The Official Manchester City (World Club Champions)Thread

[Driver101]

sjc said:

Driver101 said:

sjc said:

Driver101 said:

He made decisions for and against both teams. There was no bias on show. You can say he got a few yellow card decisions wrong, but the big decisions were all fine.
The commentary team have influenced your opinion on the Sterling tackle.
I appreciate screenshots don't tell the full story, but I don't have a video.

Edited by Driver101 on Thursday 5th May 00:14

No the commentary team didn’t influence my thoughts,I couldn’t hear a single word they were saying where I was watching …but thanks for the patronising.If you don’t think that missing two blatant yellows on the same player in the first half and hence reducing them to ten men isn’t tantamount to a big decision then you don’t know football. I don’t know who you support,but I’d assume it’s one of their rivals hence your own prejudices have come into play,or maybe you’ve just played at a low level. I’ll level up the patronising with that.

No I don't support any rival team. You don't sound the most impartial.

You're claiming bias when the referee could have easily taken strong decisions against City. Laporte could have easily seen red early in the first half. Zinchenko should have been booked for diving and his next yellow would have been red. The referee got some calls wrong like they do in every game. He let some things go early that he probably should have pulled up. City got decisions their way too and he missed out on yellows and potential reds for both teams. It balanced out.

Casimiro's were two blatant yellows in 30 odd minutes,to compare that with a Zinchenko dive and "his next yellow would have been red" when he didn't even commit a foul after that let alone a possible yellow one is simply nonsense.If Laporte sees red then so does Modric, who had his hand round his throat.City got the decisions when they meant nothing,RM got the ones that really mattered.
A truly great game, partially marred by an official not up to the job.

Modric did not have his hands around Laporte's throat. Laporte theatrically threw himself to the ground after slapping Modric after some mild handbags.




Zinchenko was booked for a foul. He should have already been on a yellow for the dive.

[Driver101]

martinbiz said:

Driver101 said:

Laporte could have seen a red for lifting his hands to Modric.

No he couldn't, keep up with the rules

What rule says striking someone in the face can't be a red?

[ayedubya]

i think there is some basis for the city disgust at the reffing yesterday... casimiro should have been off in the first half. would have completely killed the game and made it a cakewalk for city hence probably why uefa the ref was quite lenient with their biggest sh*thouse

[Pommy]

When you still have 11 men on the pitch and lose 3-1 you have no one to blame but yourself.

[Driver101]

It was two fantastic games of football. I do think City did enough to win the first game by more goals. I thought for large parts they were the better side last night. They should have won. This is cup football and these things happen.

Pep shouldn't be anywhere near getting the sack. I'm really surprised to hear that is even a suggestion. It's just the fickle world of football.

I really don't like this cornering the referee and trying to blame him. He got some decisions wrong for both teams. Hounding him as if he's to blame isn't right and it's taking away from the games.

[tamore]

Pommy said:

When you still have 11 men on the pitch and lose 3-1 you have no one to blame but yourself.

i don't think that's the debate. it's that they should have been down to 10 in the first half. game is dead if that happens. a scissor tackle is a yellow at least no matter how much of the ball is won. and hauling someone down on the break has been a yellow for a long time too.

however, real shouldn't have been allowed to get a goal having not had a shot in 90 mins, let alone go on to bag 3. that i'll agree with.

[TEKNOPUG]

tamore said:

TEKNOPUG said:

tamore said:

no right minded city fan wants pep gone. he got it bang on against madrid, but a couple of players let their concentration go momentarily and real are the kind of team to punish that. also, the profligacy by those in on goal time and time again isn't his fault.

That's the manager's fault for not replacing Aguerro and instead spending £100m on Grealish, rather than a whole host of other strikers, surely? I mean he signs all the players, chooses the team and formation, gets all the plaudits when things are going well but it's not his fault when the most expensively assembled squad in history fails in the CL, again....

the manager identified kane, and it was all looking good until levy did what levy does. it's worked out well for spurs as kane settled back in OK. it screwed city though, but early in the season the false 9 thing was working a treat as sides were being blown away. it's not worked so well at the sharp end of the season though. one striker has already signed, and the other will hopefully be signed early in the summer.

