There's a difference between being gung-ho and probably being destroyed and being defensive but trying to counter attack.
I'm a bit surprised so many contributors to this thread can't see the difference.
I don't know how it turned out in the end but on commentary we were on the verge of setting a new record for low possession and Manchester City beating their record of passes in any game. This is not the way for us, or anyone else, to play.
It's hardly surprising as early in the game we had everyone within 35 yards of our own goal, so unsurprisingly when we did manage to make a challenge and nick the ball, we had no hope of getting it, or our players, any further up the field.
Although I made a passing comment on Shoutbox and was instantly patronised for it (yes, I have seen Man City play before, as I have the old Barcelona under Guardiola etc) I've seen enough to know how to try and make some sort of dent in vastly superior possession sides like this, and the only way is to use the boilerplate defence of two lnes of four about 10 yards apart strung across the 18-yard line, but have the bravery to leave one, or even two, higher up the pitch. Then, when you can get possession you have a reasonable chance of a counter attack before they steal the ball again, or stop your counter by fouling the runner out of defence.
What happened this afternoon was that, when we did get decent possession, we usually managed to turn back towards our own goal. It's bad enough having 80+ minutes of Manchester City attacking without us doing that to ourselves as well.
I'm relieved it was only a two goal deficit and that's the only positive from a team perspective.