So Cancelo clocks Holding on the head and picks up a subsequent yellow. In the meantime he’s allowed to proceed and to shoot in a dangerous position. Would that have been pulled back via VAR? Why didn’t Moss blow for a foul at the time?

He got a yellow subsequently. How can it not be a foul?

Phew! No Willian

Pathetic.

Mari with an accurate pass

I agree

Thoroughly enjoyed our game today. Everyone played well.

Apart from the goal it was a solid defensive effort from us, but it's frustrating that we couldn't threaten them at all going forward. They are of course by far the best defensive side in the league this season, but we didn't even create a half-chance in that second half.

Oh well - Not expecting even a point there.

City is 10 points ahead now.

Well, after a promising last 15 mins of the 1st half in which we looked very dangerous we barely laid a glove on them in the 2nd which was disappointing because they were not at their best.

In truth, we still have too many players not at their level, either technically, physically or mentally.

Tierney and Saka were our best players which is ironic really given their relative youth and inexperience.

Yes, going back to your half-time comment about football being played in the head, Tierney and Saka looked like the only ones who believed we could do something tonight.

They definitely have something about them character-wise.

Would not be surprised to see either coveted by the very best teams in europe.

Guardiola could not have failed to take notice today.

Other than the goal I thought that Holding played well and created when he could.

Yep, he played very well, goal apart.

I don’t think it’s fair to call City a nothing club in the past. They’ve always had a big and loyal fan base. Talksport have this quiz where a couple of contestants have to guess the attendance for obscure matches from the past. One of them was City v Macclesfield league game at Maine Road when City must have been at their lowest. Was it the old third division? Anyway, while I don’t recall the exact figure when the answer was given, what I do remember is that it was over 30k.

How many clubs would have got over thirty thousand in the old Third Division, let alone a game against Macclesfield?

Yeah, I get all of that but..

I’ll bet that nobody much had heard of them outside of the UK. Now they are a European super power. That’s the kind of comparison that I had in mind. In European terms they were a nothing club.

And add PSG to the list.

When Man City won the European Cup Winners Cup in 1970, PSG did not exist.

Sorry but City are a proper team.

Yes but bang average by European terms being a generous assessment is the point. Now they're a sports-washing investment vehicle.

Edit: As are lots of clubs I suppose

That 1970 club bears no resemblance to today’s behemoth.

I perhaps should have said the are a proper club. They have a long and respectable provenance. They may have been financially doped since then, but which European club who were successful 50 years ago (and are still around) haven’t?

There are very few I think.

Arsenal?

Man United?

A European super power that has only won a single European trophy? That was in 1970, decades before they became financially doped.

Okay you win. They are not a European super power. And nor are PSG.

It’s dire. A good effort but for what

The results are *%^@ but how can you improve this

A massive amount of money is the only thing that fixes this

Isn't it a pleasure to watch a club with such quality and ambition?, hopefully when they sign Saka he can win a few trophies there.

Sadly it's midtable for eternity with the total opposite of either quality or ambition which emanates from the very top of our average club.

Even our all conquering women's team are going downhill under KSE.

Would be funny if we were spuds..

Wake up, start the replay, watch the smallest guy on the pitch out jump 2 central defenders, turn it off in disgust.

Exactly. The most annoying thing is when members of the current Man City claim some kind of affiliation with the pre-financially-doped, battling, quite likeable version. Guardiola's quote after Colin Bell died recently was just ridiculous: 'We have to play and defend legacies like Colin Bell and Mike Summerbee help us to create at this incredible club.'

I know what you mean

It’s all a bit meh

Toss a ball in the box our defenders should deal with it. Where do we go from here

City are in good form, as evidenced from their easy win. Certainly not at the top for the fun of it.

It was so obvious that City had been sent out there to play quick football from the start. Knowing full well that we were likely to be half asleep. I've now watched the extended highlights and think City could have easily been 3 or 4 nil up at half time if they hadn't fluffed some very good chances. I expected us to lose but think we were very lucky not to get clobbered despite what the final score line says.

In saying this, it seems Europa League is the priority because that wasn't the best 11 based on current form despite players being fit.

Well no. But ever since the inception of the PL, it didnt take long for a few wealthy elite to see an opportunity in making, be it about 10 years. Same for a few Euro clubs being hand picked as major options.

Most likely whatever team Arteta picks will fly to Athens on Tuesday. Leicester play an EL match
Thursday as well, but at a home advantage. They're our away game, on the 28th. Arteta has his work cut out for him.
Willian will probably feature for EL and Leicester.

