MY TAKE ON PSG VS MAN CITY AS WELL AS LIVERPOOL .

 man city played psg in the uefa champions which is their second big game of this week . before i write about the game let me tell you that in the chess world the deeper the thinking the better your game and your rating . in the game versus psg gaurdiola showed that he has thinking power but was not really convinced that he has got a serious depth to it . in football it is very important that you just do it right never under do it nor over do it . i think in this game gaurdiola's team just did a little than what they should had done . on the offensive front even though man city were a little bit short but on the defensive front i think that they did a good job but i would say that psg were poor . gaurdiola can pat his back that he put psg under pressure but just came short . 

psg started the game with 4-3-3 while man city had the same formation . sterling started the game as the no.9 with mahrez and grealish besides him . man city conceded the first goal before the game could settle down . man city were trying to determine as to how mbappe was going to operate when he made a diagonal run and was left unmarked in the box and psg scored but aafter the goal the game kind of settle down to a familiar tune . psg were sittind back and trying to hit on the counter while city were trying to press psg and win the ball back . the one thing that intrigued me was and was novelty for me was that that when man city won they didnt tried to hit psg with a counter counter attack . but instead they slowed the pace of the game allowed psg to get their shape back as well as get its own shape as to what they wanted to acheive on the offense . they got their both wide players really wide and then they started the offense . for the first 25-30 min psg were playing a high line and trying to press man city also . they too wanted to control the tempo of the game but as soon as city tried to release sterling behind the psg back four they dropped back the other thing for dropping back was that maybe they didnt want to give mahrez the space to operate because he getting to the byline and whipping crosses . meanwhile on the defensive front man city were able to keep psg at bay and it was because the three psg front players are still not in cohesion with each other . man city on the offensive front were poor and lacked ideas . they knew that they would get that space in the middle so they were dependent on the wide players to create something for them . grealish and mahrez were the wide players . first to grealish the opposition is not there to give him space and time on the ball they are going to be tight to him and will be physical with him . instead of complaining when he is fouled .he should just dust up and get along with the game . he is not bad since he can read the game and slip the ball but he needs coaching because his game is one dimensional and the commentators wanted his to take the fullback and run on the outside but he hasnt got that pace and guile to do that like mahrez . what i found intriguing in the first half was that they were just poor . they didnt show any cohesion or tried something different with the ball . the players movement could be read by the opposition . mahrez and grealish stayed wide and saw most of the ball and they just tried to keep coming inside but there was no crisp passing and most importantly as i had pointed out in the last post that man city didnt had a plan as to what they would do when they had the ball in the psg final third . in the first half they were just poor but came the second half . 

in the second half he changed silva and de bruyne's positions . they both came into their natural positions . he kept the shape of the attack the same but what he changed was that he asked de bruyne to make runs in the space between the fullbacks and the centre backs and atleast a couple of times de bruyne had the ball at  his feet but he was not able to find anybody in the box nor was he able to find the back of the goal . this is where gaurdiola was lacking . he found the space that was there to exploit but couldnt complete moves as he needed atleast two or three passes to complete the move . he needed to have a proper no.9 who knows as to when to make moves and what position he should take so that if he is not the target then atleast he keeps the centre backs tied and gets space for other players to exploit inside the box . i think gaurdiola is thinking but not doing it fully . his team is still struggling in the final third . just having ball and dominating ball doesnt counts for anything unless you have a shot at goal and create chances . his team are short of that . although i would credit him that his team did stopped psg in the tracks on offense and did a good defense and most importantly in that rodri's role was very good . 

psg has the three best players in the world as their forwards . but for me they struggled against both psg and club brugge who should had won the match had they taken their chances neatly . i think that they were over confident that is why they were trying to showboat and playing in some hollywood passes . either of neymar or mbappe should really help out his defense because they are getting outnumbered in the middle of the park and that is where the opposition is trying to stretch them and exploit them . i think as far as psg tactics are concerned i think that he has got the players in the right position. neymar drops deep to help his midfield and move the ball while messi stays as a link up between them . but the most important facet of the game was that for the majority of the game man city were able to stop psg in the tracks . they tried to fancy at times and that cost them the possession . if psg are to be the title contenders then i think they need to be more better than that . they couldnt control the tempo of the game and were dependent on playing counter rather than controlling the tempo the game and putting the opposition on back foot . 

i also the game between liverpool vs man city . now it wasnt a great game with man city again playing decent but both all the goals came on the counter attacks . while  cancelo was very good on the offense he was very bad on defense . first off whenever a fullback goes out to press his opposite number and the distance between him and the centre backs then its his responsibility that he doesnt gets beaten . he shouldnt get beaten because if he gets beaten then the shape and the organisation collapases and then for that his centre back has to leave his position and that creates spaces in the defense and it can be exploited . cancello while in the first half was very good because he was conservative in the first half but in the second half he got overconfident which led to two goals against his team . foden is decent but his decision making needs to be better . 

last but not the least there are youtiya's in pakistan who keep on backing their pm and keep on sugarcoating him while he may be doing idiotic things and doesnt understand anything about the world  . same thing can be said about football coaches in england . southgate is the best that is to offer for england . he has no clue as to what is going on the pitch . the journalist or the so called pundits keep on writing plaudits about him . they are just idiots that is why they are there in the idiot box not on the pitch . england were hopeless against both andorra and hungary . well best of luck to them . 

