The day Man City came of age!!!

Sometimes a defeat can tell more about you than a victory....Today despite being three-nil down and a man short..City showed that they are finally a team and not a bunch of expensive mercenaries....

Heart, conviction, passion.. the city players ran the hearts out and for me showed why they are the next big thing in the premiership...

Sure they are out of the F.A Cup but with Europa and the Carling cup it's not the end of the World...

City are finally a team of scrappers who work together and good luck.......

Finally the day this City team came of age!! The future never looked brighter..

I think that happened last season when they won the cup.

I thought a doing today coulld have took the wheels off but the second half performance was superb, up until City's second goal though United looked like they could score every time they went up the pitch

They won the cup but today was courage under fire..something that shows character...

Agree a doing could have hurt City and no doubt Ferguson wanted six...but I think most were surprised by the resilience and heart shown and I always thought resilience and heart may have been the only things missing from this squad..

Money can't buy that..

I thought city were excellent in the second half today but a different kind of excellent to what we have become accustom to. City have blown me away this season with their interplay, the likes of silva, nasri and aguero changing positions and swapping quick passes added to the coleuses yaya they really have been formidable despite their inability to defend consistently. But today in the second half they showed guts and desire two things that we hadnt really seen from the citizens. very impress despite the defeat.

Absolutely......They showed real substance to go with the style......

Showed more in defeat than in most of their victories this season...

Credit were its due, some of the city players have been accused of being mercenaries in the past but second half showed a lot of commitment to the club and it's fans today, can't really fault them there.

Pains me to say it but future is really bright for man city

Think you got it right City players tried but Utd went to sleep too and never really woke up but Mancinis changes were defensive which was a mistake

marty2086 wrote:Think you got it right City players tried but Utd went to sleep too and never really woke up but Mancinis changes were defensive which was a mistake

Utd did go to sleep, but it was Mancini's tactical genius that clawed 2 goals back and a nearly got them more. Brilliant tactics from Mancini and i think the defensive outlook at the start of the second half was fantastic. Used the wingbacks with a back 3, aguero chasing every ball.

Genius.

I have no allegiance to either Manchester club but there's no doubt it was a thrilling cup tie and that City's fightback - and heart - was stirring stuff. To say that City are not the most popular of sides is an understatement, but they will have won a lot of new friends after yesterday.
Could have done without Rooney trying - and succeeding - to get the lad sent off. What Kompany must have been thinking when he looks at that Lampard tackle last week that only warranted yellow, I hate to think.

It's say's alot about the current United squad when they got smashed by city at home they used the ten men excuse well city had ten men for 80min's and almost beat United. Also the decision to bring Scholes back smack's of desperation, the bloke has been awful for about five year's and almost lost them the game yesterday, while city will go out and buy somebody for £20mil if they need to, United on the other hand have to bring somebody out of retirement who was awful for year's before he retired. I can't wait for the cup game at Anfield, please play Scholes from the start bacon face.

It irks me that people are saying that the character City showed in adversity is something entirely unique to them.

I've seen team after team go a man down and put in a heroic display, West Brom last season went 2 men down and still outplayed a team.

Get off the City gravy train, you're boring me.

sainty is that comment just cos your a united fan

I am a United fan, yes.

I just get bored of reading all this stuff about City doing things and it being made to be the finest achievement ever.

They're being lauded as heroes when really they're contributing to football's extortion.

"I am a United fan yes......"

No need for rebuttal then!!

There was a need as otherwise, I'd get labelled with the tired jealousy tag.

Don't get me wrong, City play some great football, have Silva, one of my favourite players playing for them and showed remarkable character yesterday.

It's just a topic that constantly irks me.

What irks you is that guys like Silva can be purchased by your neighbors when before the only place in Manchester they'd go to is Old trafford.....

I understand that.......

