EPL Talk » Manchester City

Observations About Premier League Saturday Matchday 13

The Gaffer — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 21:21:26 +0000

Thank god the Premier League is back. Nothing against international football, but there’s something very comforting with getting back into the ritual of watching Premier League football and being familiar with the surroundings, the pace of the game and the excitement it creates.

So the Liverpool against Manchester City game on early Saturday was the perfect re-introduction to the Premier League. I found the first half not as boring as ESPN’s Tommy Smyth claimed it was. Sure, there were few chances, but the flowing football was easy on the eye which was punctuated by two unfortunate injuries for Daniel Agger and Ryan Babel.

The second half of the match erupted. The last ten minutes of the match were pulsating with both teams throwing everything forward to try to get the winner, but alas the game ended 2-2 — which I thought was a fair result for both teams.

For me, the player who had the biggest impact on the match was Carlos Tevez who came off the bench and transformed City from a team who looked soulless in midfield to a team that was suddenly dangerous on the attack and had more possession. The thing I love about Tevez the most is that he turns nothing into something. He constantly fights for the ball and a perfect example of this was how he won the ball down the left wing and ran with the ball, passing it to Shaun Wright-Phillips who planted a beautiful pass to Stephen Ireland to score a valuable goal for City.

In the other games I watched, the football wasn’t as exciting as the match at Anfield.

Sunderland’s 1-0 victory against Arsenal was a game that wasn’t for the soccer purist. Both teams played well but Sunderland suffocated most of Arsenal’s attempts on goal and the Mackems had few chances of their own. That’s not to take anything away from Sunderland’s performance. The team battled hard and deserved to get something out of this game, and had a bit of good fortune in the ball falling to Darren Bent to win the match. While Tevez was my man of the match in the Liverpool versus City game, my man of the match at the Stadium of Light was Andy Reid who delivered a performance equal of Tevez by constantly fighting for the ball and pouring his enthusiasm into everything he did for Sunderland.

Just as Liverpool and Manchester City didn’t look like Premier League champion material today, neither did Arsenal. It wasn’t that they were bad. Instead the Gunners were shut down well by Sunderland similar to how Steve Bruce’s side did the same against Manchester United at Old Trafford recently. I’m sure a lot of the excuses for Arsenal’s defeat today will be aimed at the unavailability of Robin van Persie due to injury, but I feel that’s unfair. Arsenal had a few golden chances near the end of the game to equalize but it just wasn’t their day.

With Arsenal’s loss in the northeast, Chelsea moved eight points clear of the Gunners with an emphatic 4-0 home win against Wolverhampton Wanderers. Seriously, Chelsea have become incredibly boring to watch this season. Don’t get me wrong. They’re playing wonderful football, but the matches they play are so one-sided that I find myself losing interest because they constantly cruise to victory with simplicity (except of course in a few games this season such as against Manchester United and Wigan Athletic, where the opposition was tougher to break down).

Last but not least, the match between Manchester United and Everton was exceedingly enjoyable to watch. Everton were very much in the game and fighting for every ball until the 35th minute when Darren Fletcher rocketed the ball with his right foot into the top corner of the net. Despite Everton’s constant persistence, they created very few chances against a Manchester United side that seemed to be buzzing after their recent drop in form during the past few matches.

The second half of this match was very wide-open with both teams trying to get the decisive goal. But it was another piece of class in this game that saw Manchester United scoring a goal. This time it was a perfect pass from Ryan Giggs to Michael Carrick who knocked in a shot with precision into the far corner of the net to make it 2-0 to United. Antonio Valencia’s shot near the end of the match which was deflected in to make it 3-0 made it a very convincing win for Manchester United although you have to think that the scoreline wasn’t a fair representation of how well Everton played at times during this match.

I’ll try to spend some time later tonight watching the other Premier League games played today. But in the meantime, feel free to post your observations about the games today and what was interesting for you.

Photo credit: Soefrie.

Carlos Tevez Proves His Worth to Man City

Dave Warner — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 20:50:12 +0000

When football pundits discuss Carlos Tevez, they often talk about his “work rate” and his “eye for the ball.” At times, though, the words “work rate” can morph into a backhanded compliment — as if those pundits are really saying, “He’s rubbish as a goal scorer, but boy, he sure works hard, doesn’t he?”

Indeed, Tevez has only two goals in league play this season, and he has expressed his frustration over his sudden inability to finish. His infamous work rate, however, might be the primary reason Manchester City was able to score twice in the second half at Anfield today.

Until Tevez replaced Gareth Barry at the hour mark, Man City’s attack looked listless and idea-free against Liverpool. Instead of working the ball through the midfield, City seemed content merely to bomb the ball forward to Emmanuel Adebayor and hope he could do something with it — a strategy that Liverpool could defend easily. Tevez’s entry into the game, however, seemed to give his teammates a boost, allowing City to poke some holes in Liverpool’s beleaguered back line. In fact, it was Tevez’s to win the ball near goal that set up Shaun Wright-Phillips’ pass to Stephen Ireland, who put City ahead 2-1 in the 76th minute.

