Alessio cerci

Mancio said:
hgblue said:
Mancio said:
mancini did play balotelli when the guy was 17 in the 10 most important games of mancini's career. while he was risking to lose a serie A titles he preferred a teenager to very experienced players like crespo and cruz.

mancini has got the courage for play the teenagers , if they are good enough.

So what about Cerci Mancio? Is he good enough?

good enough for 6m ? its not hard to be good enough for 6m mate ;)

Ha ha. You know what I mean, is he good enough to make an impact here?
 
hgblue said:
Mancio said:
hgblue said:
So what about Cerci Mancio? Is he good enough?

good enough for 6m ? its not hard to be good enough for 6m mate ;)

Ha ha. You know what I mean, is he good enough to make an impact here?

don't know mate, really don't know. many italian average players have failed in england. the only ones who have succeded are the ones that where already very good in italy.

so i'd say cerci is a bet , but i have faith in mancini's knowledge so will see :)
 
Damocles said:
BillyShears said:
Mancini's record at City of giving youth it's head is shipping Nedum out on the basis that Boyata is better. Boyata then got himself sent off against Arsenal and was never seen again. Other than that - he's done fuck all for the young players coming through at our club. To be fair to him, it may well be that they're all just not good enough. My point is more in relation to the myth which is peddled by those obsessed with Hughes - which goes along the lines of: "Mancini brings through young players. Hughes would never had done that. He sent Hart out on loan, and Mancini recalled him" as if that one act makes him Arsene Wenger...

Mancini has given more first team debuts to Academy prospects than any manager since Kevin Keegan, and he's only a little behind him with Keegan been here for 4 years including in the First Division

Nimley, Cunningham, Boyata, McGivern, Wabara, Ibrahim, Vidal, Mee, Guidetti, Chantler, and Razak all made appearances in the first team under Mancini.

Hughes gave ONE guy his first appearance; Vladi Weiss in the final game of the season for ten minutes when we were already beating Bolton.

Boyata has made 26 appearances under Mancini, 9 of them since his Arsenal sending off. He played against Poznan, Juve, Villa, Reading, Sunderland, Liverpool, Blackburmn, Stoke and Bolton since his Arsenal sending off.

Mancini has literally brought through over DOUBLE the amount of youth players that Stuart Pearce did, a man who is recognised for this as part of his management.

Honestly Billy, you just keep showing yourself up as a man who has an extreme opinion and is blindly following it irrespective of the facts.

Giving a player a singular appearance does not in my book constitue bringing a player through.

I take your point about Boyata - I didn't realize he'd played quite so many times post Arsenal.

You know me well enough to know that I couldn't give a toss whether you or anyone else thinks I'm showing myself up. Everyone on this board, you included, does it from time to time. My opinions of Mancini may be extreme in your eyes, but there's enough who agree with them for me to not feel like the leper some of the Mancini trolls would like me to feel like...
 
Mancio said:
hgblue said:
Mancio said:
good enough for 6m ? its not hard to be good enough for 6m mate ;)

Ha ha. You know what I mean, is he good enough to make an impact here?

don't know mate, really don't know. many italian average players have failed in england. the only ones who have succeded are the ones that where already very good in italy.

so i'd say cerci is a bet , but i have faith in mancini's knowledge so will see :)

Fair enough. Fingers crossed it is then....
 
BillyShears said:
Giving a player a singular appearance does not in my book constitue bringing a player through.

There's an argument in this. Don't forget that we are working at a much higher level than ever before, and the cost of failure is much personally higher for any manager that we've had in the last 20 years. Football is as such now whereby you don't just throw youngsters out there and see if they sink or swim any more; this is stupid development. Firstly, you can wreck a player's confidence, you can wreck the confidence of the team mates in the player and you can wreck your plan to win the game. At the level we operate on now, we can't afford passengers.
However, the double edged sword is that if you think like this, you'll never bring anyone through.

To be honest, when Mancini first came in, he needed to make a statement to the fans, the board and especially to the players. So, instead of playing someone out of position in the centre of defence, he gave Boyata his debut in the Derby and told him to mark an in-form Rooney. That told every young player in the squad that if you're good enough, he'll put you in the game.

This aside, you can't just give every player a baptism of fire. I'm not sure what you're suggesting, that we should have dropped on of our £30m strikers to play John Guidetti? There's no proof that John Guidetti is good enough to play at this level. People criticise Jo because it's become a bit of a meme. At the end of the day, Jo is a well liked character who keeps his mouth shut and does his job. Couple of goals against Salzburg and Juve and a few assists this year in the cups; nothing special or anything but he's played pretty much all over the field in a time when he was needed. He always starts in the games that the youth players play in anyway, so it isn't like he's taking somebody's place. The people who are suggesting that Guidetti should have filled the specific role that Jo did have either never seen Guidetti play or never seen Jo play. Jo is a player who sits back and brings down the ball, then passes it to a man, Guidetti isn't.