I think City played well in the second half, I just wonder what could have been if instead of Silva Mancini had took the dead weight that was Samir Nasri off. I thought he was really poor yesterday

while you have to credit city, great second half and showed how a half should be played with ten men (take note united squad after 6-1) i do feel we really took our foot off the pedal. this current united squad has no leaders you only have to look at our captain,evra (one of the worse players for being lackadaisical at times) and it has showed this season. no schmichels, bruce, keane characters that would marshall the team. the team would never have played so badly in second half with keane as captain. the only real leader would be vidic who we are missing badly.

the biggest difference between the squad this season and last when we won the title is the characters missing from the changing room, brown o'shea neville (was missing scholes aswell) were all characters who were united through and through and all very professional, these players gave the squad a good back bone whether they were playing or not. now the senior players are rooney rio and evra types, while great footballers there hardly shining beacons on how to behave

I wouldnt say that i have jumped on the city bandwagon by praising their performance with 10 men as sainty rightly pointed out many teams over the years have performed miracles with 10 men but for me i have never seen city in all the years ive followed football produce a performance that showed backbone, guts and determination they way they did in the second half on sunday and thats what i was commending.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Sometimes a defeat can tell more about you than a victory....Today despite being three-nil down and a man short..City showed that they are finally a team and not a bunch of expensive mercenaries....

Heart, conviction, passion.. the city players ran the hearts out and for me showed why they are the next big thing in the premiership...

Sure they are out of the F.A Cup but with Europa and the Carling cup it's not the end of the World...

City are finally a team of scrappers who work together and good luck.......

Finally the day this City team came of age!! The future never looked brighter..

Wow thats a little bit over the top isn't it? What would you have been saying if City had drawn or even won? As already mentioned Utd allowed City to come back into the game due to their carelessness and lazyness and they nearly paid the full penalty so to speak. It is interesting that listening to pundits and City fans they seemed to be more concerned about Utd's weakness and how better City performed with 10 men than Utd did in the 1-6 defeat. The fact is Utd with a whole host of injuries to key players have done fairly well so far this season, better than any other club would do in their position. They are still in the title race and 2 cups and are not relegation fodder just yet as many had hoped. City may be having a good season but their fans should remember that no matter what they may or may not win, they are still nowhere near Clubs like Liverpool and particularly Manchester United in terms of greatness and respectability.

I'd be saying the same thing....We all know they can afford the players but what we didn't know was if they could scrap as a team!!

As for Nasri ...the biggest waste of space on Planet premiership..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:What irks you is that guys like Silva can be purchased by your neighbors when before the only place in Manchester they'd go to is Old trafford.....

I understand that.......

What a small minded view.

I'm openly saying I appreciate the players they possess and you're saying I'm jealous?!

Of course I'd like players of that calibre at United, but with City's clout financially, it's going to be hard.

I welcome their re invigoration, I love that the derby's have been given an added sense of occasion now the clubs are on the same zenith!

Excited. Yes. Jealous? Hell no.

End of the day, United are the most successful team in the country, and will be for a long time, I'm appreciative of our history and how we've got there, without having a Harlem Globetrotters-esque team to do it.

What United show is that through a strongly implemented structure and regime they can be successful. City have bought it.

I thought it was a worrying sight at the final whistle as city even in defeat were able to take more from the lose than united did in the win. The crowd were celebrating and united players went off heads down. I think it came down to numerous reasons, united looked lacking in confidence in the second half, city played outstanding, sloppy defending. You could go on and on and argue either way as to how and why the game changed. Hopefully when united have had time to think about it they will realise at the end of the day the are still in the cup so you have to take the positives.

fair play to city though and mancini in coming up with some great tactical changes

I stress my initial point. It was nothing outstanding, merely 10 men rallying together to make a fist of it. That, coupled with United's dip in the second half contributed to the scoreline, not some Herculean effort as previously inferred.

A lot is being taken away from United's first half display as well, they looked ruthless.

Agreed United played excellant in the first half. The timing of the first city goal was key. If United had held out for say 10 minutes I don't think it would have ended up so tight.

didnt help that lingergard couldnt catch or hold onto a ball.

