Discuss Pellegrini (Pt 4)

[franksinatra]

You are backing yourself into a corner billy with your blind faith in Pellegrini-

What part of what i've posted above constitutes blind faith? I've said this before, but blind are those people who know fuck all about Pellegrini beyond what they've seen in the last few months, and try and pontificate about what they know when clearly what they know is very very limited. Certainly on the subject of Pellegrini.

he has turned the premier leagues best defence into a vulnerable shambles

- our hopeless vulnerability to simple balls over the top is beyond laughable

Again, lets talk facts. How many goals have been conceded because of nothing more than a simple ball over the top. ie. no mistake on a players' part. Just an easy ball.

- his continued preference to pick an inept Javi Garcia confuses all city fans

You mean when all other options are injured he plays Garcia. Not inept, pragmatic.

- his blind faith and arrogance in sticking with the old school 4-4-2 formation leaves us vulnerable to more flexible teams, e.g. Bayern

The old school 442 we've been playing for 2 years now? Notwithstanding that, Bayern was a fuck up. IMO the only really serious tactical blunder he's made going into a game.

- all we ever see is like for like substitutions. We never see a positive substitution to win the game. Mancini had his faults but last week v Sunderland why not take off a CB in last 30 mins and throw on Dzeko. Instead we get striker on striker off

Well Balo left in January so if anything losing Balo was to the detriment of Mancinis reign. The money spent may have replaced players but, with the exception of Tevez the spending of the money and loaning out of Sinclair, Barry etc was the choice of management. Gareth Barry would have happily stayed but the management chose to replace him with a 29 year old costing 33 million. Similarly Sinclair was loaned out and replaced by a player costing 17 million. Demichaelis could have also been picked up for free a month before we signed him also.

Surely it is obvious those decisions will be judged and the additional cost scrutinised. Similarly Mancini was judged on his signings and I fail to remember any objectivity in that debate stating he had to replace Bellamy, Ireland, Robinho, Adebayor and rightly not as these decisions along with the league position is what we judge managers on.

 

[NQCitizen]

[

A lot of this is one sided exaggerations of fair points.

Villarreal did have a good team before him, reaching the semis of the uefa.

Pellegrini did finish second but he also finished 5th, 7th and 8th.

His jaunts in Europe were not always as successful as you make out, he made the semis getting through the 16 and QFs on away goals to Rangers and Inter.

Repeatedly Villarreal finished too low in the league to qualify for the CL.

You moan about the standard of discussion yet make up an entirely new narrative for people to nod along to.

Maybe you should check the voracity of your facts. If you want a discussion then lets have an accurate one. Villareal finished 3rd, 7th, 5th, 2nd, and 5th under Pellegrini in his five years in charge. It's noticeable that two of the times he finished outside the top 4 his team were playing CL football with a squad certainly limited in size. I believe this to be excellent for a club the size of Swansea. His jaunts into Europe you say were "not as successful as you make out". Actually the fact they were playing CL football regularly was in and of itself a success. The fact he always got through the group stages is widely respected because it was a remarkable feat for a club the size of Villareal with the squad of players they have.

So yes, I moan about the standard of discussion. Because posters like you come across as entirely disingenuous in the things you post as "facts".

EDIT:

You also have repeated a few times now that Villareal beat Ranger and Inter on away goals. Is beating a team on away goals not counted a win? Also, who was the manager of Inter Milan when Pellegrini's Villareal put them out of the CL? I've resisted asking you that but since you've now laboured this particular point for a third time I think it's worth noting.

I would imagine it was Mancini. I thought the away goals was relevant as it hinted at the closeness of the games.

I do apologise if I got the league standings wrong though (seems like I added an 8th by mistake) and I appreciate you clearing that up.

 

[LoveCity]

Gareth Barry would have happily stayed but the management chose to replace him with a 29 year old costing 33 million. Similarly Sinclair was loaned out and replaced by a player costing 17 million. Demichaelis could have also been picked up for free a month before we signed him also.

A few corrections here. I don't know if you're deliberately exaggerating things to make your point or unknowingly, but:

- Fernandinho had just turned 28 the month before joining City and cost £30million after he waived his loyalty bonus. So he's not 29 and won't be until nearly the end of the season. (and is far better than Barry, IMO, with more dimensions to his game)
- Navas cost £14.9million rising to £15.9million if we win stuff (in which case the added revenue offsets the extra).
- Demichelis joined Atletico closer to 2 months than 1 month before City signed him (11 July <-> 1 September), and yes City could have signed him for free, but were pursuing their main target Pepe at that point. So it's a moot point because as rich as the club is, they aren't in possession of psychic foresight or a time machine, and there was still a good chance they could have signed Pepe back in July (then Varane's injury was worse than expected and they refused any sort of deal).

