[Slick Fosbury]

It was on the last page tbf.

I'm well aware of how the stats work. You can do a similar thing with most strikers though, take out Aguero's goals against Norwich away, Swansea at home and Wigan at home then he looks a bit worse. Ronaldo used to score the majority of his goals after he'd already scored and you were winning. Thinking about it Balotelli is one of the few players who does score spread quite evenly. Can only think of 2 games he's scored more than 1 off the top of my head.

One thing about Dzeko is he often talks about consistency. He said he needed the pre-season here to really hit the ground running and has talked about a run of games doing him good. Its obvious it does anyway, Balotelli weirdly can go in and out of the team and perform, yet Dzeko needs a run of games. Yet he was inexplicably dropped on numerous occasions and never really given a run of games again.

Also there was a good 3 month spell (Maybe longer, I can't recall) where Aguero didn't score from open play. And the stat is probably even more telling if you exclude games at home. Tevez did a similar thing last season. My point is that we can afford games where our strikers don't score especially if they lead to spells where they do. As much as Dzeko scored 4 away at Spurs, we could have done with just 1 from a striker away at Liverpool, Arsenal and a host of other clubs (Swansea, Everton plus more) but he never got a chance to do that.


Don't really follow transfer rumours anymore. They bore me since Spursmad left, as you just hear people predictions really.

Still think we need a stonking centreback, a speedy winger/forward and a centre mid who can attack well. Those 3 give us enough cover, and more importantly, the tactical flexibility to set up in a number of ways. Right now I don't think we can combat a high line, nor can we absorb pressure and still pose an attacking threat. The high line alone would get us another 5 wins on the road imo.

[TheBallWinner]

City 0-0 Dynamo - Full Match Report found @ www.theballwinner.com

A lively crowd in Austria tonight and that’s because the majority were here to see the newly crowned Premier League Champions, Manchester City. Sergio Aguero, Carlos Tevez, Vincent Kompany, Aleksandar Kolarov and Yaya Toure headed the list of superstars in the line-up and the German side Dynamo Dresen were the opponents. A bit of a surprise in terms of the line-up’s was that City trialist Marcos Lopes managed to find himself on the teamsheet, selected for the 2nd time in pre-season by manager Roberto Mancini. Much faith had been placed in the youngster, who was surely not going to get much game time in the Premier League if the club were to sign him. Roberto Mancini was clearly after the victory tonight after slumming to a disappointing 1-0 defeat at Al Hilal a few days previous.

Mancini opted to start most of the returning City stars!
Comfortable yet impressive spells of possession for Manchester City were the highlight of the opening 20 minutes, Carlos Tevez and Sergio Aguero almost finding their way through the Dynamo defence after a lovely passage of play between the two Argentines. A blocked Lopes effort from the edge of the box was Lopes’ main claim in this game, with some good movement off the ball seeing him pick up a pass from Yaya Toure, after a trademark run through the center of the pitch from the Ivorian. A wild Carlos Tevez effort followed this half chance, but the shot was well off-target and unable to trouble the Dynamo stopper.

Read more ....

I don't think the 1-0 loss and the 0-0 draw here are anything to worry about. Weiss is looking good though.

[Slick Fosbury]

They always mean nothing. Iirc we had an indifferent pre-season last year then won 8 on the bounce (or whatever it was), then the season before I think we won every pre-season game but started poorly with a draw away at Sunderland? And then the season before we struggled and won our first 3.


Forgot he even played for us..

[Gob Bluth]

Game was on at the pub earlier. Looked very boring from glances now and again. Was that Pantimillon in goals btw?

[Laertes]

It was boring and it was Pantilimon for the first 70(ish) minutes.

[Slick Fosbury]

Modric, a little speedster and a centre back would complete our squad.

[Laertes]

Pass on Modric. He's not worth the £35m+

I agree on the centre-back and somebody quick, though. There was a distinct lack of pace in our game, at times last season. That said, I'd also be be looking to add central-midfielder as well.

[Zürich]

(Original post by Laertes)
Pass on Modric. He's not worth the £35m+

I agree on the centre-back and somebody quick, though. There was a distinct lack of pace in our game, at times last season. That said, I'd also be be looking to add central-midfielder as well.

Why do you care? It's not like it's Manchester City's money anyway...

[Laertes]

(Original post by Zürich)
Why do you care? It's not like it's Manchester City's money anyway...

A wise man once said 'Money doesn't have owners. Just spenders'. I agree with him but still I prefer us not to over-pay that much for players. It's a habit we have to get out of, and I'd rather it was sooner than later.

[Slick Fosbury]

(Original post by Zürich)
Why do you care? It's not like it's Manchester City's money anyway...

We earnt that money by being the most attractive investment opportunity.

[Zürich]

(Original post by Slick Fosbury)
We earnt that money by being the most attractive investment opportunity.

Man City's owners could have bought Accrington Stanley and eventually have won the league...Don't kid yourself that City have earned anything.

[Slick Fosbury]

(Original post by Zürich)
Man City's owners could have bought Accrington Stanley and eventually have won the league...Don't kid yourself that City have earned anything.

Accrington Stanley weren't as attractive as an investment, ergo they didn't invest in them.

