Confused....and angry

[jay_mcfc]

At the risk of repeating myself and others, I've got no problem with Hughes receiving a considerable amount of criticism for the part he has played in the disappointment that this season has been so far. What I find completely and utterly blinkered however, is this view that the players are somehow blameless and that if they don't perform then it is Hughes' fault. It's a view that is just plain wrong. Not opinion... just wrong.

Hughes' tactics and selections have at time bordered on insane but once those players are on the pitch they have a responsibility to him, the club, us, hell even themselves, to put in a hard graft and do what they can. Everyone has off days, I get that, but when competent players continually put in sub standard performances then I question them and them alone.

As I said, I'll blame Hughes for his apparent tactical ineptitude and for picking dross such as Vassell and Ball when he had better options, but I won't blame him for the players on the pitch playing like they have nothing riding on it.

I don't want Hughes to be sacked if I'm honest, but I would completely understand if he was and wouldn't be too bothered. That said, regardless of the manager in charge, I want to see a considerable amount of deadwood around Eastlands banished from the club for good.

Nobody is saying the players are 'blameless', and that's because they aren't. They've under performed badly this season and whatever we say about Hughes it is ultimately the players that go out and play. However there is a huge difference in being 'blameless' and being 'to blame'. Whilst they're clearly not blameless they are a million miles away from being the blame. Whatever happens on a football field the buck stops with the manager and that is that. He is failing badly as manager of MCFC and whilst I agree that there are plenty of players that need moving on, Hughes has got plenty to work with and we shouldn't be performing as poorly as we are.

Your last paragraph just about sums up the belief of a lot of our supporters and my response to that is to say it's a little bit gutless. I don't want to have in my mind that I don't really care one way or another if the manager is sacked. I want to be 100% behind him, to have the faith in him that even during bad times I can see his vision and aims for the club. I want to respect and admire him, I want him to show me what he's capable of, I want him to admit when he's wrong, I want him to control the dressing room, I want players to respect him and to go onto the football field with a mindset where they'd run through brick walls for him. Sadly MH is failing on every single point. He doesn't excite me, he can't take us where we want to go, he's lost some players, his performance so far is a shambles and in my mind the future under Hughes is about as average as Blackburn under Fat Sam.

 

[Wooderbeen]

It's not gutless - not too sure what you mean by that. To me, it's sticking to my original argument of giving the man time. I firmly believe that a manager can only be judged over the course of a full season, which Hughes hasn't had. I can understand people being upset, frustrated, even angry with our lack of progress, but I'm not going to change my view game by game. A full season is exactly that; not half a season, a bad run or an early cup exit. With the exception of being in a serious relegation fight come March, I can't see the harm in giving Hughes more time and money to bring in the personnel he wants.

Call me an optimist but I think we'll match where we finished last year and maybe improve on it.

With regard to the players, I still find it confusing and a touch amusing that you're quite willing to suggest that they aren't 'blameless' but they also aren't 'to blame' without affording Hughes exactly the same courtesy. I don't think I'll be changing any opinions today, nor do I want to, but I'd still like to see a bit more clarity and a bit less hypocrisy on both sides of the Hughes debate.

Oh and in response to your last paragraph... are you really saying it's 100% backing or nothing? There are shades of grey in football. Please don't misinterpret my understanding of our current situation or my defence of Hughes as mere apathy.

 

[jay_mcfc]

Your post suggests I've changed my mind as a result of current form...that would be wrong. I was against the Hughes appointment from the start because I didn't like him and I didn't like his management style. I still thought he was a decent manager and would do a decent job however, much to my surprise if I'm honest, he's been appalling. Just about everything that could go wrong has done. He's failing in every aspect of management a manager can fail in with the exception of some very good signings. But my problem with Hughes has never been about current form, that's just the final straw for me. My problem is his management style and how far he can take us and on current evidence that is not very far. I could accept certain aspects of his management if he istilled a bit of excitement or if I had faith in him, unfortunately I have neither. He's a distinctly average manager in my opinion and we've got him at exactly the wrong time. Had he came just after KK or just after Pearce then things might have been different but as it stands he just isn't what we need.

 

[Anonymous]

Good post Jay, agree with everything. Allthough i think Parker and Bridge are good signings because they are better than Ball and Fernandes.

