Under normal circumstances City would be looking forward to today's game against Blackpool. Alas someone has a wicked sense of humour and has decided to appoint Mark Clattenburg, the man who makes Uriah Rennie look like a competent official, as the referee for the contest.
About the only positive thing you can say concerning Clattenburg is that he is an equal opportunity buffoon. There appears to be little rhyme nor reason to his decision making so it's always possible that City will prevail. But having single handily made a mockery of the FA's Referee Respect campaign, neither side is likely to be looking forward to today's contest.
A shame really as from a tactical standpoint this could be a quite fascinating contest. It all depends on City's formation. The victory over Aston Villa notwithstanding a 4-2-3-1 formation at home is usually a poor choice as said formation is a counter attacking mode that relies on catching an opponent on the break. When used against an aggressive team, such as Chelsea, it can be particularly effective.
Ian Holloway, Blackpool's manager, has constantly attacked this season other than the one game against Chelsea where he tried to park the bus and got ripped to shreds in the first half of that encounter. Such a philosophy is the perfect set up for a 4-2-3-1.
Comments
Posted by Mick on 01/01/2011
Wallace
I couldnt agree more. I just hope we dont get any red cards to impair us next week against Arsenal. Our bottom position in the fair play league with a average of 2.93 cards per game compared to our Europa average of 0.6 make make an interesting subject for one of your future articles?
Posted by Daniel on 01/01/2011
How Clattenburg didn't give a card of any sort on the Blackpool player that hacked down Silva is a disgrace. A complete disgrace.
Wallace Reply At this point I'm just happy City got 3 points and there were no red cards!
Posted by Stan on 01/02/2011
Yes, the bottom line from the Blackpool match is 3 points. That was a match that would have ended in a draw (or worse) a year or two ago.
| |
Post your comment |
 |
|