SF33

That's devastating. My heart says I hope we retain him and that he's ready to come back for us in about January, 2018, but the head says we may as well cut our losses. It's been a fun ride, Pumba.

I'm sure I'd dislike him if he played for another team, but when you you compare him to the dozens of players we've had that were so useless they were essentially stealing money from the club and looked like they couldn't care less, well, I'll take Kilkenny's passion, for better or worse.

It's a fine line, I reckon. If you're a good team and you're winning, the pundits will say it's a example of why the team is so good. If you're a terrible team, it's a sign of mutiny. We're somewhere in the middle, I suppose. Sorensen made some good saves, but I think those in the Bouzanis camp would say that his incessant rolling the ball out after a save put us under way more pressure than we should have been. Perhaps I'm missing something, but can someone explain to me why Izzo's red card was such a boneheaded play, or why Fornaroli was so clever to draw it? It's the option of walking the ball in, against - what- an 80% chance of converting from the spot (assuming the referee actually calls the penalty and red card - not exactly a guarantee with A-League refs)? And I don't think Izzo had a choice but to do what he did. Sacrificed himself to keep his team in the game, like Sorensen did for us in week 1. Finally, if there is a hell and if they play football down there, I reckon the game that you'd have to watch would be an 11 v 10 Melbourne City training drill. We're utterly hopeless every time there is a red card in a game, whether we're playing with 11 v 10, or with 10 v 11.

I sit on the side up that end and I rarely know what they're singing about when they break out a new chant. It just seemed like the odd random "Shit...Shit...Shitney" from where I was sitting. God knows what that bloke is mumbling about on the megaphone, with all the distortion. And I think the "If you love City, stand up" should used a lot more conservatively. I get that people want to show their support whether we play well, or badly (didn't stop Melburnians clearing out within about five minutes of the final whistle), but when half the crowd is pissed off by what is being dished up on the park and they're thinking "I'm not standing up for these clowns", well, you don't really have a choice, when half the people are standing and half the people aren't. It's really "If you want to see the game, stand up", not "If you love City..." when it's busted out at those times.

I think they're a bloody tough team. I still don't think they're better than we should be. People were bemoaning how well Zullo had been playing for Sydney this year. Well, trust me, I was sitting on that wing and Nick Fitzgerald did everything short of putting a gimp mask on Zullo. He was tearing him to pieces, time and time again. Look at their lineup. I defy anyone to tell me that on paper it looks like one of the best teams in the history of the league. But they're tough and they're smart, one of those 'whole is greater than the sum of its parts' sides that I can't remember Heart/City ever being at any point in the history of the club. I get the nagging feeling that if one of our whipping boys (Muscat, Malik, Rose, Tongyik even the marquee man) ended up in their colours next season, they'd suddenly look like rock solid cogs in that team. But we're still just a team that "can beat anyone on their day", like we have been for oh, about 90% of our history. Flaky, inconsistent and pick and choose when we're going to be at our best. Haven't won two in a row in the league since mid-October. Sydney this year is a team that gives it everything they have, week in/week out. Guaranteed, if they had gone down to 10 men, instead of us, late in the first half, they still would have created numerous excellent chances, like every team seems to do against us when they're down to 10 men (they turned a deficit into a draw when they copped a second half red card against us earlier in the season, after all). When we're down to 10, we don't look like ever salvaging anything from the game (I think the last time we did, David Williams was prominently involved). I think the most galling thing for me about last is that I couldn't fault the effort (well, maybe slightly once it was clear Sydney had the game in the bag): the result was simply down to brainfades. Our one goal took an exquisite piece of individual work, easily one of the best goals this year. Their three looked so, so soft in comparison. Sydney puts a premium on the goals that they concede. The team had a huddle thing going in the middle of the park after the game...it would be interesting to know what was discussed. There needs to be a line in the sand at some point. How much more are we supposed to take?

I'd argue it's topped off by the fact that it's actually spelt "Rhyan". What a tip rat.