 

[Wooderbeen]

All fair points. I too was completely underwhelmed by his appointment especially as they got rid of a bit of a fans' favourite, but from the second he was appointed I've been behind him and said that he needed time to make his own mark on the team. Maybe that's the difference. I'm not saying one way is right and one way is wrong, but it does occur to me that some (not all) have had a vendetta against the man from the get go. You say your opinion of him has nothing to do with our current form but I would suggest that is the single most important factor, which is why I'm very quick to point out I understand Hughes' critics.

We can't really know what Hughes is like in the dressing room, the same way we can't really what's he like on the training ground, the same way we can't know for sure that Elano is the trouble making monster we're led to believe, etc. etc.. We can speculate sure, but it seems wrong to base your entire opinion of him on speculation. Do we really know Hughes' management style under a completely different set of circumstances than he had at Blackburn? I've certainly not seen much clobbering from our side this year (in fact we need more if you ask me) and our football has ranged from pathetic to sublime. As for not being exciting, well I too hate the position we're in but I do believe we've seen much more exciting football this season by City than we did last, albeit sporadically at best. Second top goalscorers in the Premier League has surely got to suggest exciting football. I'd rather be top six with a negative goal difference, without a doubt, but you see my point.

That said, we do find ourselves in an uneviable position in the league table and Hughes must accept a good portion of the blame, as you said before the buck stops with him. I'll personally stick to my guns on this one and reassess the situation in a few months time. Given that the board seem to be sticking with Hughes for now, it's likely one of us will eventually be proven wrong.

 

[CBlue]

FFS - there is some shit in this thread.

City lack a back bone & are unbalanced.....when the fuck did this suddenly become an issue? Was it in pre-season? Was it in the middle of September? October? November? Did our management geniuses miss this small detail when assembling their squad to conquer Europe & an assault on the top 4? Why the fuck wasn't this addressed? Hughes was appointed manager in early June - it's not as if he had no time or resources to do it.

Hughes is a "Hard man" manager....great, I'm very happy for him. Unfortunately, I have no fucking idea what that is supposed to mean. Good management is about making the most effective use of the resources at your disposal. I'd hazard a guess that treating a room of millionaire employees as kids & fucking idiots isn't really the best approach in getting the best out of them. You treat them with respect & let them know your approach/plan to achieve success. If you can see that some aren't on board with that idea & show dissent to it then you move them on at the most convenient time for you & bring in resources that you feel will achieve success. What you don't do is alienate them when they are an integral part of the plan...you get the best out of them, by whatever means (i.e. you manage them) until you are able to strengthen/improve the resources. How many of the players that SGE inherited were part of his ideal squad? I would guess not too many...take a look at some of his early press conferences....praising Dunne/Richards/Johnson/Hart/Hamman/Ball/Ireland...these guys were walking on air - I would think that, long term, some of them weren't part of the master plan.

Players taking the piss out of the manager....good managers would take them to one side & talk to them. If it continued then a spell in the reserves...if it still continued then training with the youngsters etc. What you don't do is continue playing them while potentially creating unrest with the rest of the squad - not unless you want to create a scapegoat for your own management deficiencies...self fulfilling prophecy...see I told you so etc.

All the issues about player unrest seem to be down to piss poor management. The solution that the pro Hughes camp keep espousing is to not sack him because he is a really poor manager & it's all the fault of the players. Even Cook thinks he's not too good when he talked about him not wanting to leave his comfort zones.

Hughes is the local corner shop owner that has just been appointed the CEO of Walmart...what worked for him at the local store won't work at Walmart...he needs additional skill sets that he is showing he doesn't possess.

 

[HelloCity]

Your post suggests I've changed my mind as a result of current form...that would be wrong. I was against the Hughes appointment from the start because I didn't like him and I didn't like his management style. I still thought he was a decent manager and would do a decent job however, much to my surprise if I'm honest, he's been appalling. Just about everything that could go wrong has done. He's failing in every aspect of management a manager can fail in with the exception of some very good signings. But my problem with Hughes has never been about current form, that's just the final straw for me. My problem is his management style and how far he can take us and on current evidence that is not very far. I could accept certain aspects of his management if he istilled a bit of excitement or if I had faith in him, unfortunately I have neither. He's a distinctly average manager in my opinion and we've got him at exactly the wrong time. Had he came just after KK or just after Pearce then things might have been different but as it stands he just isn't what we need.

Says it all.

