Tuesday, 26 October 2010

Arsenal reax

Sam Wallace, The Independent
City were never able to show the best of themselves, especially with Carlos Tevez still struggling with injury and Mancini's team pulled out of shape by the loss of Boyata. It is impossible to make a judgement on them on the basis of this game but there is no point in them having a squad full of famous internationals if they conspire to reduce themselves to 10 on the pitch.
Henry Winter, Daily Telegraph
For City, no points came their way, such a possibility largely evaporating with Dedryk Boyata’s early dismissal, but they can take heart from the spirit displayed by the 10 hungry men who remained. Until he felt a thigh muscle tighten, Carlos Tévez embodied City’s work-rate. So did the excellent Silva, floating past challenges and showing remarkable stamina.
Kevin McCarra, The Guardian
For all the wealth of the owner, Sheikh Mansour, that contribution, which people pay to make, will be important to City's pursuit of honours. The crowd were probably inflamed by the conviction that some sort of injustice was being perpetrated here, although that was not the case. Their side had a fine bloody-mindedness about them, too.
Michael Cox, ZonalMarking.net
With the three in midfield narrow, and Silva just ahead, they were effectively forming a midfield diamond around Arsenal’s three central midfielders (with the wider players of the three shuttling forward) and were not played off the pitch. Indeed, Arsenal were having trouble in the centre of midfield, reflected in the fact Fabregas, Alex Song and Denilson all collected yellow cards.


Steve said...

Now if you listened to your average Arsenal fan, you will hear how they "took us apart". Funny as I felt that was exactly what they werent able to do until the last quarter of the game when city legs were very tired. I personally took a huge amount of optimism from the game as I thought city man for man were much much better. Im a huge fan of Boyata... his potential is mind blowing and I was glad he got the green light above Lescott (although im not one of his knockers). He was unlucky with the challenge as he obviously thought he could win the ball....

Topgunpires said...

How were City 'man for man much much better'?

The likes of Milner and Barry were very poor. The defence was a mixed bag, some very good moments but also some dreadful ones. Chamakh was easily the most effective forward on the pitch and despite Silva being excellent his efforts were matched by Fabregas and Nasri.

I thought City did as well as they could and on another day you may have got a goal and salvaged a draw but there is no doubt over 90mins Arsenal were the better side.

knowall,noreally said...

Arsenal have now seen 4 opponents sent off in 8 league games. Which must be close to a record.
What does it tell us? That they are so good the only way teams can cope is to foul them? Or that good managers put referees under psychological pressure by demanding 'protection' repeatedly and continually?

We would have beaten them with 11. And I agree that there were plenty of positives in a match that wasn't over until they scored their second.

Wyn Mills said...

What has Boyata being sent off have to do with influencing referees? It was a straightforward sending off offence. No question. All I have seen from City fans since the end of this match is sour grapes and straw clutching. For goodness sake grow up. You were well beaten by a skillful Arsenal side. You had your moments but in the end the win reflected the balance of play. Move on.

Topgunpires said...

Saying you'd have won with 11 is just totally irrelevant.

The truth is you werent good enough to keep 11 on the pitch. Arsenal forced City in to a situation where Boyata either took a red card or Chamakh had a 90% goal.

Boyata made his choice and city paid the price.

Steve said...

TopGun, what Im trying to say is that city.. with a man down, City matched Arsenal for the majority of the game. To be honest I would say for periods of the game we were better. The sending off was understandable (although harsh i thought) and I have no gripe about that...but listening to Arsenal fans you would think it was 11 vs 11 all game and that Arsenal ran away with it. Well that wasnt the case was it...unless you were watching a different game to me?

If im honest I though Chamakh was poor. I know thats a polar opposite to your view..but there it is. He's not in the same universe as Tevez. Fabregas had the run of the midfield as that was where the hole was. Toure dropped into defence....but even then we took the game to you.

Im not a wind up merchant... my honest view was that Arsenal flattered to deceive and the score has made Arsenal appear much much better than they actually were.

Steve said...

Chamakh had lost control of the ball....watch it again and you will see it. Hart would have got it.

