Premier League 09/10

Keith : [quote]joannes3000 :
United 4, City 3?

More like - United 3, City 3, referee 1. Four minutes of injury time becomes six. :dontgetit

This will help you understand something even Mark Hughes doesn't understand...
Click
[/quote]

I'm not contesting the nature of the added time as much as I was expressing my frustration at the way City lost the game. Admittedly, I'm new to the game of football so I have no clue as to what constitutes additional time added on.

In all fairness, from my perspective as a City fan, it just seemed too convenient that time was extended for the home team and it ultimately led to the game winning goal. If it had happened on City's pitch, I would have questioned things just the same.

In the end, it was my first time getting to watch a derby (watched it online until the servers started bogging down) and confirmed the fact that football in Europe is as intense as football here in the US. And in actuality, I was more excited to watch the City/United match than I was to watch my home football team play later that day! :shock

I can understand your point of view. Apart from one point. The added time was there for both teams to win, if city had of won this game in these circumstances the roles of each team would swap. Fergie would be having the "ref rant" and Hughes would happy with the decision and believe the ref was right in allowing the extra added time.

I suppose it relates back to your point of "frustration" due to your support of City. Dont worry, youve got West Ham next :p

this is a good pic

The !RedDevil! : this is a good pic

he is in the wrong stadium with PIG. they are at the emirates for some reason. think he is getting too old. and PIG just follows him everywhere.

I have a feeling PIG is more of a bodyguard rather than a sub keeper

_Man_u_barmy_army_ : I have a feeling PIG is more of a bodyguard rather than a sub keeper

=D=D hahahahaha

he was good today. he has only ever made 1 big mistake that i remember, it was vs arsenal in his debut when he took down adebahore. but still that was a bit unlucky.

at times he has been dodgy in the air, and it isnt his strongest side. but never made costly mistakes.

his kicking is quite so shit though, but has GREAT long throws.

and to be honest he looked very solid today and it felt like VDS was in the goal, the defence was solid and concentrated.

i really think he should get a few more games. i think Foster has gotten enough chances and needs to be benched in a few games and realise he needs to raise his game.

im not saying foster is shit and doesnt have potential. but he needs to raise his game.

foster is looking very shakey, "PIG" as you call him haha, should definately get more games than foster, he is just less error prone

The !RedDevil! : foster is looking very shakey, "PIG" as you call him haha, should definately get more games than foster, he is just less error prone

PIG= Pole In Goal =D easier that way, cant spell his name =D

haha kuszczak isnt that hard to spell

So City gives Hughes the axe and places Roberto Mancini in charge. Being hand-picked by the board, I would hope that Mancini gets more time than what was afforded Hughes.

they could have waited. a team isnt builded up in just 1 day. it takes time. but what can you do. stupid boards.

feel sorry for Mark Hughes. RedArmy your right. They should have gave him more time. Just another example of foreign owners not understanding you cant just buy the league in a season. Man Utd, Chelsea, Arsenal have built up their squads for years and thats why they're up at the top !

RedArmy20 : they could have waited. a team isnt builded up in just 1 day. it takes time. but what can you do. stupid boards.

Definitely seems like they could have waited a little longer before making a decision. For all the fingers that point to the fact that City hadn't won in so long, you can easily point to the fact that City has only lost twice so far during league play. I certainly hope that Mancini is given time to build the team up to his liking (defensive help, please!!!) and just as important - time for the team to gel. Just like in any other sport, too many managerial changes is never a good thing.

he mite have only lost twice
but he only won twice in league
you cannot say thats a good record
however
i think it is appaling what city have done to him

smithy079 : he mite have only lost twice
but he only won twice in league
you cannot say thats a good record
however
i think it is appaling what city have done to him

Being an accountant, I know all about making numbers say whatever you want them to say. And like I said previously, one can look at either side of the coin and make a very similar argument.

The reason I don't particularly like the move is that it will naturally unsettle the team because I presume Mancini will have a different tactical approach to the game. So you are taking a team that had yet to get comfortable with themselves on the pitch, and now you're asking them to get comfortable with a new coach. Yuck. City has had 17 managers in the past 20 seasons; I just hope that Mancini gets a chance to build a bit of a foundation before the evaluations begin with him.