Quote Originally Posted by kendoddsdadsdogsdead View Post
...it's akin to saying if we'd scored those 2 last min pens against wolves we would have won...wrong..if we'd scored the first one the second wouldn't have happened.
I agree about the Wolves game - it finishes 1-1 if Madine scores his penalty.

However, the Chelsea game is different surely. Chelsea are awarded a penalty for Gunnar's foul and score from it, so that means that, at best from a City perspective, all of the game's other controversial incidents, apart from one, occur with us either drawing or losing (i.e. a situation where we would be expected to have a more attacking attitude than we would have had in the way the match panned out in reality). If anything, that would mean us pumping or throwing more high balls into the Chelsea goalmouth from dead ball situations and more opportunities for the sort of challenges on Morrison that the pundits on Match of the Day agreed should have resulted in two penalties for us (I don't see that a difference in the score at the time would affect the way Chelsea "handled" the threat posed by our captain).

I accept that Chelsea would not have been as light at the back when Rudiger brought down Zohore late on if the score had been 2-1 to them rather than 1-1, but I don't believe that it was solely the fact that they were losing which enabled Chelsea to gain the corner they equalised from - they would have just as likely have got it if the score was 1-1 at the time and the linesman would have made the same, truly dreadful, error either way.