I think United did play very well in the first half and City couldnt contain them, I think the dip in trhe seconf half was also helped by the substitutions that Mancini made at half time. It tightened the game up and got the City players a lot closer to their United counterparts. I also though Micah Richards had a great game at cenre half a position he hasnt played for a long time

cherriesfan wrote:didnt help that lingergard couldnt catch or hold onto a ball.

Harsh assessment, from what I saw of Anders, he had a decent game. He made some important saves at vital points in the game. He was unlucky with Aguero's goal in particular, because lets face it, it was teaming it down with rain, the ball was soaking and the the pace Aguero hit it with caused it to deviate away from him despite a decent save at first. Trust me, if it was De Gea, you'd have had a point.

Lindegaard is a good keeper.

they're both not prem standard IMO.

De gea is massively overrated, and Lindegaard is no better than a no2 in the prem

Sainty wrote:I stress my initial point. It was nothing outstanding, merely 10 men rallying together to make a fist of it. That, coupled with United's dip in the second half contributed to the scoreline, not some Herculean effort as previously inferred.

A lot is being taken away from United's first half display as well, they looked ruthless.

It may have happened before, but that doesn't make the effort any less impressive. How many teams with 10 men have trailed 3-0 at half time and almost managed to take something from the game?
Add to that, how many of those were against one of the best teams in the country and their nearest rivals in terms of location and league position?

10 men coming back in that situation should never be preceded with the word merely.

Sainty wrote:

cherriesfan wrote:didnt help that lingergard couldnt catch or hold onto a ball.

Harsh assessment, from what I saw of Anders, he had a decent game. He made some important saves at vital points in the game. He was unlucky with Aguero's goal in particular, because lets face it, it was teaming it down with rain, the ball was soaking and the the pace Aguero hit it with caused it to deviate away from him despite a decent save at first. Trust me, if it was De Gea, you'd have had a point.

Lindegaard is a good keeper.

I think Fergie only ever signed Lindegaard to be a second keeper, same with Kuzcak. He's been forced to play him because of De Gea's horrible form, I'm not convinced by either to be honest.

Sainty wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:What irks you is that guys like Silva can be purchased by your neighbors when before the only place in Manchester they'd go to is Old trafford.....

I understand that.......

What a small minded view.

I'm openly saying I appreciate the players they possess and you're saying I'm jealous?!

Of course I'd like players of that calibre at United, but with City's clout financially, it's going to be hard.

I welcome their re invigoration, I love that the derby's have been given an added sense of occasion now the clubs are on the same zenith!

Excited. Yes. Jealous? Hell no.

End of the day, United are the most successful team in the country, and will be for a long time, I'm appreciative of our history and how we've got there, without having a Harlem Globetrotters-esque team to do it.

What United show is that through a strongly implemented structure and regime they can be successful. City have bought it.

Come on United got where they are because of their financial muscle,they broke the British transfer record more times than I can remember over the last 20 years.It may not have been as quick a process as at City but Uniteds dominance was bought just as much as Citys current success is.
It's a pity but the only way we'll ever see a changing of the traditional powerhouses in football will be when megarich owners come in and buy success.Just look at all the teams who have challenged United over the years,Blackburn,Newcastle,Chelsea and now City all needed huge investment to get to the top,only Arsenal managed it without a sugar daddy and they had the advantage of being a traditionally big club with a solid fanbase and facilities.There will never be another team that comes from the lower divisions and earns a place at the top table without buying success.

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

Sainty wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:What irks you is that guys like Silva can be purchased by your neighbors when before the only place in Manchester they'd go to is Old trafford.....

I understand that.......

What a small minded view.

I'm openly saying I appreciate the players they possess and you're saying I'm jealous?!

Of course I'd like players of that calibre at United, but with City's clout financially, it's going to be hard.

I welcome their re invigoration, I love that the derby's have been given an added sense of occasion now the clubs are on the same zenith!

Excited. Yes. Jealous? Hell no.