I think that you need to be clearer on what exactly is "brought through". How many appearances counts? Mancini has shown a willingness to put youth on the pitch so that they can have the opportunity to showcase themselves. So far, only Boyata has made the leap to regular, but to be fair after looking through that list and thinking back, there's only really Razak who I thought looked like he belonged on the same field as the first 11, so it's not like he can pick inferior players.

I take your point about Boyata - I didn't realize he'd played quite so many times post Arsenal.

You know me well enough to know that I couldn't give a toss whether you or anyone else thinks I'm showing myself up. Everyone on this board, you included, does it from time to time. My opinions of Mancini may be extreme in your eyes, but there's enough who agree with them for me to not feel like the leper some of the Mancini trolls would like me to feel like...

My entire problem, is that you aren't looking at this the right way. You already have an opinion and you're looking for things to support your case, rather than looking at things and forming an opinion over them. And you're smart enough to know that just because one or two share your outlandish views, it doesn't mean that they are any more valid.
 
Damocles said:
There's an argument in this. Don't forget that we are working at a much higher level than ever before, and the cost of failure is much personally higher for any manager that we've had in the last 20 years. Football is as such now whereby you don't just throw youngsters out there and see if they sink or swim any more; this is stupid development. Firstly, you can wreck a player's confidence, you can wreck the confidence of the team mates in the player and you can wreck your plan to win the game. At the level we operate on now, we can't afford passengers.
However, the double edged sword is that if you think like this, you'll never bring anyone through.

It's a problem which all top clubs have. Unless your producing Arsenal or Barcelona quality youngsters who, it's very difficult to figure out how to develop them in the first team.

To be honest, when Mancini first came in, he needed to make a statement to the fans, the board and especially to the players. So, instead of playing someone out of position in the centre of defence, he gave Boyata his debut in the Derby and told him to mark an in-form Rooney. That told every young player in the squad that if you're good enough, he'll put you in the game.

We can argue the rights and wrongs about that decision all week - but I would much prefer that he'd picked the strongest XI he could've done, rather than using such an important match to make a statement to the young players.

This aside, you can't just give every player a baptism of fire. I'm not sure what you're suggesting, that we should have dropped on of our £30m strikers to play John Guidetti? There's no proof that John Guidetti is good enough to play at this level. People criticise Jo because it's become a bit of a meme. At the end of the day, Jo is a well liked character who keeps his mouth shut and does his job. Couple of goals against Salzburg and Juve and a few assists this year in the cups; nothing special or anything but he's played pretty much all over the field in a time when he was needed. He always starts in the games that the youth players play in anyway, so it isn't like he's taking somebody's place. The people who are suggesting that Guidetti should have filled the specific role that Jo did have either never seen Guidetti play or never seen Jo play. Jo is a player who sits back and brings down the ball, then passes it to a man, Guidetti isn't.

I think that you need to be clearer on what exactly is "brought through". How many appearances counts? Mancini has shown a willingness to put youth on the pitch so that they can have the opportunity to showcase themselves. So far, only Boyata has made the leap to regular, but to be fair after looking through that list and thinking back, there's only really Razak who I thought looked like he belonged on the same field as the first 11, so it's not like he can pick inferior players.

You completely misunderstand me. I said earlier in the thread it's very possible that most of the youngsters we have simply aren't good enough. That's not Mancini's fault at all - and I certainly don't expect him to blood any player who isn't good enough. As I said above, he should be picking the best team available to beat the opposition.


My entire problem, is that you aren't looking at this the right way. You already have an opinion and you're looking for things to support your case, rather than looking at things and forming an opinion over them. And you're smart enough to know that just because one or two share your outlandish views, it doesn't mean that they are any more valid.

Like I said, and I mean this with all due respect, I don't care what your problem is. You think I'm not being objective or that I'm being overly harsh on Mancini. I can live with that. My views might seem outlandish to you, but there's a hell of a lot more than one or two people who agree with them. In any case, even if nobody agreed with them, it wouldn't make them any less valid. Football supporters are predisposed to support everything to do with their club, so holding a negative opinion about an aspect of it is always going to be seen as going against the grain or being "outlandish".
 
Damocles said:
BillyShears said:
Giving a player a singular appearance does not in my book constitue bringing a player through.