Hasn't he already played, like, three times as many games for us as Hughes did? He's missed a few games. Injuries happen. I think people just need to settle down.

Ain't that the truth. Let's win two games in a row first, before we start considering grand final trips.

Probably. But I think it's a more reasonable response when you're playing an opponent that's in your league, not so much when they're a tier below. Personally, I would have thought there'd be some benefit in seeing what Mooy could do against his potential future teammates that offsets the possibility of City actually losing the game. Maybe it's smart/gamesmanship, but I don't think it's a great look. Shades of Australia v Australia A in the cricket in the mid-90s, where Paul Reiffel was dominating for Aus A, so Australia promoted him for the final between the two teams and then made him 12th man. Or those local level reserve teams in (pick any sport you wish) that start stacking their teams with senior players to qualify them for reserves finals (once the senior teams are out of contention) to win one of those sacred reserves trophies. Nothing illegal about it, but still just doesn't sit well with a lot of people. Having said that, it's Manchester City's call and it's hardly Trevor Chappell's underarm.

It's a long bow to say that their last game was the one that has really mattered in the league this season and not the 19 that preceded it. They've lost one game all season (next best is five) and conceded 10 goals (next best is 24). If that's not a sign that they've been mentally tough this season - at least to this point - then I don't know what is.

I think the refs have over-corrected with Brandan. He's got absolutely nothing from them since that Perth game just after Christmas, even when he's being fouled, clear as day. Called it. Green line.

While it's certainly pretty premature (if not, completely arse about) to consider Sydney to be mentally weak, I can sort of see them being susceptible to a pretty poor run into the finals, given they're eight clear with only seven games to go. But, if we beat them, it's game on for the title, with Sydney playing Victory the following week. I think it's just a case of Sydney, in my opinion, not looking any more talented on paper than, say, Brisbane or Perth. They've just had the toughness to get a result in every game they've needed to (Cup Final aside). But now that the aura of invincibility has been broken, if we beat them this week, it could be a very interesting run home for them.

It's a line in the sand game for me. We last won two league games in a row in mid-October. We have absolutely pissed our last games against Sydney and Victory away and if we'd held on for the win in those two games (without even considering all the other games that we've thrown points away) we'd be one point off second place and still within touching distance of top spot (considering we have two more games against Sydney). Sydney is not 17 bloody points better than us and it's about time we showed that, in no uncertain terms.

No, but it sums up Fox Sports' coverage that it wasn't even mentioned during the game (at least not that I heard). God, those away games in NZ are painful. It's bad enough that they seem to have a designated Glory or United cheerleader in the commentary box every time we play in Perth or Adelaide, but when the state of the commentary during a game makes you wish for the 'quality' of Brenton Speed, it's a bit of a worry.

Good performance, but not great. I'm sure I'm not the only one with the nagging feeling that we might not have come back to win if Barbarouses had put away his penalty. Nevertheless a great confidence builder, without too many passengers and considering Cahill, Colazo, Kamau, Jakobsen and Franjic all played bit parts, or not at all (and all should be available for Friday). I'm not saying all of them should be automatic inclusions into the starting 11, but it illustrates that there's starting to be clear competition for spots and serious quality on the bench, especially if the younger players continue to be rewarded with opportunities (although tonight's lineup gives little reason for optimism for the likes of Genreau, Arzani, Crowley and Pierias). Just one result and a huge month coming up, but if you can't take a moment to enjoy tonight's performance after what feels like months of barely even looking like scoring on anything other then freak situations and penalties, I'm not sure that you'll have many happy moments as a City supporter.

Slightly off topic: I think it's a really tough call for Vukovic v Theo for the best keeper in the league this season. Vukovic will get the nod, I'm sure (nine goals against speaks for itself), but I think Vukovic has generally been steady, while Theo has regularly been spectacular (not one of his better games last night, though he wasn't terrible).