End of the day, United are the most successful team in the country, and will be for a long time, I'm appreciative of our history and how we've got there, without having a Harlem Globetrotters-esque team to do it.

What United show is that through a strongly implemented structure and regime they can be successful. City have bought it.

Come on United got where they are because of their financial muscle,they broke the British transfer record more times than I can remember over the last 20 years.It may not have been as quick a process as at City but Uniteds dominance was bought just as much as Citys current success is.
It's a pity but the only way we'll ever see a changing of the traditional powerhouses in football will be when megarich owners come in and buy success.Just look at all the teams who have challenged United over the years,Blackburn,Newcastle,Chelsea and now City all needed huge investment to get to the top,only Arsenal managed it without a sugar daddy and they had the advantage of being a traditionally big club with a solid fanbase and facilities.There will never be another team that comes from the lower divisions and earns a place at the top table without buying success.

Not quite. Utd success is not just based on money as City's is. Utd are well renowned for having a good youth system and have reaped the rewards of that. In 95 Utd lost 3 key players and replaced them with kids. If that happened to City now they would have to spend probably another 100m. Apparently the manager is reported as saying he needs more cash even now!

dondelero wrote:
Not quite. Utd success is not just based on money as City's is. Utd are well renowned for having a good youth system and have reaped the rewards of that. In 95 Utd lost 3 key players and replaced them with kids. If that happened to City now they would have to spend probably another 100m. Apparently the manager is reported as saying he needs more cash even now!

By picking 1995 you're not compaing like with like,give City 4 years of success or 8 years under a manager who can implement his own youth policy before judging City on that criteria.

I agree Uniteds success is not only based on money but it's a huge part of it.It takes a lot of money to set up and run the youth system they have in place.They also have broke the British transfer recor many times over the last 20 years.

There were big money signings over the years that just blew every other side out of the water Keane,Cole,Berg,Stam,Yorke,Barthez,Van Nistelrooy,Veron,Forlan,Ferdinand,Ronaldo,Rooney and Berbatov stick out but there are many more.Where City have bought success United bought dominance I don't see much difference except the speed with which you start winning trophies.

It's sad but the romance has gone out of football and the only way the dominance of United will ever be broken is by a team who can outspend them,City may even come to dominate the next 20 years like United have the last but eventually another rich owner will come along and decide he wants to own a premiership winning side.I have to say my interest in football has dropped hugely over the last 5 years for this reason,no small club will ever be able to build a successful side as at the first sign of promise the rich clubs will buy all their best players and they are left struggling again.Spurs seem to be trying to buck this trend but I can't see them breaking the top 2 any time soon and they aren't really a small club to begin with.

So if Utd had a Sheikh of their own they wouldn't be spending money!!!

How many times have Utd broke the transfer record in the past.....??

How many of the current team are from a youth policy....??

Degea ? , Ferdinand ? Carrick ? Hernandez ? Berbatov ? Rooney ? can't be bothered naming anymore!!!

You got lucky with one crop!!

Money talks..Utd did have it. now they haven't... and now the fans are basically jealous..Look at the pathetic Roy Keane the other day!!

It's the truth..I know it can hurt!!

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

dondelero wrote:
Not quite. Utd success is not just based on money as City's is. Utd are well renowned for having a good youth system and have reaped the rewards of that. In 95 Utd lost 3 key players and replaced them with kids. If that happened to City now they would have to spend probably another 100m. Apparently the manager is reported as saying he needs more cash even now!

By picking 1995 you're not compaing like with like,give City 4 years of success or 8 years under a manager who can implement his own youth policy before judging City on that criteria.

I agree Uniteds success is not only based on money but it's a huge part of it.It takes a lot of money to set up and run the youth system they have in place.They also have broke the British transfer recor many times over the last 20 years.

There were big money signings over the years that just blew every other side out of the water Keane,Cole,Berg,Stam,Yorke,Barthez,Van Nistelrooy,Veron,Forlan,Ferdinand,Ronaldo,Rooney and Berbatov stick out but there are many more.Where City have bought success United bought dominance I don't see much difference except the speed with which you start winning trophies.

