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.

Yes, its easy to miss. 10 point clear at the top and with 12 premier league wins in a row are clues that even Sherlock Holmes might have missed.

The Guardian described our start to the game as follows:

'Arsenal seemed intent on “playing dead” faced with a superior predator, refusing to engage with the game at all, like a splayed hedgehog who has, on this occasion, forgotten to curl himself up into a ball.'

We lost to City, a fate that would most probably befall any team that tackled them at the moment.
And we didn't put out our strongest team.
And we shot ourselves in the foot by giving them a one goal start.

So I'm not reading too much into that.

Looking at the table, Everton and Villa are the only sides, I have any semblance of confidence in catching. I think its not even 50/50 we could finish higher than the scum. Mourinho may be having a bad spell but I expect he'll at least manage to keep above us. I also worry about Wolves below us. They could turn the corner.

So, all in all, I think 8th is about as good as we're likely to do. I can't see us getting anywhere close to a Europa Cup unless the best clubs get knocked out first. This season will be a wash. What I want to see:

A good partner for Gabriel. Holding has punched above his perceived weight (although I've been a long time fan), but I don't see him getting that much better. Gabriel has done remarkably well for someone new to the league. His upside is very good. We have to make a decision about Saliba. Holding will make a great back up CB if/when we get a quality partner for Gabriel. Keown to Adams/Bould if you will.

Partey, when healthy and I watch his health closer than the VP of America watches the President's, is worrisome. But its his first season and the pace and physicality of the league, especially in his position, is tough at first. Maybe its Ødegaard, maybe its Smith Rowe but we need a proper central midfield partnership. I still say I'd love to see a Saka/Partey middle, Smith Rowe in there depending on the formation (4-3-3 or whatever)

Willian isn't long term so a proper winger on the right. Pépé...hmm...he seems to play according to the mood of the squad. I won't be looking to him to take any match we are struggling in by the scruff of the neck anytime soon. I also am encoiuraged he seems to be more of a team player than he was prior but still has some ways to go.

I hope Arteta can find a formation that plays Aubameyang and Martinelli at the same....effectively. If not, Martinelli the heir to Aubameyang in a few years. We are fine at LB. Bellerin needs replacing. He's grown in leadership qualities but has maxed out his effectiveness.

(PS: Bring back Fabregas for a swan song season or two to quarterback the team till we find a suitable player for that position )

I think a frustrating aspect of yesterday's game is that bar a 15 min period just before halftime we never really had a go at them. Which is all the more annoying because we actually looked fairly dangerous and opened them up a bit during that time, especially down the left.

I still feel that Arteta's substitutions are often too conservative and too late.

If we'd stuck with Wenger for the last 2.5 years I think we would have got more points than we have, but I also think results would have still regressed just at a slower rate than they have under Emery and Arteta. I also don't think we'd have seen any green shoots of recovery that we have seen under Arteta.
With Wenger it was 1 step back every season. By getting rid of him we probably took two steps back every season BUT we gave ourselves the opportunity in the longer term to take 2 steps forward every season after the slide was arrested, I didn't see any way Wenger was going to take us a step forward whilst he stayed with us.

We definitely seemed far too respectful and nervous of what they could do. But then who in the last 18 games City have played has found a decent formula to even get close to them? In their last 13 league games they have conceded 2 goals from open play and 1 penalty and they are averaging just under 3 goals a game in that time.

When I look at the two teams they are clearly better all over the pitch, but some of our players could be considered 'close' to theirs. The huge gaps in quality were:
Dias, an absolute colossus in defence, probably my player of the year along with Bruno at Man U. He dominates every situation
Cancelo at right back - I don't want to bash Bellerin too much but the difference in quality of the two is huge, Cancelo could (and did) play central mid, his technique, passing and all round game is wonderful
Mahrez/Sterling - two very different players but both so direct and both with end product 20 goals+assists per season. It is an area we've really struggled with.

I’m not sure mate. We were in free fall.

When Wenger resigned I said on here it would take years to undo the damage and decline that had set in and that the task would span more than 1 manager. I was proved right and really don’t see much changing from that. I think Ben summed it up right earlier when he said were into a 5 year project. It’s a complete rebuild and the club have made absolutely crazy decisions off the field. Sanelhi mslintat etc etc there’s no structure there and it must really hurt us.