I'm not sure putting all your eggs in one basket and expecting Levy to fold on a low-ball bid could be considered as "all looking good"

[tamore]

low ball? you are kidding, yes?

[Pommy]

tamore said:

Pommy said:

When you still have 11 men on the pitch and lose 3-1 you have no one to blame but yourself.

i don't think that's the debate. it's that they should have been down to 10 in the first half. game is dead if that happens. a scissor tackle is a yellow at least no matter how much of the ball is won. and hauling someone down on the break has been a yellow for a long time too.

however, real shouldn't have been allowed to get a goal having not had a shot in 90 mins, let alone go on to bag 3. that i'll agree with.

Both sides had moments where they could have been in trouble.

Woulda, coulda, shoulda.

It's 2 legs and ultimately it's a fair outcome, epecially when you ship 3 at home in the first leg. I don't think you can let in 6 goals over 2 games to a side and claim it's unfair.

Every time City lose you never hear 'we played badly' it's always a VAR or a referee or a conspiracy.

[smn159]

Pommy said:

tamore said:

Pommy said:

When you still have 11 men on the pitch and lose 3-1 you have no one to blame but yourself.

i don't think that's the debate. it's that they should have been down to 10 in the first half. game is dead if that happens. a scissor tackle is a yellow at least no matter how much of the ball is won. and hauling someone down on the break has been a yellow for a long time too.

however, real shouldn't have been allowed to get a goal having not had a shot in 90 mins, let alone go on to bag 3. that i'll agree with.

Both sides had moments where they could have been in trouble.

Woulda, coulda, shoulda.

It's 2 legs and ultimately it's a fair outcome, epecially when you ship 3 at home in the first leg. I don't think you can let in 6 goals over 2 games to a side and claim it's unfair.

Every time City lose you never hear 'we played badly' it's always a VAR or a referee or a conspiracy.

Yep, if it wasn't for VAR / the ref / the wrong phase of the moon and we'd signed Kane, Mbappe and Messi in the Summer then Chelsea would have beaten them

[sjc]

Driver101 said:

sjc said:

Driver101 said:

sjc said:

Driver101 said:

He made decisions for and against both teams. There was no bias on show. You can say he got a few yellow card decisions wrong, but the big decisions were all fine.
The commentary team have influenced your opinion on the Sterling tackle.
I appreciate screenshots don't tell the full story, but I don't have a video.

Edited by Driver101 on Thursday 5th May 00:14

No the commentary team didn’t influence my thoughts,I couldn’t hear a single word they were saying where I was watching …but thanks for the patronising.If you don’t think that missing two blatant yellows on the same player in the first half and hence reducing them to ten men isn’t tantamount to a big decision then you don’t know football. I don’t know who you support,but I’d assume it’s one of their rivals hence your own prejudices have come into play,or maybe you’ve just played at a low level. I’ll level up the patronising with that.

No I don't support any rival team. You don't sound the most impartial.

You're claiming bias when the referee could have easily taken strong decisions against City. Laporte could have easily seen red early in the first half. Zinchenko should have been booked for diving and his next yellow would have been red. The referee got some calls wrong like they do in every game. He let some things go early that he probably should have pulled up. City got decisions their way too and he missed out on yellows and potential reds for both teams. It balanced out.

Casimiro's were two blatant yellows in 30 odd minutes,to compare that with a Zinchenko dive and "his next yellow would have been red" when he didn't even commit a foul after that let alone a possible yellow one is simply nonsense.If Laporte sees red then so does Modric, who had his hand round his throat.City got the decisions when they meant nothing,RM got the ones that really mattered.
A truly great game, partially marred by an official not up to the job.

Modric did not have his hands around Laporte's throat.

