Mattyc55 said:JULES said:bollox, there`s more moaning shit on here than anything else
I was referring to TMQ as an individual poster, obviously over the course of a day a lot of posts are going to be made from opposing perspectives, but when the same person makes the same points with a different title; I just dont get that. That also relates to the retorts that people reply to any sign of negativity or debate, were shot down with abuse about how we should count ourselves lucky that were not in the midst of a relegation battle. Its a forum, and were all city fans, were more than in our rights to have our say.
de niro said:scorer said:There is no team more beatable away from home than Burnley.....except for us.
Hughes was no better than Mancini hence we have a collective of goodplayers who do not compliment each others game at all.
and mancini is no better than hughes, so why change? we changed managers not because of poor results but because we were scared of good results, had hughes finished 4th or won a cup he would have been unsackable and with jose already lined up we could not have that could we.
hughes was sacked incase he did well.
no, he is jose's woman, they may even work together.Damocles said:de niro said:and mancini is no better than hughes, so why change? we changed managers not because of poor results but because we were scared of good results, had hughes finished 4th or won a cup he would have been unsackable and with jose already lined up we could not have that could we.
hughes was sacked incase he did well.
So why appoint a man with a huge history of winning trophies, instead of say, Alan Ball?
We would be in an even worse situation come June if Mancini finishes top four and we sack him.
de niro said:no, he is jose's woman, they may even work together.Damocles said:So why appoint a man with a huge history of winning trophies, instead of say, Alan Ball?
We would be in an even worse situation come June if Mancini finishes top four and we sack him.
TheMightyQuinn said:Mattyc55 said:I was referring to TMQ as an individual poster, obviously over the course of a day a lot of posts are going to be made from opposing perspectives, but when the same person makes the same points with a different title; I just dont get that. That also relates to the retorts that people reply to any sign of negativity or debate, were shot down with abuse about how we should count ourselves lucky that were not in the midst of a relegation battle. Its a forum, and were all city fans, were more than in our rights to have our say.
My apologies.
I admit, I get pissy when City get slagged.
Intelligent, reasoned debate is fine by me and I'm happy to partake but when it comes to posters preferring 3-3 draws to 'boring' 2-0 wins or mindless ignoring of facts then I do get agitated.
mammutly said:Mancini should be told now. TODAY. That he has exactly 3 years to make a success of the job or he can fuck off.
It should be made a water tight contract on both sides. No more questions. No more doubts. No more ifs or buts. Three years before any further review. Until then his job is cast iron safe and that's it.
Mattyc55 said:TheMightyQuinn said:We're joint 4th.
I've never known us to be so high in the table since I've been going.
I hated being shit, I hated not being in the top tier, I hated relegation, I hated the constant threat of relegation.
For me, this is a great time to be a blue.
I believe Mancini can deliver.
And people respect that, but when you forcefeed it us at least twice a day in differing topics, it doesnt half get tedious. I respect people's optimism and some of it I agree with, but as soon as anyone has anything negative to say about City or the way in which our manager/team is currently performing, the same old suspects have a go at us, or respond with a pointless thread which has been done a million times over. Pure attention seeking if you ask me.
Newlunar said:For 20 minutes last night we looked like a team. We were playing the ball around Stoke and there was not a lot they could do about it.
When Stoke got the ball they were lofting it into areas they thought might find one of their players and most of the time we simply tidied it up. Quite simply, they were poor. And their 'loudest fans in England' were muted.
Now I don't think we have a god given right to beat anyone, but when a team are well off their game I don't think it is unreasonable to expect our expensively assembled team to punish them.
And when our 25 milll striker turns them inside out and is clean through, the very least I expect is that he shoots and hits the target. If Sorensen saves it as he did with RSC later then fair enough he's done his job. But he shit out when he gave it to Bellamy.
The moment that chance went adrift I knew it would cost us and it did.
The remainder of the first half was spent trading 10 ft high balls with Stoke where both teams just went through the motions in a moronic stalemate.
In the second half we helped Stoke. We let the ball roll out of touch repeatedly. We had a free kick on the edge of their box that was so poor it culminated in one of our own players being booked trying to rescue us in the counter attack.
Our corners are basically nothing of a threat whatsoever...ever.
Our 25 mill striker is so indisciplined he goes anywhere and everywhere but where you want him.
We have no leader on the field. The players look like they have the world on their shoulders and rarely offer each other any inspiration.
De niro is right, there is definitley something wrong behind the scenes and it has developed over the last month since the Everton game.
To deny it is to be in denial.
Mattyc55 said:TheMightyQuinn said:My apologies.
I admit, I get pissy when City get slagged.
Intelligent, reasoned debate is fine by me and I'm happy to partake but when it comes to posters preferring 3-3 draws to 'boring' 2-0 wins or mindless ignoring of facts then I do get agitated.
Fair enough mate, I anticipate some decent debates with you in future as you do seem to have a good grasp on the game.