It's sad but the romance has gone out of football and the only way the dominance of United will ever be broken is by a team who can outspend them,City may even come to dominate the next 20 years like United have the last but eventually another rich owner will come along and decide he wants to own a premiership winning side.I have to say my interest in football has dropped hugely over the last 5 years for this reason,no small club will ever be able to build a successful side as at the first sign of promise the rich clubs will buy all their best players and they are left struggling again.Spurs seem to be trying to buck this trend but I can't see them breaking the top 2 any time soon and they aren't really a small club to begin with.

This is the trap that many clubs and managers fall into they think that spending big WILL bring instant success or even just sucess. but there are many examples of clubs where this has not happened. Yes Utd spent money but did not try to create whole teams with superstars and mercenaries to try and get this instant and shallow success. Also many clubs have indeed outspent Utd but even so Utd still compete, even with long term injuries to key players.

You will probably have to say that every successful team like Utd have spent some money and it has always been the same that small clubs sell on their stars to keep going, nothing has really changed in the last 5 years. City depend solely on money which is why it is unlikely that they will ever be as successful as Utd or Liverpool.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:So if Utd had a Sheikh of their own they wouldn't be spending money!!!

How many times have Utd broke the transfer record in the past.....??

How many of the current team are from a youth policy....??

Degea ? , Ferdinand ? Carrick ? Hernandez ? Berbatov ? Rooney ? can't be bothered naming anymore!!!

You got lucky with one crop!!

Money talks..Utd did have it. now they haven't... and now the fans are basically jealous..Look at the pathetic Roy Keane the other day!!

It's the truth..I know it can hurt!!

Jealous of who? City? dream on. When City are lifting their 20th league trophy then come back. It is hoped that Utd NEVER end up like City who depend solely on money and have a load of mercenaries on their books. even now the manager says he needs more money. No you keep your shake!

Well It didn't happen overnight with Utd did it??? Ferguson nearly lost his job at one stage..

So I reiterant If Utd had the money then or now..they'd buy the best!!!

Because no Manager gets too long!!! and who knows if anything good will come out of an academy anyway!!!

Look at Australian cricket now!!! getting battered off England....with no decent spinner!!!

Can't rely on an academy..

dondelero wrote:

This is the trap that many clubs and managers fall into they think that spending big WILL bring instant success or even just sucess. but there are many examples of clubs where this has not happened. Yes Utd spent money but did not try to create whole teams with superstars and mercenaries to try and get this instant and shallow success. Also many clubs have indeed outspent Utd but even so Utd still compete, even with long term injuries to key players.

You will probably have to say that every successful team like Utd have spent some money and it has always been the same that small clubs sell on their stars to keep going, nothing has really changed in the last 5 years. City depend solely on money which is why it is unlikely that they will ever be as successful as Utd or Liverpool.

For some it does happen Blackburn,Chelsea and (probably) City have mangaged it but you're right for most it doesn't work and the price of failure can be high.Leeds are the best example of how the mighty can fall.
I think overall the Premiership has been bad for the health of football and since it came into being the gap between the richest and poorest teams has become so wide as to be unbridgeable.It's probably a conversation for another thread but the fact that the highest ambition most clubs can aspire is to become a premiership team and hope to stay around mid table forever is damning on the whole system.

Yes and Utd supporters are thankful that patience was kept with SAF. SAF's philosophy is like no one else's. He will give youth a chance in general because he knows how and has the staff to develop youngsters. It will be a very sad day when he stop's managing Utd.

If there are any Utd so called supporters who are jealous of City then let them start supporting the likes of City and Chelsea and good riddance to them!

asoreleftshoulder wrote:

dondelero wrote:

This is the trap that many clubs and managers fall into they think that spending big WILL bring instant success or even just sucess. but there are many examples of clubs where this has not happened. Yes Utd spent money but did not try to create whole teams with superstars and mercenaries to try and get this instant and shallow success. Also many clubs have indeed outspent Utd but even so Utd still compete, even with long term injuries to key players.