Hadn’t seen any of the Aston Villa v Leicester game until the highlights on MOTD2. Must admit I didn’t think Martinez was blameless for either Leicester goal. For the first, Maddison practically passed it into the net from quite a long distance. He certainly didn’t hit it like a Peter Lorimer thunderbolt. For Leicester’s second, Martinez parried a shot from Vardy that was more or less straight at him directly to Barnes following up, who scored. Personally I think Martinez could have done better with both.

Socrates mentioned the other day that Martinez was stronger in some aspects of his game than Leno. I can probably accept that with catching crosses. For distribution, to be honest I think the difference between them has been overstated by some. I really don’t think there’s much to choose between them, with any difference there is being pretty marginal in my view. On shot stopping, Leno gets my vote. I reckon Leno is certainly the more likely to keep a difficult shot out.

Martinez and Leno are similar level keepers with some slightly different strengths/weaknesses. I find it strange that people use letting Martinez go as a stick to beat Arteta/Edu/Arsenal with, especially as many go on about how the club never sells players at the right time for the right amount.

Martinez value was as high as it was ever going to be and we did the right thing by taking the offer from Villa. Without that money Partey would not have been bought in.

I think Arteta and Edu are on the right track. They've managed to clear out a whole host of underperforming, overpaid players (Özil, Mustafi etc), have bought in players who seem promising (Partey, Gabriel) and given chances to younger players (Saka, Emile Smith Rowe).

I really don't understand why fans are on Arteta's back considering the mess the club was in when Wenger left (which was then somehow made worse by Sanelhi). We could have hired Gaurdiola and there wouldn't have been a miraculous return to the top of the table. This is a 5 year+ project and anyone that thinks otherwise is unrealistic.

Over the last month or two, I've only watched City in big matches. They are comfortably at the top of the league for a reason. When I see the table I see City have 5 draws and 2 losses but until last night wasn't really aware they have beaten everyone in all competitions for a few weeks now. Amazing. I hadn't realized they were in perfect form.

That said, I see our match in context. We didn't have Partey, and he would have been a huge help. You simply aren't going to be giant killers witih Elneny and Xhaka in the middle. Not gonna happen. The fact it was "only" 1-0 is not too shabby considering how good City are and the fact we weren't at full strength. We had chances and I take something positive from that. At times we had them on their heels.

It's not much consolation to most Gooners but considering where they are, where we are, their form and ours, I'm disappointed in the result but not angry. We are to be judged against sides lower down in the table. Losing to City 1-0 nil is no crime right now.

Spurs are falling down the table as well and it may be just a matter of when not if, Mourinho is given the boot and the best he can do after are the clubs a tier below the top European sides. Your Napolis, Marseilles, Romas, Sevillas or back to Porto or the national side of Portugal or some 2nd tier Euro country. His managing career at the elite clubs are probably done. Not to mention he's caustic. He got away with it when he was winning. You get a lot of room for your negatives when you are winning. It's glaring when you are losing.

I didn't think they should have gotten rid of Poch unless they could get an elite manager. Couldn't have happened to a better guy or club.

I am pessimistic about the Europa Cup because who is left in the competition but I'm hoping we can get to the semis.

Shot stopping - Leno
Distribution - Martinez
Catching crosses - Martinez
Quickness in thought - Martinez

That's how I rate them. Though shot stopping is the most important aspect for a GK.

I think you’re one of the people overstating the difference in distribution. Leno is actually very good at releasing the ball. Quickness in thought? I couldn’t give a toss how long it takes each to do Sudoku puzzles. If quickness of thought means the speed of seeing the danger with through balls and getting to them first to clear, I’d actually put Leno a bit higher.

What grates me with regards to Chelsea and City (as well as PSG as you mentioned) is that the sports media rarely (and I would rather say 'never' but I'm allowing for an instance or two) ever mention (anymore if they did in the past) their present status is 100% due to outside money.

Their success was bought by the same type of money that controls everything else. As much as I hate Man Utd, they made money from their fame and name. Liverpool as well, especially through buying smart from big sales.

You had to follow English football to know about City. They would pop up on everyone outside the UK's radar when they were in the top flight and had the Manchester Derby or by chance in a cup tie. That was it.

Chelsea had a bigger name than City but again, not a global name by any stretch. All three (including PSG) have a robust merchandise business as a result of buying success.

I don't like it when the 1% buys American politics and the same when they buy football success. Its the same to me. Nothing organic about their success like ours, Man Utd's or Liverpool's.

...and I guarantee you before their sugar daddies, many of those same fans had a moan about the big money in the big clubs and how they are 'real football'. Not 'prawn sandwich eaters' to paraphrase Keane.