City’s defending ultimately let them down in the end, and Yossi Benayoun’s equalizer just a moment later forced both sides to settle for a 2-2 draw. Still, Tevez proved today that there is much value in that “work rate” of his. Perhaps he needs to be more accepting of this role in City’s attack. Perhaps the glory of the goals he scored three years ago to save West Ham from relegation made him forget his biggest strength — winning and holding the ball up front and setting up scoring opportunities for his teammates.

There is much value in a point forward. Mark Hughes would do well to remind Tevez of this. Hughes has a great collection of players at City, but he has yet to mold those players into a team with a distinct identity. Convincing Tevez to embrace the role of set-up man might help City take that first step toward becoming that team.

Manchester City: a First Class Club with a First Class Atmosphere?

Alex Caulfield — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 09:13:44 +0000

Are City fans being denied a true match day experience?

Fair play to Manchester City, Carlos Tevez, and manager Mark Hughes for a fluid performance against West Ham United at Eastlands on Monday evening. Their 3-1 victory inched the Blues ever closer to the pinnacle of the Premier League table, as City are now only three points away from pole position. Tevez not only showed his quality in front of goal, but the striker also exhibited grace towards his former fan base after scoring before West Ham’s supporters. The Argentine front man held his hands apologetically in the air towards the Hammer faithful in response to his controversial stay in east London. This rare act of humility is a stark contrast to Emmanuel Adebayor’s disgraceful celebration in front of his old employers two weeks prior. Credit to Hughes for pulling all of these big personalities together and allowing City to play free-flowing and adventurous football. Yet despite all of these positive remarks, there is one glaring deficiency with the Blue Moon match day experience.

When approaching the City of Manchester Stadium the modern architecture and luxurious amenities appear suitable for one of the world’s wealthiest football clubs. Yet it was not all that long ago that this same side was playing in a historic and dilapidated ground. Before the likes of Thaskin Shinawatra and Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Manchester City were a club mired in tumult and volatility. Nevertheless, this was part of City’s charm, and the supporters never abandoned the side – even when the Blues tumbled down the English football pyramid to League One.

While yesterday’s Premier League action against West Ham United was spirited, the change in atmosphere at Eastlands is disturbing when contrasted against the club’s time at Maine Road. Now I know what you are all thinking; this is just another bland article about ‘true’ fans being priced out of the game and the soulless nature of big-money football. Much has been made of the latter, and telling that story again would do little to stimulate conversation.

Instead I would like to focus on the physical configuration of contemporary football and how new stadiums are negatively impacting England’s national past time. Last week I watched Man City take on Fulham in the Carling Cup at Eastlands and was amazed at how different the atmosphere was from Maine Road. Yes, this was a Carling Cup match. Typically the least important competition for Premier League sides, the League Cup holds neither the prestige of the FA Cup nor the glitz of the Premier League.

Fulham's lack of away support not withstanding, the Eastlands atmosphere is a far cry from the Kippax

Nevertheless, every fixture maintained an electric atmosphere amid the grittiness of Maine Road, and this attribute was noticeably absent at Eastlands. I am not having a go at City supporters. They are one of the best sets of fans in Europe and deserve their due. Rather, the way in which Manchester City Football Club has arranged the stadium seating has ruined the club’s famed atmosphere. Traditionally, each football ground has a stronghold of their most vociferous supporters behind a particular goal. These Kop ends are etched into the history of the English game. Anfield will forever be associated with the Spion Kop, Villa Park with the Holte End, and Chelsea with the Shed End.

At Maine Road the word “Kippax” held a powerful connotation with City supporters and away fans alike. Unlike most clubs that build their Kops at the end of the pitch, the Kippax was a massive stand that ran parallel to the touchline. It was undeniably intimidating, and housed some of the most passionate football fans in the sport’s history. The Kippax could generate an overwhelming amount of noise that promptly quieted any away support. Moss Side was an incredibly dodgy place to visit, and Maine Road was the crown jewel of this notorious district.

Obviously the new-look City has been rebranded for the financially booming Premier League. Hillsborough and the Taylor Report changed the manner in which fans of the English game observed football forever. However, many of the top grounds in the country retained their atmospheres even after the tragic events of April 15, 1989. Maine Road was among these venues, begging the question, what exactly changed when the Blues relocated to Eastlands?

City's famed Kippax Stand

The answer is startlingly simple. Rather than reestablishing the girth and reputation of the Kippax stand, City opted for new age stadium configuration. If you go to Eastlands today to take in a match you will find that there is no traditional Kop end. Instead the supporters that grew up on the Kippax have been relocated to the corner section between the Colin Bell Stand and the North Stand. This leaves City’s most energetic fans sandwiched against the main stand and the opposing side’s supporters. Instead of the cross-pitch banter that takes place between two sets of fans in most grounds, Eastlands creates an indiscernible din from the northwest corner. Additionally, the security of this setting is questionable, as during high-profile encounters both sets of supporters attempt to get at one another across the police line. This has proven to be problematic in the Manchester derby and against the likes of PSG in the UEFA Cup.

