BT Coverage of the game

We were well beaten of course but the BT commentary team and in particular Martin Keown couldn’t wait to comment on how great United had suddenly become.

It was lazy and unimaginative in the extreme, in contrast to the radio coverage that I listened to for some of the second half where the pundits said that Utd has improved a little bit but that we hadn’t really given them much of a game, which was much closer to how I saw the game.

It felt like the narrative had been pre-written and Keown jumped straight to it and kept on and on about it.

Just rubbish (and really boring!) broadcasting.

We were appalling today and were beaten before the game kicked off. We didn't play with our usual intensity and didn't get close to the most pedestrian midfield in the top 6. I came away from the Citeh game thinking no what we had done City could have scored however many goals they wanted to. Tonight however I thought we were just dreadful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thehumblegringo

We were appalling today and were beaten before the game kicked off. We didn't play with our usual intensity and didn't get close to the most pedestrian midfield in the top 6. I came away from the Citeh game thinking no what we had done City could have scored however many goals they wanted to. Tonight however I thought we were just dreadful.

---

Don't fall into the trap of calling Manchester City City - we're not Dominic Booth.

Could it just be that we've pretty much asked the same 11 to battle each 90 minutes time and again for past two months? Could it just be that Man United always had that class but had shackled themselves before OGS came and gave them the freedom to play? Whatever the reason, we weren't at it today at all.

Lazy pundits giving lazy narrative? Now there is a surprise. Some pundits just want to make it black and white for their viewers which rarely paints an accurate picture.

Manure players should be ashamed of themselves.
Playing crap for almost half a season because, it seems, they didn't like the manager.
They're professionals, and paid a not-so-small fortune.
They shouldn't let personalities stop them playing - the fans (even Manure fans) deserve better.

Still thought 5-1 flattered them.
Yes they were the better side, but we had some decent spells too.

Certainly didn’t create as much as Watford did and we also had a fair few chances ourselves.

This habit of conceding early against the top sides is becoming an issue.

How that free kick went in I don’t know, then 10 minutes later a shot is deflected in.
We get back in the game through what looked a fortunate penalty and then when I’m thinking ‘let’s go in at 2-1’ we concede again.

Also 2 other issues.
- we can’t get physical when every challenge is a free kick from some refs
- we gave goals away today with just rubbish passing. Sol was the worst to blame. Warnock needs to have a word with him.

I didn't think Utd were that special, they certainly played quicker than the previous Jose pedestrian tactics, we were very poor though, no bite ,could not hold the ball in procession, unable to find/ create space or pass to a city player in an attacking position .
Dreadful day.
Merry Xmas Ole

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lawnmower

Still thought 5-1 flattered them.
Yes they were the better side, but we had some decent spells too.

Certainly didn’t create as much as Watford did and we also had a fair few chances ourselves.

This habit of conceding early against the top sides is becoming an issue.

How that free kick went in I don’t know, then 10 minutes later a shot is deflected in.
We get back in the game through what looked a fortunate penalty and then when I’m thinking ‘let’s go in at 2-1’ we concede again.

Also 2 other issues.
- we can’t get physical when every challenge is a free kick from some refs
- we gave goals away today with just rubbish passing. Sol was the worst to blame. Warnock needs to have a word with him.

---

Come on mate. We didn't have decent spells we were awful. Their biggest weakness is their midfield in my opinion. Matic and Herrera are slow and pedestrian yet we put no pressure on them whatsoever. Instead we opted to sit deep first half and were completely unorganised in a deep block.

Martial was their best player and he was up against Manga who would struggle at right back in the conference!

It's nothing to do with Refs, though Oliver was poor yesterday, but more to do with our own naivety. We just let teams play. You haven't got to do tackles like a Joe Ralls special or a Bennett on Sane to be effective but you do need to break the momentum against the top teams and we just let them crack on.

As for Man United, they'll have a few weeks in the sun now they're playing us, Huddersfield etc then they'll get battered by PSG, Man City, Liverpool etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thehumblegringo

Come on mate. We didn't have decent spells we were awful. Their biggest weakness is their midfield in my opinion. Matic and Herrera are slow and pedestrian yet we put no pressure on them whatsoever. Instead we opted to sit deep first half and were completely unorganised in a deep block.

Martial was their best player and he was up against Manga who would struggle at right back in the conference!

It's nothing to do with Refs, though Oliver was poor yesterday, but more to do with our own naivety. We just let teams play. You haven't got to do tackles like a Joe Ralls special or a Bennett on Sane to be effective but you do need to break the momentum against the top teams and we just let them crack on.

As for Man United, they'll have a few weeks in the sun now they're playing us, Huddersfield etc then they'll get battered by PSG, Man City, Liverpool etc.

---

No need for me to ‘come on’.. we did have decent spells. We created far more chances than we did at Watford.

Once patch we had Zohore’s shot saved, another De Gea save and 2 missed headers.

As for the refs you seem to have completely overlooked my point.
I’m not criticising the refs, jus saying we need to be cuter.

We allowed Watford to push and shove us last week, afraid to get physical even though the ref clearly was letting stuff go.

It was the opposite this week - refs have different styles and we don’t seem as good at playing to these as others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lawnmower

Still thought 5-1 flattered them. Yes they were the better side, but we had some decent spells too.

---

Your bias is almost comical in this post, Tim. The truth is a 5-1 scoreline didn't flatter Manchester United at all. Indeed, a larger winning margin wouldn't have been unfair. City were quite simply totally outclassed from first whistle to last.

In fairness, considering there isn't a single Cardiff player who would get in the United squad, that shouldn't have come as a great surprise. However, some of the City team were especially poor last night. Bamba had a really bad game, Morrison looked out of sorts and Cunningham was less than convincing; Gunnarsson was awful, Arter did little other than run around a lot, Hoilett was anonymous and Paterson looked completely ineffective. Meanwhile, some of the United players were excellent.

Warnock's men have done well at home recently, but I can't help feeling that, the Fulham game apart, they've had the rub of the green during the victories they've achieved. That's not a criticism as such, as there were games earlier in the season when the team definitely didn't get the rub of the green, but these things do have a tendency to even themselves out over the course of a campaign.

I've a suspicion the team has been over-achieving in recent months and the last two games have been something of a reality check. When your opponents are bringing on Brazilian and Belgian internationals as substitutes and you're bringing on Joe Ralls and Kadeem Harris, the task City are facing is underlined.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

Your bias is almost comical in this post, Tim. The truth is a 5-1 scoreline didn't flatter Manchester United at all. Indeed, a larger winning margin wouldn't have been unfair. City were quite simply totally outclassed from first whistle to last.

In fairness, considering there isn't a single Cardiff player who would get in the United squad, that shouldn't have come as a great surprise. However, some of the City team were especially poor last night. Bamba had a really bad game, Morrison looked out of sorts and Cunningham was less than convincing; Gunnarsson was awful, Arter did little other than run around a lot, Hoilett was anonymous and Paterson looked completely ineffective. Meanwhile, some of the United players were excellent.

Warnock's men have done well at home recently, but I can't help feeling that, the Fulham game apart, they've had the rub of the green during the victories they've achieved. That's not a criticism as such, as there were games earlier in the season when the team definitely didn't get the rub of the green, but these things do have a tendency to even themselves out over the course of a campaign.

I've a suspicion the team has been over-achieving in recent months and the last two games have been something of a reality check. When your opponents are bringing on Brazilian and Belgian internationals as substitutes and you're bringing on Joe Ralls and Kadeem Harris, the task City are facing is underlined.

---

I came away thinking 5-1 was fair. However I was surprised the expected goals on motd had it as something like Cardiff 1.4 and Man U 2.4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

Your bias is almost comical in this post, Tim. The truth is a 5-1 scoreline didn't flatter Manchester United at all. Indeed, a larger winning margin wouldn't have been unfair. City were quite simply totally outclassed from first whistle to last.

In fairness, considering there isn't a single Cardiff player who would get in the United squad, that shouldn't have come as a great surprise. However, some of the City team were especially poor last night. Bamba had a really bad game, Morrison looked out of sorts and Cunningham was less than convincing; Gunnarsson was awful, Arter did little other than run around a lot, Hoilett was anonymous and Paterson looked completely ineffective. Meanwhile, some of the United players were excellent.

Warnock's men have done well at home recently, but I can't help feeling that, the Fulham game apart, they've had the rub of the green during the victories they've achieved. That's not a criticism as such, as there were games earlier in the season when the team definitely didn't get the rub of the green, but these things do have a tendency to even themselves out over the course of a campaign.

I've a suspicion the team has been over-achieving in recent months and the last two games have been something of a reality check. When your opponents are bringing on Brazilian and Belgian internationals as substitutes and you're bringing on Joe Ralls and Kadeem Harris, the task City are facing is underlined.

---

I think most of this is probably true. There has been a lot of false hope recently that has (after Watford and Manure games) translated into anger at the players, manager and tactics. When we heard about the level of debt the majority on here said try and run the club within the limits that our finances allow but I don't hear much support for that view now that it is leading to these kind of humiliating results.

In terms of the money we have spent, we won't lose on Murphy and Reid, Cunningham, Smithies are all decent players in the Championship, the next challenge for the club is the age of some of the key players.

Some people on here have a very naive view of the game, throwing cash and playing attacking football would more likely turn us into Fulham than Bournemouth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Father Dougal

I came away thinking 5-1 was fair. However I was surprised the expected goals on motd had it as something like Cardiff 1.4 and Man U 2.4

---

We had a number of good chances at 4-1 down so I think our 1.4 is pretty fair. How does XG work? At 2-0 they had played all the football but their two goals were somewhat bizarre.

Im not asking to splash loads of cash or play like Fulham or Bournemouth. Gringos post was correct. They have a slow midfield but we just sat off them. It looked like a training match we allowed them so much space.

Arter is getting worse. Why? Looks like we are coaching all ability out of him What are they doing on the training ground.?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hilts

Im not asking to splash loads of cash or play like Fulham or Bournemouth. Gringos post was correct. They have a slow midfield but we just sat off them. It looked like a training match we allowed them so much space.

Arter is getting worse. Why? Looks like we are coaching all ability out of him What are they doing on the training ground.?

---

My guess is they are tired, which I have always written off as a bit of a pathetic excuse but there has been way less intensity higher up the pitch. Vs Watford and occasionally yesterday when we did try to hassle players in our own third we just got pulled out of shape and passed around.

We sometimes look like a team who needs 13 players to beat 11. Palace is a big game now, we need to start picking up points away against the lower teams if we are to stand a chance (although their confidence will be high after yesterday!)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

My guess is they are tired, which I have always written off as a bit of a pathetic excuse but there has been way less intensity higher up the pitch. Vs Watford and occasionally yesterday when we did try to hassle players in our own third we just got pulled out of shape and passed around.

We sometimes look like a team who needs 13 players to beat 11. Palace is a big game now, we need to start picking up points away against the lower teams if we are to stand a chance (although their confidence will be high after yesterday!)

---

I cant have tiredness for that display. That was clearly tactical.

If tiredness is to play for some individual awful performances then its the managers job not to pick them.

If they are tired then at least 5 should be axed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric Cartman

I think most of this is probably true. There has been a lot of false hope recently that has (after Watford and Manure games) translated into anger at the players, manager and tactics. When we heard about the level of debt the majority on here said try and run the club within the limits that our finances allow but I don't hear much support for that view now that it is leading to these kind of humiliating results.

In terms of the money we have spent, we won't lose on Murphy and Reid, Cunningham, Smithies are all decent players in the Championship, the next challenge for the club is the age of some of the key players.

Some people on here have a very naive view of the game, throwing cash and playing attacking football would more likely turn us into Fulham than Bournemouth.

---

Being at the all
games this year has shown me how skillfully and strong these sides are, the movement and interchangeable tactics in a live environment is at times like chess played at speed.

Utd were okay but compared to us they were world beaters.

Martial speed ,movement and control for his goal was incredible not sure how it looks on TV ?

The off camera views for me are the key to these games, that's where you can see how they think and set up , they then eventually play into those create spaces by pulling you out of position to score or create chances.

Bugger BT /Sky ,rather rain, beer and chips .

The likes of Martial Rashford Lyngaard were always capable of doing damage. The key was to stop their central midfield. Tactically we stood off them and allowed Matic and Herrerra and Pogba all the time and space they wanted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

Your bias is almost comical in this post, Tim. The truth is a 5-1 scoreline didn't flatter Manchester United at all. Indeed, a larger winning margin wouldn't have been unfair. City were quite simply totally outclassed from first whistle to last.