[Driver101]

sjc said:

The TV footage of the game and replays didn't show that. That picture clear he did.

It still stands that if the referee was biased he could have easily sent Laporte off for the slap.

[jammy-git]

Driver101 said:

sjc said:

The TV footage of the game and replays didn't show that. That picture clear he did.

It still stands that if the referee was biased he could have easily sent Laporte off for the slap.

Tbf, both of them should have been off. At least that would have kept things level.

[TEKNOPUG]

tamore said:

low ball? you are kidding, yes?

Well it was less than Levy wanted. And you chose to spend £100m on Grealish, instead of spending that money on Kane. And Grealish has managed 3 goals and 3 assists all season and missed 2 sitters last night, when you exited the CL, again. So yeah, I think that history will suggest that you low-balled a bid for Kane and it was destined for failure from the outset. If you'd increased your Kane bid by the money you'd spent on Grealish, you'd no doubt be booking your Paris hotel room now.....

Edited by TEKNOPUG on Thursday 5th May 16:58

[JNW1]

Pommy said:

It's 2 legs and ultimately it's a fair outcome,

Depends on your definition of "fair" but over the two legs there's little doubt in my mind the best team lost. Yes you have to credit Real Madrid for keeping going and never giving up and yes Man City shot themselves in the foot by missing some easy chances, especially in the first leg. But IMO no way in the world were Madrid the better team over the two matches and I doubt Liverpool will be as generous as City when it comes to squandering chances - reckon they'll win the final quite easily.

[GTO-3R]

TEKNOPUG said:

Well it was less that Levy wanted. And you chose to spend £100m on Grealish, instead of spending that money on Kane. And Grealish has managed 3 goals and 3 assists all season and missed 2 sitters last night, when you exited the CL, again. So yeah, I think that history will suggest that you low-balled a bid for Kane and it was destined for failure from the outset. If you'd increased your Kane bid by the money you'd spent on Grealish, you'd no doubt be booking your Paris hotel room now.....

Even as a United fan and find it funny that City dropped 100m on Grealish, to say he missed 2 sitters is a stretch. First one he did everything he could and it was just great defending to clear it off the line and the second was a world class save from Cortois. He couldn’t do any more really.

He’s been bang average this season though.

[TEKNOPUG]

GTO-3R said:

TEKNOPUG said:

Well it was less that Levy wanted. And you chose to spend £100m on Grealish, instead of spending that money on Kane. And Grealish has managed 3 goals and 3 assists all season and missed 2 sitters last night, when you exited the CL, again. So yeah, I think that history will suggest that you low-balled a bid for Kane and it was destined for failure from the outset. If you'd increased your Kane bid by the money you'd spent on Grealish, you'd no doubt be booking your Paris hotel room now.....

Even as a United fan and find it funny that City dropped 100m on Grealish, to say he missed 2 sitters is a stretch. First one he did everything he could and it was just great defending to clear it off the line and the second was a world class save from Cortois. He couldn’t do any more really.

He’s been bang average this season though.

What can I say, better players would have scored one of those opportunities.

[smn159]

Driver101 said:

sjc said:

The TV footage of the game and replays didn't show that. That picture clear he did.

It still stands that if the referee was biased he could have easily sent Laporte off for the slap.

And then got him back and sent him off again for going down clutching his own face after he'd slapped Modric

[stuartmmcfc]

smn159 said:

Driver101 said:

sjc said:

The TV footage of the game and replays didn't show that. That picture clear he did.

It still stands that if the referee was biased he could have easily sent Laporte off for the slap.

And then got him back and sent him off again for going down clutching his own face after he'd slapped Modric

Would this situation and the resulting slap have happened if the ref had dealt with the tackle n KdB correctly in the first place?

[stuartmmcfc]

GTO-3R said:

He’s been bang average this season though.

In their first season under Pep a lot of players are “bang average” as they get used to his system.
Hopefully he’ll be fantastic next season