars said:
Out of the champions league and out of the champions league, all in the space of the next 10 days.
Oh, and no shots at goal.
Going out of the Champions league is so bad you had to say it twice? Oh, and no shots at goal.
. And you've probably missed your one shot.
Alpinestars said:
Sparkyhd said:
Alpinestars said:
So good, that you'll miss out on a place next year and get knocked out this year. HTH .
And you've probably missed your one shot.
I don't care if we miss out next year. We're a roller-coaster and this year's a down slope. . And you've probably missed your one shot.
jammy-git said:
Alpinestars said:
Sparkyhd said:
Alpinestars said:
So good, that you'll miss out on a place next year and get knocked out this year. HTH .
And you've probably missed your one shot.
I don't care if we miss out next year. We're a roller-coaster and this year's a down slope. . And you've probably missed your one shot.
ks, or supports a team who never had a chance of qualifying. mike74 said:
franki68 said:
You’re confused mike,1/2 billion is pretty close to how much more city have spent over the last 7 years than united.
City have spent marginally more than utd in the last 7 years on transfers, most generally accepted figures are around £580m for utd v £750m for City.The difference being that one of them clubs is now on an entirely different level in terms of the style of football and technical ability of their players, whilst the other club looks like it needs to spend another half a bill (and get a better manager) just to even try and compete.
And anyway, surely that more pertinent point is where that £750m and £580m have come from, rather different sources me thinks.
ORD said:
Another big difference: Man Utd earn the money they spend by being a successful team and club, whereas City are a plastic club that was hollowed out by money men and is used to launder cash.
Utd are a real football club; City used to be an average but genuine team and are now plastic.
Bingo! Here we go again, generating income from having official noodle partners, official engine oil partners, official mattress partners and official paint partners gives you so much credibility! Utd are a real football club; City used to be an average but genuine team and are now plastic.
The only success utd have truly had in recent years is their ability to generate revenue from ever more bizarre and obscure commercial partners.
Gassing Station | Football | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff