GWT: Champions League - Matchweek 3

[Moncherry]

City needing a striker is not why they haven’t won a CL yet. It makes them the favorites this year, but they’ve been favorites multiple times before. City haven’t gone out in recent years because they’ve been a striker away. They’ve gone out because Pep has made bizarre lineup decisions which have cost them.

It is a huge part of why they haven't. Imagine if they had Haaland for the tie against Real last year. Or the game against Lyon with Sterling's unbelievable miss.

 

[cgf]

City needing a striker is not why they haven’t won a CL yet. It makes them the favorites this year, but they’ve been favorites multiple times before. City haven’t gone out in recent years because they’ve been a striker away. They’ve gone out because Pep has made bizarre lineup decisions which have cost them.

How much of that was him compensating for not having a striker and trying to solve that problem in different ways?

Plus with Erling on board they wouldn't have gone out when they did even with those bizarre lineup decisions

 

[Savant]

It is a huge part of why they haven't. Imagine if they had Haaland for the tie against Real last year. Or the game against Lyon with Sterling's unbelievable miss.

I completely disagree. Pep outsmarted himself in all of those games. Outsmarted himself against Liverpool. Especially outsmarted himself in the final against Chelsea. They should have won at least one but Pep couldn’t get out of his own way.

How much of that was him compensating for not having a striker and trying to solve that problem in different ways?

Plus with Erling on board they wouldn't have gone out when they did even with those bizarre lineup decisions

Zero. Zero compensation for not having a striker. Especially when they’ve gone out to English teams. Even with Haaland, if he picked that midfield that he did vs Chelsea in that final they were in trouble. Pep’s outsmarted himself in big games. I mean at Barca it didn’t matter because Messi did Messi stuff. Now if anything he is going to be over reliant on Haaland. We will see how that goes when it gets into the knockout stages

 

[cgf]

I completely disagree. Pep outsmarted himself in all of those games. Outsmarted himself against Liverpool. Especially outsmarted himself in the final against Chelsea. They should have won at least one but Pep couldn’t get out of his own way.

That can be true and it can also be true that they would've won despite Pep "outsmarting himself" if they had had a healthy Haaland

 

[Savant]

That can be true and it can also be true that they would've won despite Pep "outsmarting himself" if they had had a healthy Haaland

But we only have evidence of one of these things happening

 

[Moncherry]

I completely disagree. Pep outsmarted himself in all of those games. Outsmarted himself against Liverpool. Especially outsmarted himself in the final against Chelsea. They should have won at least one but Pep couldn’t get out of his own way.


Zero. Zero compensation for not having a striker. Especially when they’ve gone out to English teams.

If City had a player like Haaland when they were slaughtering Real last season, they would have completely buried the tie, and most likely got past other teams they went out to, such as the Lyon game. Pep's wacky tactics be damned.

Then I again I seem to recall you were one of the Liverpool supporters deluding themselves into thinking City acquiring Haaland wasn't that big of a deal.

 

[Savant]

If City had a player like Haaland when they were slaughtering Real last season, they would have completely buried the tie, and most likely got past other teams they went out to, such as the Lyon game. Pep's wacky tactics be damned.

Then I again I seem to recall you were one of the Liverpool supporters deluding themselves into thinking City acquiring Haaland wasn't that big of a deal.

I didn’t think City getting Haaland wasn‘t a big deal. I did think he wouldn’t challenge for the single season goal scoring record right away, but I don’t think anyone thought he wasn’t a big deal. I thought there may have been some issues with adjustment to Pep system (which historically isn’t tradition 9 friendly) but Pep instead decided to throw away his system to accommodate Haaland. That I did not see coming.

if you want to make the arguement that Haaland is tactic proof, maybe? But Pep chocked away those games. Pep lost that Madrid game because he hooked all his best midfielders early. He didn’t lose that game best no Haaland. It’s a fake narrative.

 

[cgf]

I didn’t think City getting Haaland wasn‘t a big deal. I did think he wouldn’t challenge for the single season goal scoring record right away, but I don’t think anyone thought he wasn’t a big deal. I thought there may have been some issues with adjustment to Pep system (which historically isn’t tradition 9 friendly) but Pep instead decided to throw away his system to accommodate Haaland. That I did not see coming.

if you want to make the arguement that Haaland is tactic proof, maybe? But Pep chocked away those games. Pep lost that Madrid game because he hooked all his best midfielders early. He didn’t lose that game best no Haaland. It’s a fake narrative.

The point is that if they had been up by 4-5 more goals at that point then it wouldn't have mattered whether Pep hooked his best midfielders early or not.

Real would've been in too deep of a hole to come back from no matter what mistakes Pep may or may not have made from that point on

 

[Savant]

The point is that if they had been up by 4-5 more goals at that point then it wouldn't have mattered whether Pep hooked his best midfielders early or not.

Real would've been in too deep of a hole to come back from no matter what mistakes Pep may or may not have made from that point on

But there is no evidence City would have been up 4-5. And frankly that isn’t exclusive to having Haaland or not. City scored plenty of goals and won plenty of games without him. It’s not why they lost. You can say every team lost every game ever because they didn’t have an extra 4-5 goals in the game they lost. It’s kind of silly.

 

[luiginb]

City needing a striker is not why they haven’t won a CL yet. It makes them the favorites this year, but they’ve been favorites multiple times before. City haven’t gone out in recent years because they’ve been a striker away. They’ve gone out because Pep has made bizarre lineup decisions which have cost them.

Bingo. I fully expect something like Gundogan at left back later on when injuries start piling on. They still don't have 4 healthy wingbacks. And no, I'm not counting Stones or Ake, that's gonna help in the groups, not when it gets tough.

 

[hatterson]

I’d agree that Pep outsmarting himself is the reason they didn't win in past years, but having a true #9, especially one of Haaland's caliber helps insulate him from that. Having that killer instinct in the box can hide so many other issues so even if (when) Pep makes a stupid decision in a big game, the raw talent of guys like KDB will be able to create something for Haaland far more often than not.

 

[Savant]

I’d agree that Pep outsmarting himself is the reason they didn't win in past years, but having a true #9, especially one of Haaland's caliber helps insulate him from that. Having that killer instinct in the box can hide so many other issues so even if (when) Pep makes a stupid decision in a big game, the raw talent of guys like KDB will be able to create something for Haaland far more often than not.

But none of that is unique to Man City.

 

[cgf]

But there is no evidence City would have been up 4-5. And frankly that isn’t exclusive to having Haaland or not. City scored plenty of goals and won plenty of games without him. It’s not why they lost. You can say every team lost every game ever because they didn’t have an extra 4-5 goals in the game they lost. It’s kind of silly.

Have you seen Haaland?

 

[Savant]

Have you seen Haaland?

Madrid isn’t Copenhagen. No player is the history of the sport is guaranteeing 4-5 goals per game either

 

[Duchene2MacKinnon]

My money is on Haaland scoring though

My money is on Haaland scoring though

 

[Scandale du Jour]

If City had a player like Haaland when they were slaughtering Real last season, they would have completely buried the tie, and most likely got past other teams they went out to, such as the Lyon game. Pep's wacky tactics be damned.

Then I again I seem to recall you were one of the Liverpool supporters deluding themselves into thinking City acquiring Haaland wasn't that big of a deal.

Maybe, maybe not.

PSG had three players of Haaland's caliber and we still beat them.

 

[LOGiK]

We say every year that PSG or City will finally win and they never do. One year, it will be true, I guess.

One year... yes...
A lot goes into it as other posters have all mentioned. Form and all after the WC break... injuries... etc etc etc...
Someone said before (@cgf I scrolled back) union crashes the party.... people expect them to stay on top of the table or enough to get into the cl? I haven't watched them .... too many matches to watch it isn't humanly possible to watch all these matches and leagues =P

 

[Savant]

Maybe, maybe not.

PSG had three players of Haaland's caliber and we still beat them.

Absolutely correct. Not having Haaland is not why City didn’t win. If you are going to make the argument that Haaland guarantees more goals, that’s fine, but that also applies for every team on the planet. He was not a unique solution for City’s UCL woes.

Only team Haaland doesn’t help is LFC in last years UCL final because Courtois decided to have the best goalkeeping performance, at least in a final, in the history of the competition hot goalies…