Unfortunately this type of maneuver is becoming too common with new English stadiums, as grounds like the Riverside, Pride Park, and the Stadium of Light are now devoid of a traditional English atmosphere. These grounds lack a proper Kop setting, and while fan bases at these clubs (particularly City) are strong, the charm associated with Maine Road or Roker Park is gone. In its place is a synthetic style of match day experience that provides little sustenance for those of use that remember the rusty roof over the Kippax.

I Saw Something Other Than Adebayor On Saturday…

Fletch Spigner — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 13:24:42 +0000

Saturday’s Manchester City v. Arsenal match was exciting for many reasons: six goals, fast, fluid play, a fun atmosphere, two players playing against their former team, fans throwing all sorts of things at one certain player… All of this made for a great match. While I’ll only mention Adebayor’s celebration just this once, we can all agree it provoked emotion from both sides, which is ultimately why we watch football.

But I saw something—or someone—else during the game that may turn out to be more significant than some cheesy celebration in the fourth game of a very long season: Tomas Rosicky. A sub, yes; but he played fantastic. He had just come off a week of playing with the Czech Republic and his performance in Manchester had to pleasing for Gunners fans. He ran circles around every other player. He made Cesc Fabregas look like he was standing still—a tall order. He passed through, around, and behind defenders—and never got tired. He scored a goal for crying out loud—albeit a little too late. Upon coming into the game, he immediately upped the tempo of the entire match and, I thought, he kept Arsenal in it—and by “in it” I mean they kept getting chances in front of the goalmouth. I never assumed they would come back.

Even though I knew Arsenal was going to lose, I couldn’t help but noticing this gangly little guy in the middle of the pitch running around, his un-Christiano Ronaldo hair flapping around, his no-nonsense feet dazzling my TV screen, and his perfect passes crisp, smooth, fast, and effective. He was all I was watching.

Perhaps Rosicky was not perfect on Saturday—I’m sure he made a few mistakes. Perhaps Rosicky will never fully recover from injury—or even get re-injured. Perhaps he plays well off the bench. Perhaps this was his one goal this season. Perhaps Rosicky cannot play an entire 90 minutes with the pace he has shown thus far. Perhaps I am wrong—but I certainly hope I am not!

Proposed Caps to Halt Spending Are Bad for Football

Sebastian Shepard — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 08:11:35 +0000

The inexplicable is often the standard in football. The £14 million pounds Man City paid for Wayne Bridge is inexplicable. Florent Malouda’s protean hairstyles are inexplicable. Arsene Wenger’s ability to see zero penalties against Arsenal is inexplicable. Yet even bearing this in mind, I could not help but rubbing my eyes to make sure I had read the headline correctly:

Abramovich keen to stop big-spending City

The gist of the article is that Abramovich feels that Manchester City have spent too much and need to be reigned in. Michel Platini agrees and suggests that clubs only should spend what they earn in revenue and failure to break even would result in a banning from European competition.

Yes, the hypocrisy is obvious. Yes, the irony is wonderful. Beyond this, the proposal has some positives, namely that the astronomical fees of this summer might return to earth. Real Madrid has a revenue of about 350 million euro, but even they would not splash out 250 million of it per season like they have most recently, given that operating costs would surely put them in the red.

It’s also not as if this would be disastrous for the Real Madrids of the world, given that large clubs already have large revenues, world-class players, and the ability to attract top talent. It would just promote smart business, in theory. It might even allow a well managed smaller club to break into European football more easily.

Despite these boons, Platini’s idea should not be taken seriously.

Whether one likes it or not, it usually takes money to assemble a side capable of playing attractive football, and almost always takes considerable money to create a side capable of competing for trophies. Even in competitions taken much less seriously than others, such as the Carling Cup, cash seems to be the key to success. In the past 5 years, only large spending teams (Tottenham, Chelsea, and Manchester United) have won the trophy.

While single-elimination tournaments like the FA Cup can always produce the shock of a Portsmouth, Millwall, or Cardiff in the final, the long term trend is once again teams that spend money win.

Results aside, big money also tends to lead to better football visually. Let us look to the example of Liverpool. Two seasons ago, Torres arrived for £20 million. Gerrard and the Spaniard linked up wonderfully, often with eye-pleasing results. Glen Johnson arrives this season for £18 millon and the added quality on the right is even more entertaining.

While I don’t believe that money always buys attractive football, or that attractive football requires money, there does appear to be some connection between the two. Even if Chelsea are criticized for playing “negative” football, it would be difficult to watch an entire Blues match without some excellent play. The same cannot be said of some lesser spending teams, particularly the recently promoted ones. This is not a criticism, however. I accept they do not have the money to spend on players of that calibre.

When it comes down to it however, I would rather watch FC Barcelona (with the 40 million euro right back Dani Alves and 65 million euro Ibrahimovic) and their fantasy football over a more “fair” version of the sport any day.

So if money is the food of football, spend on.