Alan Hansen: "Sacking Hughes was a mistake without shadow...

[Citizen Green]

Mancini has us much more tighter at the back and scoring more goals, winning away games and is forming a good solid unit all over the pitch with the players Mark Hughes brought in.

Reason? Mancini is a better manager than Hughes. I liked Hughes myself, thought he was a decent manager who hit the jackpot when ADUG bought City, but at the end off the day he is limited, taking a squad that finished 9th with Eriksson, spending £100m on it and finishing 10th is proof of it for me.

I think in the long run he would of established us as a very good attacking top 6 side. Mancini on the other hand I think will turn us into a hard to beat, solid top 4 side, possibly champions. Just like he did at Inter.

Good move by the club IMO.

 

[the talisman]

Mancini has us much more tighter at the back and scoring more goals, winning away games and is forming a good solid unit all over the pitch with the players Mark Hughes brought in.

Reason? Mancini is a better manager than Hughes. I liked Hughes myself, thought he was a decent manager who hit the jackpot when ADUG bought City, but at the end off the day he is limited, taking a squad that finished 9th with Eriksson, spending £100m on it and finishing 10th is proof of it for me.

I think in the long run he would of established us as a very good attacking top 6 side. Mancini on the other hand I think will turn us into a hard to beat, solid top 4 side, possibly champions. Just like he did at Inter.

Good move by the club IMO.

nail, head

best post of the thread

 

[PSmyth07]

I hate watching MoTD when he's on it, same with Lawrensen. Don't have nothing against them personally, its just the shit they come out with when they're 'Analysing' the matches.

The only time it was good was when Billic was on it, they should get more managers/coaches to come on and analyse the games.

 

[fetaolive]

Gosh I thought we had put this one to bed. Reading through pages upon pages I feel like I have drifted into "off topic" and am actually reading about the election "result." Which reminds me......

 

[citygirl77]

Funny, because I blame him and his draws for our inability to finish 4th.

"DITTO"

 

[BufordUSABlue]

sorry dont agree,we need the likes of robbie in our squad, what sort of manager would pass on having that talent in the squad, i'll tell you, a defensive one.

Let's see where Robnho ends up eh.
I've a feeling that he wont come back to England at all, except to play for Brazil. I don't think the beaches of Blackpool and Rhyl really appeal to him.

He has no idea what he is missing :-) !!

 

[m27]

Mancini has us much more tighter at the back and scoring more goals, winning away games and is forming a good solid unit all over the pitch with the players Mark Hughes brought in.

Reason? Mancini is a better manager than Hughes. I liked Hughes myself, thought he was a decent manager who hit the jackpot when ADUG bought City, but at the end off the day he is limited, taking a squad that finished 9th with Eriksson, spending £100m on it and finishing 10th is proof of it for me.

I think in the long run he would of established us as a very good attacking top 6 side. Mancini on the other hand I think will turn us into a hard to beat, solid top 4 side, possibly champions. Just like he did at Inter.

Good move by the club IMO.

Great summing up and exactly my thoughts.

 

[Bonol]

Must be that second training session at 10 oclock at night that cracked 5th place.

 

[Fulop's Reflex]

yes....It's important that we axed Hughes and hired Mancini. It's an important appointment but it's not finished. We have an important season next year and the stability under Mancini will play an important factor in the long run.

 

[masterwig]

Funny, because I blame him and his draws for our inability to finish 4th.

Funny, because if Mancini had toughened us up and not lost five games in the second half of the season we'd have finished 4th. If we'd drawn just three of those games we'd be looking forward to Champions League football next season. Then there was the tame draw at home to Liverpool when we bottled it and settled for a point.

See, neither manager has a perfect record. I don't think Mancini has done significantly better than Hughes was in the first half of the season. He has the advantage of a team which has been together longer but the disadvantage of it not being a team of players he has signed. What he has done well is make us look more organised at the back. What he has done badly is turn us into a team that doesn't create many chances. I don't think he has the tactical ability to make game-winning substitutions but that's hard to say given the weak bench he's had. And in any case Hughes wasn't brilliant with that either. Hughes made us hard to beat (2 defeats in the first half of the season). I've said all along that that is the best way to start building. Make us hard to beat then go from there and turn the wins into draws. Mancini has turned us into a bit of a soft touch again in the crunch games. Everton twice, Hull and Stoke (cup) bullied us out of it.

We have Mancini now and I hope we stick with him. I'd rate him a 7/10 so far. There's a lot of improving to do but we have to give a manager time. We made a mistake not giving Hughes that time but he's history now. If Mancini sees the team through a bad run of form we can't just sack him and start again. The people running the club appointed him and they have to back their judgement. Keep changing managers and we'll never win anything.