They had the choice of every club and they invested in us, why? Because we were the most attractive investment and we earned that throughout our history by becoming the club we were in August 2008.

[Zürich]

(Original post by Slick Fosbury)
Accrington Stanley weren't as attractive as an investment, ergo they didn't invest in them.

They had the choice of every club and they invested in us, why? Because we were the most attractive investment and we earned that throughout our history by becoming the club we were in August 2008.

I was under the impression that the Sheik bought City because the previous Thai owner had his assets frozen...

How can you call City an investment when the owners stand to lose a fortune on the club? There's nothing unique about City, any team could have been bought and have been just as successful .

[Slick Fosbury]

(Original post by Zürich)
I was under the impression that the Sheik bought City because the previous Thai owner had his assets frozen...

How can you call City an investment when the owners stand to lose a fortune on the club? There's nothing unique about City, any team could have been bought and have been just as successful .

Shinawatra arguably facilitated the move, but that's no different to every other club that has changed ownership.

For starters, I believe they will make a long term return on City.

But for the sake of argument, lets assume they didn't. Then presumably they have gained something from it. Lets say what they wanted was exposure, well they have definitely got that with article after article being written in the press about them. Say they wanted to show their power, well they've done that in winning the league. Say they wanted to just get some enjoyment, well presumably they've done that.

I wouldn't pay £1000 for a season ticket, it doesn't mean that Arsenal don't deserve the money the thousands who flock to the emirates pay to them. I wouldn't pay however much it costs to get Emirates on the front of your shirts, it doesn't mean Arsenal don't deserve the money for it. Do you see what I'm getting at yet?

Just because you don't understand an investment doesn't mean it's not a worthwhile one.

[charlie9872]

(Original post by Zürich)
I was under the impression that the Sheik bought City because the previous Thai owner had his assets frozen...

How can you call City an investment when the owners stand to lose a fortune on the club? There's nothing unique about City, any team could have been bought and have been just as successful .

City is a club in the same city as the biggest football club in the world, its very, very marketable. They don't stand to loose a fortune either, the huge initial investment will draw in a huge percentage increase in revenue over time, give us 10 years and we'll have one of the highest incomes. We're growing at a ridiculous rate, something like a 60% increase last season. Yes, any team could of been as successful, but the owners aren't just playing with their money, they're very good businessmen (especially our chairmen) they know what they're doing and will create a global brand, and I can tell you know that a club with Manchester in the name is going to draw in far, far more fans from foreign countries than if they were to have been taken over Everton as example.

[Slick Fosbury]

(Original post by charlie9872)
City is a club in the same city as the biggest football club in the world, its very, very marketable. They don't stand to loose a fortune either, the huge initial investment will draw in a huge percentage increase in revenue over time, give us 10 years and we'll have one of the highest incomes. We're growing at a ridiculous rate, something like a 60% increase last season. Yes, any team could of been as successful, but the owners aren't just playing with their money, they're very good businessmen (especially our chairmen) they know what they're doing and will create a global brand, and I can tell you know that a club with Manchester in the name is going to draw in far, far more fans from foreign countries than if they were to have been taken over Everton as example.

Exactly.

Manchester city centre has undergone huge regeneration over the past 2 decades and that continues even now with buildings like the Hilton. That is something they will tap into with the huge amount of space surrounding the ground, they are property developers after all. Christ even now, I think the metrolink is just about to go to COMS. We're 5 minutes from the city centre, 20 minutes walk and this is one of the biggest cities in the UK. They wouldn't have got that at every other club.

And even then, the clincher is the rivalry with United. The derby (Which we won 1-0 lolololololol) had the biggest TV audience of any PL game. That's arguably in the first year of our rivalry in terms of challenging for the title. We're piggy backing of United's success. No other club could offer that.

[Zerforax]

(Original post by Zürich)
I was under the impression that the Sheik bought City because the previous Thai owner had his assets frozen...

How can you call City an investment when the owners stand to lose a fortune on the club? There's nothing unique about City, any team could have been bought and have been just as successful .

The previous owner's frozen assets helped lower the price somewhat in buying Man City but it was also no doubt due to the facts that there was potential investment in the surrounding areas too.

I'm sure they had other reasons but no doubt they were selective in their purchase, otherwise why didn't they buy another club?

[doggyfizzel]

(Original post by charlie9872)
City is a club in the same city as the biggest football club in the world, its very, very marketable

Side note, I don't think United are the biggest club in the world, I think Real would take that. I think we might be second, just about.

The United-City rivalry was defiantly part of it only Inter-AC have two clubs of a similar stature in the same City, bar London which is sort of a different case.

[Speckle]

Billionaires look for 2 things in taking over a football club.

1) Quick results, i.e. a strong championship team or a premiership team.
2) A club with an established fan base, aka, a large stadium.

Then just throw money at players and watch results.

[Laertes]

(Original post by Speckle)
Billionaires look for 2 things in taking over a football club.

1) Quick results, i.e. a strong championship team or a premiership team.
2) A club with an established fan base, aka, a large stadium.

Then just throw money at players and watch results.

Yeah, there tends to be more to it than that.