City and Donnarumma on the ball

O

OliverPicks

Community Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2025
Interesting bit of reporting on City looking for ways to help Donnarumma contribute more in possession. The suggestion of building with three defenders instead of two feels like a very City solution to a very non-City problem.

It also sums up the odd fit here: elite shot-stopper, but maybe not the kind of keeper you instantly trust to do the full Pep thing. If they have to tweak the structure just to make him comfortable, that says quite a lot.

At the same time, it is hard to argue with the idea if it keeps things simple and avoids risky passes in dangerous areas. The real question is whether this is a smart adaptation or the first sign that the signing never fully made sense.
 
Three defenders behind the ball gives you cleaner angles and a safer first pass, so in theory it suits a keeper like Donnarumma. The trade-off is that it can slow the build-up and invite pressure higher up the pitch, which is where City normally try to dominate. It is a compromise, but not a crazy one.
 
its basically admitting the keeper aint comfy and theyre gonna change the whole shape around him which is mad when you think about it but city will just keep tweaking until it looks fine on paper
 
This is less about Donnarumma being bad and more about City trying to reduce variance. If your keeper is elite at stopping shots but less secure under pressure, adding another outlet can protect the system without asking him to be something he is not. It is pragmatic, even if it looks a bit un-Pep-like.
 
Honestly, I can see why they are trying to make it work because Donnarumma is still a top keeper and you do not just throw that away because he is not the cleanest passer. But this is exactly the sort of thing people meant when they said he was not a natural fit for the full Pep setup, and now it looks like they are having to engineer the whole back line just to cover for it. The funny part is that City always sell the idea that every problem has a perfect football solution, yet here they are searching for a workaround like everyone else. If you sign a keeper and then immediately need to redesign the build-up, that is not exactly a ringing endorsement, is it, and people acting like this is some genius masterplan are kidding themselves because it sounds more like damage limitation than innovation and if this goes wrong they will be fuming
 
so basically buy a keeper then build a whole support group around him because he cant do the basic pep homework thats hilarious really spend all that money then ask the rest of the team to babysit him
 
I actually think people are being a bit harsh on Donnarumma here because he is still one of the best shot stoppers around and the idea that he has to be some kind of quarterback to be useful is nonsense, plenty of top teams have won with keepers who are not ultra flashy on the ball and the back line can absolutely be arranged to help him out if the manager wants to do that, that does not make him a disaster it just means the structure needs adjusting and City are probably one of the few clubs with enough control to do it properly, people are acting like he has no value at all just because he is not pinging 40 yard diagonals every five minutes and that is lazy analysis if you ask me, he brings a different profile and there is nothing wrong with that, not every keeper has to be the same mould and the obsession with making every single one play like a midfielder has gone way too far
 
If they go to a back three in build up it could help them stop forcing passes through the middle and create cleaner circulation out wide, especially if the keeper is less adventurous. But it also means the midfield has to be disciplined because one bad touch and the whole thing looks exposed
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top