In fairness, considering there isn't a single Cardiff player who would get in the United squad, that shouldn't have come as a great surprise. However, some of the City team were especially poor last night. Bamba had a really bad game, Morrison looked out of sorts and Cunningham was less than convincing; Gunnarsson was awful, Arter did little other than run around a lot, Hoilett was anonymous and Paterson looked completely ineffective. Meanwhile, some of the United players were excellent.

Warnock's men have done well at home recently, but I can't help feeling that, the Fulham game apart, they've had the rub of the green during the victories they've achieved. That's not a criticism as such, as there were games earlier in the season when the team definitely didn't get the rub of the green, but these things do have a tendency to even themselves out over the course of a campaign.

I've a suspicion the team has been over-achieving in recent months and the last two games have been something of a reality check. When your opponents are bringing on Brazilian and Belgian internationals as substitutes and you're bringing on Joe Ralls and Kadeem Harris, the task City are facing is underlined.

---

Of course... I’m the biased one and you can see everything clearly as you have no emotional attachment any more.

If you don’t agree with me it’s because I’m ‘biased’. That’s just poor.

No mention of the stats..

It was 17 shots to 9
9 on target to 3
7 corners to 4


That’s more indicitive of 3-1 ( it’s generally something like 3 shots on target per goal) than 5-1 and to suggest it could have been more makes your comment even worse.

This was very similar to the stats at Watford , which was 3-2 which flattered us.

In fact up until the last 10 it would have been far worse up there.


The rest of your post I mostly agree with and it’s nothing new , similar to what has been said in here for months. Although I didn’t think we were particularly lucky against Wolves and we earned our ‘luck’ in the other 2.

We’d pretty much got what we deserved overall.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lawnmower

Of course... I’m the biased one and you can see everything clearly as you have no emotional attachment any more.

If you don’t agree with me it’s because I’m ‘biased’. That’s just poor.

No mention of the stats..

It was 17 shots to 9
9 on target to 3
7 corners to 4


That’s more indicitive of 3-1 ( it’s generally something like 3 shots on target per goal) than 5-1 and to suggest it could have been more makes your comment even worse.

---

Your love of the club often blinds you to the realities of the situation. This is one such example.

The penalty apart, which came out of nothing and was an absolute gift, City didn't threaten the United goal until they were 4-1 down. By that time, the visitors had taken their foot off the gas and were effectively going through the motions.

City's three shots on target were the penalty, a decent effort from Murphy which brought a good save from De Gea, and Zohore's effort from an acute angle which De Gea had covered comfortably.

United may have had nine shots on target, but they also waltzed through City's midfield on numerous other occasions and only some desperate, last-ditch defending, some over-elaborate play in the final third and a couple of decent saves by Etheridge kept the score down.

It was a really good performance by United, but also a really poor one from City. Unfortunately, the 5-1 scoreline didn't flatter the visitors at all. I genuinely believe you've imagined these 'decent spells' City allegedly had. They were outclassed, plain and simple.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

Your love of the club often blinds you to the realities of the situation. This is one such example.

The penalty apart, which came out of nothing and was an absolute gift, City didn't threaten the United goal until they were 4-1 down. By that time, the visitors had taken their foot off the gas and were effectively going through the motions.

City's three shots on target were the penalty, a decent effort from Murphy which brought a good save from De Gea, and Zohore's effort from an acute angle which De Gea had covered comfortably.

United may have had nine shots on target, but they also waltzed through City's midfield on numerous other occasions and only some desperate, last-ditch defending, some over-elaborate play in the final third and a couple of decent saves by Etheridge kept the score down.

It was a really good performance by United, but also a really poor one from City. Unfortunately, the 5-1 scoreline didn't flatter the visitors at all. I genuinely believe you've imagined these 'decent spells' City allegedly had. They were outclassed, plain and simple.

---

:yikes: agree with this

We was well beaten before the ball was kicked, I posted the other day to beat man yoo you need pace against their cart horses (matric, jones and herrera) and we decided to give them all the space in the world, we actually made Herrera and matic look good ffs, I got to feel for Reid he must be thinking why the feck did I come here

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

Your love of the club often blinds you to the realities of the situation. This is one such example.

The penalty apart, which came out of nothing and was an absolute gift, City didn't threaten the United goal until they were 4-1 down. By that time, the visitors had taken their foot off the gas and were effectively going through the motions.