MY TAKE ON CHELSEA VS MAN CITY .

 man city played chelsea in the epl . a few months ago chelsea had defeated city in the ucl final . they had completely outclassed man city in the final although they played on the counter attack but playing counter attack too takes a lot of smart thinking but what was present at that time was absent in this match . when touchel was appointed as the chelsea boss in december i had reservations about him . the thing is that not that he cannot lay  out the team but the thing is that when the things dont work out for you and you have make changes or find that chink in the oppositions armour there is where i think he lacks . gaurdiola's team was a winner in this duel but am i impressed then certainly not . his team dominated the possession but in the first half till the game was not that opened his team was not able to penetrate chelsea and was not able to muster a shot at goal . all his efforts were just shots from beyond the box and if the ball came in the box it was very well dealt by chelsea . let me tell you as to why i am not impressed with gaurdiola . lets say that for the first 10-15 its a feeling out process but after that you should be able to start playing your game and start exerting and play out the game that you had mind . now a coach does has to take into consideration the players that he has as well as the opposition and he has to play and imagine as to how the opponent will responds to his moves and how he can outsmart them . now why was i not impressed with gaurdiola is that there was a break in the first half and he was talking with walker ,rodri and diaz . now its not wrong but for its half as to what he should be doing . yes he is correct in asking walker and rodri to spot something which they had been missing or make adjustments in their positions or asking them to spot the players which they are not seeing but them at the same time he should be asking the front players that when walker,rodri diaz has the ball that they should start the move . they should make these movements and the try to  combine to have a better shot at goal and try to open the opposition . opposition will only give you spaces when you create chaos in their ranks . 

chelsea started the game with 3-5-2 formation while city started the game with 4-2-1-3 formation with foden starting in the no.9 position while de bruyne just behind him . chelsea had two up front with new man lukaku  with werner. the game started with the fimiliar note with chelsea sitting back and hitting city on the counter attack . in this game compared to the ucl final chelsea played deeper . touchel's idea to play upfront sounds very good theoratically but the execution needs to be correct .  first off the way chelsea were just way too one dimensional in their counter attacks . what they wanted to do was that whenever they have the ball they would try to find lukaku who would try to combine with werner where on he would try to release werner beyond the city back four . city could read this game from a long distance and could take the necessary moves . most importantly what was important was that lukaku tried to back into laporte . instead try to bring him out of the comfort zone . make him chase you . in that way the man city's defense does gets disjointed and gaps are created . most importantly even lukaku's touch isnt that good as it should be . the important defect that i found in the chelsea's formation was the lack of no.10 . somebody that would connect between the forward line and the midfield . what he does is that he makes those passes smaller and make it more crisper . he can release a player beyond the back four or can just go beyond lukaku . most importantly the distance between the lines for chelsea was just little more than what was needed . it meant that the ball needed to travel that much more and that allowed the opposition to close you down . most importantly chelsea player one too many touches on the ball and that allowed the opposition to close them down . he chose to substitute the wrong players . he should had replaced jorginiho instead of kante . i had already written in my earlier posts that when jorginiho struggles when he is put under pressure and city just did exactly that. chelsea players like alonso spend too much time on the ball and most importantly their game reading is just poor . touchel needs to teach them that cause the honeymoon period is over . 

                                                        

city dominated the game not because they were superior but because chelsea were poor . in the first half city just couldnt penetrate chelsea . gaurdiola thinks theorotically well but to be honest he is dependent on individual players to open the opposition defense . he has got good player in the side but he hasnt got a flair player in the side who can threaten the opposition defense . man city purchased jack grealish for 100 mil . i mean the money just has got no value because if you purchase an average player like grealish for 100 mil who has no pace,no flair and nothing great about him then i think that players like bergkamp and crespo . he is just one dimensional and plays one footed only . i would like him to be coached . he just plays in one zone and operates over there and most importantly he needs to understand that he slows down the game when he takes too many touches and stops the flow of the game which makes it easier for the opposition to stop his team and him. de bruyne was playing behind foden but his trouble is that he is a good player but he needs to move the game around him . the thing is that he passes the ball very well to other players but he needs to play himself cause he has a good shot from distance and that is a very good threat which can create cracks in opposition defense . man city didnt had a great time in the first half they didnt had a clear shot on goal . i had said that gaurdiola was talking with walker and silva but at the same time he should talking with jesus,foden and others who play upfront . man city were just one dimensional in their offense . people expect bigger things from gaurdiola team . where on they expect playing slick crisp tiki taka football and the cohesion between players is exceptional but here it just looks another ordinary team who beat another below ordinary team .