Spot on

They've definitely stepped up defensively to a point where they're incredibly difficult to even create chances against. Liverpool have shown that you can compete with City even without huge investment from your owner, but the figures City have spent are really crazy. These are the centre backs they've bought in the last seven years (transfer fees from wikipedia, so they should at least be close to the real sum):

Dias 61m
Ake 41m
Laporte 57m
Stones 47m
Otamendi 32m
Mangala 42m

I mean, we talk about how Mustafi didn't live up to expectations and was an expensive flop - City sign a Mustafi pretty much every year. And more importantly, signing these expensive centre backs have no impact on their ability to strengthen other areas. During these years they've also spent huge amounts on the likes of De Bruyne, Sterling, Mahrez, Bernardo Silva, Cancelo, Rodri, Walker etc. It's not just a different league, they're operating on a completely different planet.

You are right. Man United and Chelsea also have the luxury of making expensive mistakes in the transfer market.

I think throwing silly money at what we think our problems are would be a recipe for disaster. Careful building, with the occasional big money buy, is the way to go. Success is not impossible with that model, and if it does come (as it did for Liverpool) it is vastly more satisfying.

One of the most important lessons to learn from Liverpool is the importance of success in the transfer market. Since Klopp arrived, these are the players that have cost them more than 20m:

Thiago
Diogo Jota
Alisson
Keita
Fabinho
Van Dijk
Salah
Oxlade-Chamberlain
Mané
Wijnaldum

Out of those 10 signings, I would say only two (Keita and Ox) have been bad buys, while the others are somewhere in the range of good to incredible signings. Getting 8/10 big signings in a five year period right is incredible accuracy, and if we could emulate that I have no doubt we could challenge for trophies as well.

I agree with that and I'm not saying we should have kept Wenger - I definitely wanted him out and realised that we may have to go backwards before we go forwards, that was all acceptable to me rather than just drifting slowly backwards continuously.
I do think wenger would have got us more points because under him I think we slide slowly backwards rather than the giant leaps we've taken. What we're doing is better in the long run.

It is the way we have to go. Just like Liverpool we would need a perfect storm of events to get ahead of those with vast sums of money
1. incredible astuteness in the market. We can't afford big money failures at all
2. Improving players on the training pitch because ready made superstars are generally out of our reach
3. a genius manager who can cultivate that team to be greater than the sum of its parts
4. the likes of city not reaching their best level - because if City do all of points 1-3 as well as having 5 times the budget then you really are never going to beat them

I would add Thiago in as a failure currently. He's been very ordinary and has upset the balance of the team.
To sustain that level of hit rate on transfers is very difficult, Tsimikas and Minimino don't look anywhere near the level of those they're trying to replace. The two new CB Kabak and Davies - jury is well and truly out.
Now Liverpool have an aging team, lots of players at 29 or so who have formed the backbone of their side over the last 3 years of success and hardly any of them have a replacement lined up ready to take over. This is the unseen drift a team can have, marginal drop offs from key players but then a sudden drop as they leave, retire or lose form and half the team is wiped out. Liverpool have 12 players in their sqiad 28 or over, of those 12, 9 would/could be first 11 players - it is only the two full backs who are younger. The squad balance isn't right for them and I think they know it based on the age profile of player's they've been signing - but hardly any of them have been up to scratch

Has anyone seen the penalty that Rashford won for a foul by Willock yesterday? This is the sort of penalty Man U win every single time but no other team does. I've watched the replay a few times and can't see much contact - I've also seen countless Arsenal penalties waved away with far more contact. The one v Leeds, even one Saka had v Wolves.
In some sense I don't care which way the Arsenal decision goes as long as I don't then have to watch numerous examples of other teams being treated differently to us.

I can't agree about Thiago - he's looked pretty ordinary by his standards, but the balance of the team is more likely upset by not having central defenders available for most of the season and having to shuffle around their midfield from game to game. Play Thiago with Henderson or Wijnaldum with Fabinho in his role as the midfield pivot and I think we would see a much different player.

I do agree it's hard to sustain their level of transfer success though, but their big buys still seem good to me. The likes of Minamino, Tsimikas, Davies and Kabak are all cheap transfers or loans, you can always gamble a little bit more with those. Their next big task will be to replace Wijnaldum, who I think is very underrated and has been an important player for Klopps style of football.

A common theme when teams play and lose to Man City is to heap mountains of praise on City, players, managers and fans do it (I've probably done it before) - it is a self preservation method. Praise the obviously best team in the league and mask any shortfalls in your own team by effectively saying how difficult it is to beat them. Interestingly Pep was at it in the opposite way yesterday, lavishing praise on Arsenal saying how we make it really tough for them and therefore by beating us shows how brilliant Man City are.

We've been 5th and 8th since Wenger left. He had his worse finish (6th) his final season I think. It would be interesting to see where Wenger would have finished had he stayed.

I think we'd be on a slow decline. Slow death. He needed to go. The when (and the 'how') were the only questions.

We got to a Europa Cup final and won an FA Cup since he left so that's not too bad.