City's three shots on target were the penalty, a decent effort from Murphy which brought a good save from De Gea, and Zohore's effort from an acute angle which De Gea had covered comfortably.

United may have had nine shots on target, but they also waltzed through City's midfield on numerous other occasions and only some desperate, last-ditch defending, some over-elaborate play in the final third and a couple of decent saves by Etheridge kept the score down.

It was a really good performance by United, but also a really poor one from City. Unfortunately, the 5-1 scoreline didn't flatter the visitors at all. I genuinely believe you've imagined these 'decent spells' City allegedly had. They were outclassed, plain and simple.

---

There you go again...


They scored 5 from 9 on target , we scored 1 from 3.
We were both close with a couple too.

It suggests United were fairly clinical with their chances and they were clearly lucky with 1 or 2

That’s not a 5-1
It’s more a 3-1 ..
According to a poster above the xg has it at 2.4 to 1.4 which suggests even closer.

So for someone who’s usually obsessed with stats I’d say you are the one with clouded judgement here.

As there’s nothing objective to back up what you are saying


Fans usually overreact to games like this it’s been the same all season, but this was no worse than Liverpool or Chelsea away and nowhere near as bad as qMan City at home.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lawnmower

They scored 5 from 9 on target , we scored 1 from 3.
We were both close with a couple too.

It suggests United were fairly clinical with their chances and they were clearly lucky with 1 or 2

That’s not a 5-1
It’s more a 3-1 ..
According to a poster above the xg has it at 2.4 to 1.4 which suggests even closer.

---

It was definitely 5-1.... As for XG, that nonsense has to be the biggest load of bollocks I've encountered in more than 40 years watching football. It's not a statistic at all. It's fiction, pure and simple.

From the BBC match report:

"United made light work of a Cardiff side who had won their past four home games, with attacking flair throughout.... United were superior throughout the first period.... United dominated at the start of the second half and Lingard's penalty killed the contest, with United close to adding further goals through Rashford, Jones and Pogba, before Lingard did add the fifth after keeping his composure when clean through to round Etheridge and slot home."

I guess the BBC's judgement is clouded too.

Never mind, though. It's not worth debating really and certainly not worth falling out over. Strangely, for the first time post-rebrand, I actually felt myself getting angry at times while watching the game with my father yesterday. Manchester United were very good going forward, but City were awful and that genuinely pissed me off as, although I expected a United win, I thought it would be a reasonably close contest. It was anything but. However, if you it makes you feel better to pretend the game was closer than it actually was and the Bluebirds enjoyed 'decent spells', so be it. Nothing I say is going to change that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lawnmower

No need for me to ‘come on’.. we did have decent spells. We created far more chances than we did at Watford.

Once patch we had Zohore’s shot saved, another De Gea save and 2 missed headers.

As for the refs you seem to have completely overlooked my point.
I’m not criticising the refs, jus saying we need to be cuter.

We allowed Watford to push and shove us last week, afraid to get physical even though the ref clearly was letting stuff go.

It was the opposite this week - refs have different styles and we don’t seem as good at playing to these as others.

---

I didn't mean to come across arsey mate. I agree with TLG that your love for the club often makes you the most optimistic poster on here. I can't say it's a bad thing as you obviously bleed blue but I was extremely frustrated watching us stand off them when they have struggled to cope playing under high intensity all season.

If they can do that to us I dread to think what Spurs will do to us.

It was a strange game all round last night and maybe the 6-8000 extra bums on seats yesterday were Man United fans and it diluted the atmosphere.

X ****ing G :hehe:

Sounds like a games console.

Games gone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

It was definitely 5-1.... As for XG, that nonsense has to be the biggest load of bollocks I've encountered in more than 40 years watching football. It's not a statistic at all. It's fiction, pure and simple.

From the BBC match report:

"United made light work of a Cardiff side who had won their past four home games, with attacking flair throughout.... United were superior throughout the first period.... United dominated at the start of the second half and Lingard's penalty killed the contest, with United close to adding further goals through Rashford, Jones and Pogba, before Lingard did add the fifth after keeping his composure when clean through to round Etheridge and slot home."

I guess the BBC's judgement is clouded too.