I think Colazo deserves a mention. Some of his crosses were sublime and we just had no-one capable of capitalising on them in the lineup. For all his detractors, Cahill would have had a picnic last night.

I think Borrello genuinely just slipped up, he didn't even look at the ref until the whistle went and seemed shocked that it was called a penalty. It's starting to shit me that the pundits are talking about two penalty howlers and they're showing Borrello's and Fitzgerald. There was a tug on Fitzgerald's shirt and a bump that caused him to lose his footing. Certainly pretty soft, but letter of the law, it was there. If a defender clearly grabs his opponent's shirt in the box, he's rolling the dice and he can't really have many complaints. No-one can honestly tell me they watched the entire game and think that Fitzgerald's penalty was a worse call than Caceres' non-penalty.

We shall see. At the end of the day, we only got a point out of the game, although the endeavour was first rate and we were genuinely desperately unlucky. But looking at our remaining games, there is an excellent chance of us doing a classic Heart/early-City "one step forward, three steps back" performance. Just out of interest, our remaining games: Wellington (a), Sydney (h), Central Coast (a), Newcastle (h), Western Sydney (a), Sydney (a), Adelaide (h), Perth (a). I'm sure that's what the players were discussing in their huddle after the game, that it was just one result and that that level of effort is now the benchmark. But let's see if they can do it.

Firstly, it was far from a perfect game by Kamau, but he did a great job in stepping up when we clearly needed him and getting on the board. Hopefully, breaking the goal drought is a big step for him this season. My explanation is the definition of a "vested interest". https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vested interest Kamau plays well for City and is able to make the leap to a higher standard league, he becomes a critical member of the Socceroos and so on. That improvement in his performance benefits City supporters and it benefits him. And that vested interest is why only the worst supporters would not want JVS, Redmayne, Aloisi, Ramsay, Williams, Mifsud, Koren, Dugandzic (I could go on) to have turned it around while they were still with us. Oh yes, and I've been there, done that and seen it with elite athletes (admittedly not in this sport). Seen players go from essentially nowhere to being at the top of their sport professionally, simply by never being satisfied, giving themselves honest appraisals and working harder than anyone else to fix their deficiencies and many, many players go in the opposite direction, dominating on size or natural ability in the junior ranks, never making those critical self assessments and ultimately getting to a professional level where everyone is good and fizzling out, because they never learnt to work. The ones that have succeeded, I could never imagine them making similar "so far, so good" comments when posed with a similar question. They'd say things like they're working on their consistency, that it's been a bit of an up and down season for both them and the team and even the main areas that they are working on to take the next step. There's no harm in public acknowledging that you have a lot of work to do to get where you want to go, especially when they're as seemingly obvious as Kamau's.

And, for all we hear about Bouzanis' superior distribution. we seemed to move from end to end as well as we have in months with Sorensen in the goal. We were just missing a bit of class up forward. If that side could play the same way and perhaps bring in Fornaroli and someone else (Jakobsen, Franjic, Brandan), we could really look sharp against Wellington.

That was maybe/probably what happened, in my opinion. But at the end of the day the Fitzgerald penalty was one of those 'bit soft/there'd be ten penalties per game if all of those were given, but you give the ref the opportunity' situations. The Borrello penalty and the Caceres non-penalty were probably two of the worst penalty decisions that you'll see this year. So even if it was a square up, he still owes us.

Rudan brought up that Rose went down easily for a free kick near the corner flag at the other end when Borrello clattered into his back about ten minutes before the penalty, saying that the ref was just being consistent. He's legitimately a joke.

I think he's been fantastic. With a proven scoring target up front, his crosses could have yielded another 2-3. He's been spot on. Kilkenny clearly culpable for that second goal, as far as I'm concerned. Surely you stay between your opponent and the goal in such a dangerous spot.

Don't care what happens over the last half hour: minimal changes to this lineup for next week's game (two tops). First league game since round 2 where I can legitimately say I'm proud of this team.