[Official TC Thread] Celtic vs Manchester City - Wed 28th September - 7:45 - BT Sports 2

OK, do you dispute that the majority of those CL games were less challenging than this city game? If you don't, then they are not very representative of the challenge we face. Simples.

You are choosing to only count CL group stage home games and I am arguing that this choice leads to a very unrepresentative match sample. OK, it is true that it is a CL group stage home game, I get what you are saying. But by the same token it is a great many things (It's a European game, it's a midweek game, it's a game under the floodlights, it's a game against one of the top, top sides in Europe) and you have to justify why your choice of exactly where to draw the line is a good standard of comparison with this game.

Now, as I said, I find it quite arbitrary to draw the line exactly where you have. You know that by excluding last 16 games and qualifiers, you have made our record look better than I feel is justified.

As I say, my own personal opinion is that the relevant comparison is with other games against the elite European sides at home (note that I do at least find your choice of only counting home games to be representative and not at all arbitrary, as we do tend to do significantly better in them) and by that standard we have lost 5 from 10, not 3 from 24. Others will definitely disagree and that is totally fair enough: some might want to include all our European home games, some all our CL home games, others all our home games against English clubs in the Europe, etc...
All of these are perfectly valid comparisons; but frankly, mate, only comparing our CL home games in the group stage and not including qualifiers or last 16 games smacks of special pleading. As if somehow two wins and a draw at home against Copenhagen, Rosenborg or Aalborg had more to tell us when it comes to judging our chances tomorrow night than 2 defeats and a draw at home against Barça, AC Milan and Juve in the last 16.

 

There are weak links there if you look.

 

Carrick and Neville for sure (yes really), arguably Heinze. I used to watch the EPL back then. If I had a fiver for every time Gary Neville played someone onside...

 

No, I'm not. I'm saying they are a better team, but Milan's achievements massively overshadow City's. I'm saying that IMO any of the current elite teams put in the competition 10 years ago would be the best simply due to the way they hoover up all the top players these days. That Milan team were a better team for their era than this City team is for ours.

 

I'm not, though. I can't stand the EPL and don't think it's the best league in the world. How am I a fanboy? You might as well say I used to be a Rangers fan in the early 90's by that logic: I didn't like them, didn't watch them and didn't rate them in European terms; but I didn't try to deny the way they had used the massive changes in the game at that time to their advantage to assemble a team that was further ahead of us than they had ever been (as far as I know).

Same with the EPL today.

 

:smiley-laughing002:

 

As I said, it means nothing. Different team's, different era, remember?

I'm struggling to find many. You mean Carrick isn't in Cristiano Ronaldo's league? No * sherlock, must mean he's pish then..

Word's fail me........

 

Dida
Oddo - Nesta - Bonera - Jankulovski
Gattuso
Ambrosini - Pirlo - Seedord
Kaka
Inzaghi​

Aging guys like Cafu, Muldini, Serginho, the Ronaldo all still kicking about. Quilty younger players that didn't play as well like Pato, Gourcuff and Aubameyang.

 

Mulgrew was midfield against Barca, Matthews was left back.

 

I think the question should be was the gap between the sides who started in those games greater or less than the gap between the sides that will line up wednesday night. Were we punching well above our weight? Did the fans help get us over the line?

 

I'd say it's about the same, maybe more for Wednesday but if you look at the team that played United and the team that played barca in comparison they were miles ahead of us in quality all over the park.

The team performance has to be solid for 90 minutes but you need one or two players to stand up and have a worldie. We had Boruc ad Naka v United and we had Big Forster & Wanyama v Barca. Goalkeeper situation worries me tomorrow, but can see the likes of Dembelé and Sinclair having a good go at City.

 

They have won all their games under pep and no one has scored more than 1 goal into them.

What should we be realistically trying to achieve here?

 

Aye, just the 4-0 will do.

 

A 1-0 victory?

 

We're *!

 

This is it in a nutshell. Hopefully we can add as you say the names of Dembele and Sinclair to the list of big game players who stepped up when required. One thing about Gordon I always think, he is a brilliant shot stopper. Dodgy on crosses and poor with the ball at his feet. As a shot stopper though hes one of the best. I cant see Man City putting many crosses in with their style of play and we probably wont have to much of the ball to play out from the back. Bit long winded by me there but the jist is goalkeeper wise if its Gordon im not unduly worried.

 

There's no point playing in this competition if we're going to wet the bed any time a good side comes to town.

We've beaten better teams than them before and we will again in the future. It's football, anything can happen.

Just need them to have an off day and us to play to our peak.

I'd be about 10 times more confident if we still had Forster though. Definitely hope Gordon starts.

Had to Google him there to double-check. Can't remember him being at Lyon, he was an outstanding player for Bayern.

 

Elber was a *, mind him saying larsdon was a big fish in a small pond and that he was a far better player