Never mind, though. It's not worth debating really and certainly not worth falling out over. Strangely, for the first time post-rebrand, I actually felt myself getting angry at times while watching the game with my father yesterday. Manchester United were very good going forward, but City were awful and that genuinely pissed me off as, although I expected a United win, I thought it would be a reasonably close contest. It was anything but. However, if you it makes you feel better to pretend the game was closer than it actually was and the Bluebirds enjoyed 'decent spells', so be it. Nothing I say is going to change that.

---

Not a fan then?

https://www.pinnacle.com/en/betting-...sjh3rkxcmuf9ty

Obvious flaw with yesterday was we were 4-1 down before we came into the game at all. And even the penalty we did have was hardly from a situation we’d have likely scored from with the handball.

Not many sides will come back from 2 down against what remains a top 6 team. It felt as if it was a soft free-kick and then a defected goal, but then it was the third goal that really killed us and the woeful defending for that third and then the fourth that meant we had no chance. I didn't see the fifth this time.

However, there were two headers that should have been on target for us as well as the three shots that were. One of those goes in at the right time and it could be 2-2 or 2-3 with a completely different game on our hands. Palace fan on talksport saying that the majority of games at this level are decided on one or two moments only.

Overall, I would say that we were the better side for the three minutes between us scoring and them scoring again. Not enough to say 1-5 was unfair.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J R Hartley

X ****ing G :hehe:

Sounds like a games console.

Games gone.

---

What ever happened to people actually watching the game and making a judgement from that, man u was in 2nd gear all through the second half if we even give a sniff of a comeback they would've put another 2 on us

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Father Dougal

Not a fan then?

---

Not at all. It's utter garbage. I get the Racing Post every Saturday for the football betting pages and a couple of the tipsters have started talking about expected goals as if it has some merit. Needless to say the quality of their results has deteriorated. It's the Emperor's new clothes as far as betting is concerned. It's even less valid than the 'value' argument, and that's another load of cobblers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jamieccfc

What ever happened to people actually watching the game and making a judgement from that, man u was in 2nd gear all through the second half if we even give a sniff of a comeback they would've put another 2 on us

---

Correct

They got 4-1 up and took their foot off the gas with a busy Xmas period coming up. They were in cruise control.

Only then did we start to get a little bit of joy territorially, and had we taken one of our half chances to make it 2- 4, then I’m fairly sure they could have stepped it up again, as they did when we got the penalty back and gave ourselves brief hope for all of 3 minutes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J R Hartley

Correct

They got 4-1 up and took their foot off the gas with a busy Xmas period coming up.

Only then did we start to get a little bit of joy territorially, and had we taken one of our half chances to make it 2- 4, then I’m fairly sure they could have stepped it up again, as they did when we got the penalty back and gave ourselves brief hope for all of 3 minutes.

---

I'm sure XG has it's benefits for statisticians employed by the clubs but it makes me laugh when I hear some piss head who can't even count his change coming back from the bar talking about it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thehumblegringo

I'm sure XG has it's benefits for statisticians employed by the clubs but it makes me laugh when I hear some piss head who can't even count his change coming back from the bar talking about it!

---

Anyone with half a football brain and two eyes who watched that match yesterday could not argue 5-1 did not flatter United.

To suggest 3-1 was a more fair result because XG says so is total and utter bollocks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J R Hartley

Anyone with half a football brain and two eyes who watched that match yesterday could not argue 5-1 did not flatter United.

To suggest 3-1 was a more fair result because XG says so is total and utter bollocks.

---

Absolutely mate. You know how much stats have pissed me off over the years. I can't for the life of me understand why someone needs to look at stats if they've just watched a game with their own eyes. I didn't think United were special but their front 3 highlighted our defensive limitations again. At times it looks like we don't work on anything. The holes between the defence and midfield were frightening considering we were defending in a low block.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thehumblegringo

I didn't mean to come across arsey mate. I agree with TLG that your love for the club often makes you the most optimistic poster on here. I can't say it's a bad thing as you obviously bleed blue but I was extremely frustrated watching us stand off them when they have struggled to cope playing under high intensity all season.

If they can do that to us I dread to think what Spurs will do to us.

It was a strange game all round last night and maybe the 6-8000 extra bums on seats yesterday were Man United fans and it diluted the atmosphere.

---

Yeah, you did sound arsey.
I don’t know what more I can say.
The stats speak for themselves and yeah, I was there too.