 

[Wooderbeen]

FFS - there is some shit in this thread.
You treat them with respect & let them know your approach/plan to achieve success. If you can see that some aren't on board with that idea & show dissent to it then you move them on at the most convenient time for you & bring in resources that you feel will achieve success. What you don't do is alienate them when they are an integral part of the plan...you get the best out of them, by whatever means (i.e. you manage them) until you are able to strengthen/improve the resources. How many of the players that SGE inherited were part of his ideal squad? I would guess not too many...take a look at some of his early press conferences....praising Dunne/Richards/Johnson/Hart/Hamman/Ball/Ireland...these guys were walking on air - I would think that, long term, some of them weren't part of the master plan.

Players taking the piss out of the manager....good managers would take them to one side & talk to them. If it continued then a spell in the reserves...if it still continued then training with the youngsters etc. What you don't do is continue playing them while potentially creating unrest with the rest of the squad - not unless you want to create a scapegoat for your own management deficiencies...self fulfilling prophecy...see I told you so etc.

All the issues about player unrest seem to be down to piss poor management. The solution that the pro Hughes camp keep espousing is to not sack him because he is a really poor manager & it's all the fault of the players. Even Cook thinks he's not too good when he talked about him not wanting to leave his comfort zones.

And which Premier League side were you in charge of then? I love these 'clever' posters who are convinced they have all the answers because they went on a Call Centre Management course once. It's laughable. 'Management for Dummies' can be typed out here all people want but the bottom line is nobody knows what goes on behind closed doors and how Hughes deals with individual players!

City languish in a place where none of us want them to be and I don't mind arguing the merits of the players or the manager until the cows come home, but let's not fool ourselves by thinking any one of us have a monopoly on knowing what is best for City... and beginning posts with 'FFS' doesn't make your point more valid.

 

[mancity1]

Agree CBLE and points well made it summarises our situation well.

I might add though that whoever in our club decided that it was best we bring in " the best credentialled young manager in British football " need to have a good look at how they go about doing their research before the next selection is made.

In the blame game which I am not a big fan of anyway as it doesn't help getting more points on the score sheet on matchdays those people have to be as accountable as everybody else.

I am not a fan of Cook going to the press and telling them about Hughes failings when its obvious to all and sundry that he needs to change his approach if he is to remain in the job for any length of time and by that I mean beyond the transfer window.

Maybe I am too pessimistic and cynical about this new dawn but I see nothing in Cook and his spin that gives me any confidence that things will get worse before they get better.

Until you get the right people at the top of the tree that know how to appoint the right people who are given responsibility for on field decisions and performance you will go nowhere or as Hughes already puts it 2 steps backwards to go one step forwards.

I thought at worst we would be on an even keel with our performance level of early last year results wise ( surely the loss of Petrov and Corluka have not made us a poor team overnight given who we have bought in )

Like some others have already concluded avoiding relegation is our only priority for this season and Hughes cry for premiership experience to " bolster the quality in the squad " is a clear indication that he knows if changes are not made to personnel in January thats the distinct possibility that faces us , however he will need to change as well and for the better and quickly otherwise expect more of the same but with a different face or three.

 

[CBlue]

And which Premier League side were you in charge of then? I love these 'clever' posters who are convinced they have all the answers because they went on a Call Centre Management course once. It's laughable. 'Management for Dummies' can be typed out here all people want but the bottom line is nobody knows what goes on behind closed doors and how Hughes deals with individual players!

City languish in a place where none of us want them to be and I don't mind arguing the merits of the players or the manager until the cows come home, but let's not fool ourselves by thinking any one of us have a monopoly on knowing what is best for City... and beginning posts with 'FFS' doesn't make your point more valid.

You know fuck all about me so please don't label me as clever....I'm as thick as pig shit. I'm working my way up to "Management for Dummies"...does it have lots of pretty pictures? I've also never had the opportunity to attend a Call Centre Management course are they any good? You must be speaking from experience? Or are you bullshitting?

Which Premier League side were you in charge of then?

Unfortunately, due to piss poor management we are being fed selective leaks about what is going on behind closed doors & it doesn't paint a pretty picture. Like I said, look at the approach a good manager took to inheriting a pretty poor squad & then take a look at our current management genius.

OK, let's argue the merits of our current manager....of you go...I'm at a loss to see any. I stated at the time of his appointment that he had demonstrated a very poor record against the top teams in the PL (forget Europe because he wasn't in them long enough to form an opinion) which would suggest a lack of tactical ability. But, he was our manager & I reserved judgement & was willing to see what he could do. I take no pleasure in saying that he has flattered to deceive.