Steve said...

Wyn, maybe reading Arsenal blog sites instead will offer you opinions that you find agreeable....just a tip for the future.

Re influencing referees. Wenger NEVER STOPS asking for protection...and in some cases I agree with him. He rarely admits to seeing one of his own players misdemeanours...why do you think he does that...I tell you why..its because he understands the power of the media..he uses it for his own end...and is acutely aware where it could work against him (e.g when he is being interviewed after the game)...it isnt rocket science.

city_slacker said...

If that Chamakh chance was 90% goal, you've paid no attention to any of those 99% sitters he's skied over the bar. I don't think he would've scored, 90% for Henry at his peak, 30% at max for the 'Chamakh attack' (be realistic, looking at conversion rates that's still a good chance). Makes Boyata even more foolish.

I would also add that City attempts were made from the far better positions (mostly down to Arsenal overpassing), and if we switched our quality of finising with Arsenal's standards on Sunday we would have actually won the match (as this match is gone it's irrelevant and purely hypothetical, but I feel this lack of conversion could be a key point over the season).

Topgunpires said...

Steve, I wasnt suggestinging that Chamakh is a better player than Tevez. Just that on the day he is more effective. He got Boyata sent off, his presence forced Bridge's error for the second goal and in general just made a nuisance of himself. Tevez started well but it was obvious he wasnt really fit.

As for the guy who replaced him, I noticed as soon as he came on he chased the ball amongst the Arsenal back 4 and I thought, the motivated Ade is back today but he was back to his old self in no time, lumbering around and getting caught off side.

City slacker, City didnt miss many chances, unfortunately for you, you met Fabianski a couple of weeks too late. Silva's efforts were top notch and the save from the second was stunning. Consider as well, we did miss a penalty, we could have been more clinical.

Steve said...

TopGun...dont get me started on Adebeyor :-) To be fair to him he has definitely been improving and last week he was tremendous in the Europa. He's a frustrating player as he doesnt seem bothered and I agree with much of what Arsenal fans say about him. That said I would take him over Chamakh.

marty said...

City did well with the equivalent of having one arm behind their back. Arsenal made the most of Boyata's sending-off and did a professional job. What does this tell us about the relative merits of City and Arsenal. Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

Wyn Mills said...

We Gooners are often accused of moaning but honestly I haven't heard so much high pitched whining over the last couple of days since my last visit to Heathrow. "Clattenburg ruined the game" "Arsenal were dirty" "Arsenal influence the officials" "We were down to 10 men but would have won if we were 11". Its all tosh, but I can understand if it makes you feel better. Look, recently WBA came to the Emirates and slaughtered us fair and square. We didn't come out making excuses then. We all have days when opponents just play better and at times like this you just have to applaud and say well done, not continually look for excuses.

StanMCFC said...

Wyn Mills - fair comment but i think the point most people are trying to make is that it's impossible to come to firm conclusions about a 3-0 score line when one of those goals was scored in the last five minutes and virtually all the game was played 10vs11.

Also, your own manager is hardly lavish in his generosity to teams that beat Arsenal. Always some excuse: over physical, referee got it wrong etc. And as we see from Sunday and last night, his own team aren't averse to tasty challenges, occasional cheating and influencing the ref (waving imaginary cards etc)!

That said, I really admire the sort of football Arsenal play and if we don't get anywhere near the title, hope Arsenal win it.

dfadf said...

The Tax Return Crack-Up<2>
I was not shocked because this was old news -- practically ancient, in fact. In R. Microsoft Office Emmett Tyrrell, Office 2010 Jr.'s most recent book The Clinton Microsoft Office 2010 Crack-
Up, page fiv Office 2007 e, paragraph two, we learn that in Bill Clinton's "first four years out of the White H Microsoft Office 2007 ouse, he ea Office 2010 key rned over Office 2010 download $43 million Office 2010 Professional after
expenses... Microsoft outlook "
The next Outlook 2010 page directs Windows 7 us to Appendix Microsoft outlook 2010 I, a list of the conniving couple's fees for speeches and book royalties and other income. The first