You will probably have to say that every successful team like Utd have spent some money and it has always been the same that small clubs sell on their stars to keep going, nothing has really changed in the last 5 years. City depend solely on money which is why it is unlikely that they will ever be as successful as Utd or Liverpool.

For some it does happen Blackburn,Chelsea and (probably) City have mangaged it but you're right for most it doesn't work and the price of failure can be high.Leeds are the best example of how the mighty can fall.
I think overall the Premiership has been bad for the health of football and since it came into being the gap between the richest and poorest teams has become so wide as to be unbridgeable.It's probably a conversation for another thread but the fact that the highest ambition most clubs can aspire is to become a premiership team and hope to stay around mid table forever is damning on the whole system.

Yes in fairness the clubs you mention did or do have a measure of success but it can only be sustained with money alone ,although Chelsea tried doing that last season, spending 50m on Torres and look how that is turning out. This is why it is hoped that even when SAF leaves Utd they don't get someone who can only spend but not manage.

I'm not jealous of City at all. And I never will be, why would I be jealous of a set of mercenaries?

Trussman, you cited some of United's players there, but I can guarantee that each and everyone of them love the club and play for the shirt rather than the fee. Name me one of City's big names that they bought in that would exert the same passion that United's have.

Berbatov, Rooney, Degea, Carrick, Ferdinand, Curly-haired chuckle twins, Evra, Nani, Valencia, Hernandez ....all not mercenaries but Utd born and bred!!!

Leave it out!!!!

Manchester United got their money from success, Manchester City got it from oil. This is coming from a Liverpool supporter.

I never said anything about them being homegrown. Merely that they put it all on the line for the club.

Sainty wrote:I'm not jealous of City at all. And I never will be, why would I be jealous of a set of mercenaries?

Trussman, you cited some of United's players there, but I can guarantee that each and everyone of them love the club and play for the shirt rather than the fee. Name me one of City's big names that they bought in that would exert the same passion that United's have.

Sorry I can't agree with this at all.A select few of them may have the passion you talk of but you only have to look at Rooneys actions the last time he wanted a contract extension to see the reality of things.
Players will play for a club that pays them well and satisfys their ambitions,if United somehow became a midtable club next season there would be a mass exodus of players who want to play Champions League football.Winning trophies and msking money are the 2 factors that motivate players above all else and it's fair enough because the clubs want the exact same things.

dondelero wrote:Yes and Utd supporters are thankful that patience was kept with SAF. SAF's philosophy is like no one else's. He will give youth a chance in general because he knows how and has the staff to develop youngsters. It will be a very sad day when he stop's managing Utd.

If there are any Utd so called supporters who are jealous of City then let them start supporting the likes of City and Chelsea and good riddance to them!

I wouldn't say United fans are jealous of City but probably are jealous of the money they have. When Abramovich bought Chelsea and spent hundreds of millions buying any player they wanted a lot of other clubs wanted to go the same way but City aside it hasn't worked and the likes of United and Liverpool ended up in a lot of debt instead of having a open chequebook. Even with UEFA's new rules Chelsea and City's owners will find a way around them and still plough money into their clubs.
If they want to buy success then let them get on with it. As with Blackburn in the past and possibly even Chelsea now it won't last whereas United, under Ferguson, will always be there or thereabouts.

And the City players didn't put it on the line on Sunday..when you nearly got embarrassed..

The envy is oozing out of you!!

Sainty wrote:I'm not jealous of City at all. And I never will be, why would I be jealous of a set of mercenaries?

Trussman, you cited some of United's players there, but I can guarantee that each and everyone of them love the club and play for the shirt rather than the fee. Name me one of City's big names that they bought in that would exert the same passion that United's have.

Spot on. Most of them will take a year of inflated wages and say see ya later. In any case City deserve no better.