There's an argument in this. Don't forget that we are working at a much higher level than ever before, and the cost of failure is much personally higher for any manager that we've had in the last 20 years. Football is as such now whereby you don't just throw youngsters out there and see if they sink or swim any more; this is stupid development. Firstly, you can wreck a player's confidence, you can wreck the confidence of the team mates in the player and you can wreck your plan to win the game. At the level we operate on now, we can't afford passengers.
However, the double edged sword is that if you think like this, you'll never bring anyone through.

To be honest, when Mancini first came in, he needed to make a statement to the fans, the board and especially to the players. So, instead of playing someone out of position in the centre of defence, he gave Boyata his debut in the Derby and told him to mark an in-form Rooney. That told every young player in the squad that if you're good enough, he'll put you in the game.

This aside, you can't just give every player a baptism of fire. I'm not sure what you're suggesting, that we should have dropped on of our £30m strikers to play John Guidetti? There's no proof that John Guidetti is good enough to play at this level. People criticise Jo because it's become a bit of a meme. At the end of the day, Jo is a well liked character who keeps his mouth shut and does his job. Couple of goals against Salzburg and Juve and a few assists this year in the cups; nothing special or anything but he's played pretty much all over the field in a time when he was needed. He always starts in the games that the youth players play in anyway, so it isn't like he's taking somebody's place. The people who are suggesting that Guidetti should have filled the specific role that Jo did have either never seen Guidetti play or never seen Jo play. Jo is a player who sits back and brings down the ball, then passes it to a man, Guidetti isn't.

I think that you need to be clearer on what exactly is "brought through". How many appearances counts? Mancini has shown a willingness to put youth on the pitch so that they can have the opportunity to showcase themselves. So far, only Boyata has made the leap to regular, but to be fair after looking through that list and thinking back, there's only really Razak who I thought looked like he belonged on the same field as the first 11, so it's not like he can pick inferior players.

I take your point about Boyata - I didn't realize he'd played quite so many times post Arsenal.

You know me well enough to know that I couldn't give a toss whether you or anyone else thinks I'm showing myself up. Everyone on this board, you included, does it from time to time. My opinions of Mancini may be extreme in your eyes, but there's enough who agree with them for me to not feel like the leper some of the Mancini trolls would like me to feel like...

My entire problem, is that you aren't looking at this the right way. You already have an opinion and you're looking for things to support your case, rather than looking at things and forming an opinion over them. And you're smart enough to know that just because one or two share your outlandish views, it doesn't mean that they are any more valid.

Excellent and worthwhile debate this, I favour Damocles personally.

I think most talent gets a run out in the early stages of cup competitions, or in the games immediately before or after a massive game, when key players need rest.

So the fact that next season we'll be in every cup competition going, more youth prospects will get an opportunity to play first team games.

Who was the lad who played the last 10 mins of a game around february time? Cant remember if it was Razak or not but if he is a lanky, confident and skillful player, then I personally would give him as many appearances as possible..
 
BillyShears said:
Football supporters are predisposed to support everything to do with their club, so holding a negative opinion about an aspect of it is always going to be seen as going against the grain or being "outlandish".

No, this isn't what you are doing. You aren't having a negative opinion on a subject, you are having a negative opinion on a manager, flying in the face of common logic, which then infects your opinion on every other subject.

This isn't an isolated incident, in every aspect on here, you seem to post that Mancini is a failure. We can barely discuss things on here any more concerning the management of the club without you piling in and saying how incompetent Mancini is, many times using warped facts to present your case.

Basically, you come across that you personally dislike Mancini (and seriously, do you even know him?) rather than you forming an opinion based on what you see at the club.
 
The young players would have got much more time on the pitch had they not got beat by west brim in the cc. I think it's a case that the bar has been raised much higher and the majority of our tout players just aren't good enough.
Don't forget hart and balo are still very young but people dont focus on it because they are exceptional. A lot of our young players will have a great career but it won't be at city. However one maybe two players out of each age group will save us 30million.
 
BillyShears said:
Neville Kneville said:
I've no problem with Mancini & think he's doing a fine job but as far as bringing yougsters through, well apart from Boyata, he hasn't, not at all. Just giving a player his debut doesn't count, you have to actually play them in order to 'bring them through'. He hasn't done that, he's just used them to fill holes in individual games.

He preferred to play Jo instead of any young players & that may have cost us Guidetti.

May also be that they're simply not up to it but either way it is most definitely a myth that he's done anything special for our Academy players so far.


Yep...that's pretty much what I was trying to say in a nutshell...
mancini once said he doesnt see good yooung players in our acamedy that might be the reason he is not playing them.
i think he is good in playng youngsters.comparing with mourinho who doesnt concider academy as a part of the club mancini is much better.
may be guidetti is not good enough.he sees what most of us heredoesnt see
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.