I do find some of the opinions on the board negative, certainly more-so than in ‘real life’

If I am perceived as being biased, so be it, however there are people in this thread who like to be negative about the club and others who don’t like the manager or his style of play- so will have an in built negative bias of their own

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J R Hartley

Anyone with half a football brain and two eyes who watched that match yesterday could not argue 5-1 did not flatter United.

To suggest 3-1 was a more fair result because XG says so is total and utter bollocks.

---

That’s just one measure, shots on goal, on target, corners all back up what I’m saying.

I’m sure if they backed up your point you’d be bringing them up.

One more loss and you’ll be starting another Warnock out thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

Your love of the club often blinds you to the realities of the situation. This is one such example.

The penalty apart, which came out of nothing and was an absolute gift, City didn't threaten the United goal until they were 4-1 down. By that time, the visitors had taken their foot off the gas and were effectively going through the motions.

City's three shots on target were the penalty, a decent effort from Murphy which brought a good save from De Gea, and Zohore's effort from an acute angle which De Gea had covered comfortably.

United may have had nine shots on target, but they also waltzed through City's midfield on numerous other occasions and only some desperate, last-ditch defending, some over-elaborate play in the final third and a couple of decent saves by Etheridge kept the score down.

It was a really good performance by United, but also a really poor one from City. Unfortunately, the 5-1 scoreline didn't flatter the visitors at all. I genuinely believe you've imagined these 'decent spells' City allegedly had. They were outclassed, plain and simple.

---

I enjoyed speaking to you in the pub last night, as I always do, but your agenda is quite pathetic.

Never any positivity about our club. I don't remember you saying anything positive about Cardiff City since your hatred of Tan (for me very odd considering your love, or at least liking of, Hammam) began.

Since you claim you don't care about Cardiff City any more, maybe you should stop contributing. What's in it for you?

Or maybe there's a hidden agenda which you won't admit.

Merry Christmas!!

:ayatollah:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lawnmower

That’s just one measure, shots on goal, on target, corners all back up what I’m saying.

I’m sure if they backed up your point you’d be bringing them up.

One more loss and you’ll be starting another Warnock out thread

---

Haven’t looked to see if they back up my point or not. Don’t care for them. Anyone who watched that game yesterday knows we were well and truly battered both in performance and score line. I don’t need to read some bollocks stats about XG, corners or shots on goals to try and pretend it was any less of a mauling that it was.

“It wasn’t a 5-1, more like a 3-1”

Get a grip man

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rich munn

I enjoyed speaking to you in the pub last night, as I always do, but your agenda is quite pathetic.

Never any positivity about our club. I don't remember you saying anything positive about Cardiff City since your hatred of Tan (for me very odd considering your love, or at least liking of, Hammam) began.

Since you claim you don't care about Cardiff City any more, maybe you should stop contributing. What's in it for you?

Or maybe there's a hidden agenda which you won't admit.

Merry Christmas!!

:ayatollah:

---

Did you tell him this last night in the pub?

He knows what I think.

:ayatollah:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rich munn

He knows what I think.

:ayatollah:

---

That’s a no then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J R Hartley

Haven’t looked to see if they back up my point or not. Don’t care for them. Anyone who watched that game yesterday knows we were well and truly battered both in performance and score line. I don’t need to read some bollocks stats about XG, corners or shots on goals to try and pretend it was any less of a mauling that it was.

“It wasn’t a 5-1, more like a 3-1”

Get a grip man

---

Why all this crap about getting a grip and the rest of the pathetic cheap shots ?

Disagree by all means, but stop being a knob.

It’s just my opinion and you aren’t going to change it with comments like that. The very fact that you can only resort to insult just makes me think you’ve got a weak argument.

As your only case seems to be that anyone who doesn’t agree is biased, blind, drunk and stupid. Particularly as you want to ignore the game statistics as it doesn’t suit your agenda.

If you think 5-1 was a fair reflection of the game then were we flattered in all of the Man City, Liverpool, Chelsea games ( we definitely were at Watford who I reckon dominated more than Man U apart from the last 10 there)- haven’t we been lucky !

As for planning for the ref then yes, this is a valid strategy. Even in parks footy we knew which ones would allow you to get stuck in and which ones would have the card in their hand all game and if you don’t understand or appreciate that then that says more about you than me.