 

[Anonymous]

Well Balo left in January so if anything losing Balo was to the detriment of Mancinis reign. The money spent may have replaced players but, with the exception of Tevez the spending of the money and loaning out of Sinclair, Barry etc was the choice of management. Gareth Barry would have happily stayed but the management chose to replace him with a 29 year old costing 33 million. Similarly Sinclair was loaned out and replaced by a player costing 17 million. Demichaelis could have also been picked up for free a month before we signed him also.

Surely it is obvious those decisions will be judged and the additional cost scrutinised. Similarly Mancini was judged on his signings and I fail to remember any objectivity in that debate stating he had to replace Bellamy, Ireland, Robinho, Adebayor and rightly not as these decisions along with the league position is what we judge managers on.

Surely it's obvious that if you sell/loan five players out and replace them with five players, you haven't added to your squad. You've replaced out going players. So saying "Pellegrini spent 100 million" is disingenuous. Everything else you've written is IMO to try and obfuscate the salient point. Which is simply five out/five in.

I don't dispute the spending has made the squad stronger, because Fernandinho is an upgrade on Barry, Navas on Sinclair, and Jovetic/Negredo on Balo/Tevez IMO. However when people talk about our squad being 100 million pounds stronger that's frankly a laughable assertion considering how many people think that the players we signed in fact weren't as good as the ones we let go.

There's more than one or two who simply cannot let a positive comment about Pellegrini pass without feeling the need to criticise him. That in and of itself is fair enough, it's the nature of forums. Unlike the little Hitlers last season who wanted all discussion on the manager banned because it wasn't fair, I happen to think both sides of the discussion are interesting. What I can't abide, I've said it before and I stand by it, are the small minority who didn't want Mancini sacked, and for that reason took against Pellegrini from even before he was appointed, and now take every opportunity to do down him down. That type of childish ignorance should be called out.

 

[blue ranger]

Well Balo left in January so if anything losing Balo was to the detriment of Mancinis reign. The money spent may have replaced players but, with the exception of Tevez the spending of the money and loaning out of Sinclair, Barry etc was the choice of management. Gareth Barry would have happily stayed but the management chose to replace him with a 29 year old costing 33 million. Similarly Sinclair was loaned out and replaced by a player costing 17 million. Demichaelis could have also been picked up for free a month before we signed him also.

Surely it is obvious those decisions will be judged and the additional cost scrutinised. Similarly Mancini was judged on his signings and I fail to remember any objectivity in that debate stating he had to replace Bellamy, Ireland, Robinho, Adebayor and rightly not as these decisions along with the league position is what we judge managers on.

Surely it's obvious that if you sell/loan five players out and replace them with five players, you haven't added to your squad. You've replaced out going players. So saying "Pellegrini spent 100 million" is disingenuous. Everything else you've written is IMO to try and obfuscate the salient point. Which is simply five out/five in.

I don't dispute the spending has made the squad stronger, because Fernandinho is an upgrade on Barry, Navas on Sinclair, and Jovetic/Negredo on Balo/Tevez IMO. However when people talk about our squad being 100 million pounds stronger that's frankly a laughable assertion considering how many people think that the players we signed in fact weren't as good as the ones we let go.

There's more than one or two who simply cannot let a positive comment about Pellegrini pass without feeling the need to criticise him. That in and of itself is fair enough, it's the nature of forums. Unlike the little Hitlers last season who wanted all discussion on the manager banned because it wasn't fair, I happen to think both sides of the discussion are interesting. What I can't abide, I've said it before and I stand by it, are the small minority who didn't want Mancini sacked, and for that reason took against Pellegrini from even before he was appointed, and now take every opportunity to do down him down. That type of childish ignorance should be called out.

This is an interesting discussion m8 - but I really don't get your optimism for the Pellegrini regime. Yes we were fantastic against Newcastle and Norwich but he has made the same mistakes in each of the away games. Tinkering with his team and taking the opposition lightly IMO.

Disagree about Garcia being his only option in mid. IMO Milner could do a better job in the middle and I'm sure that Rodwell could do too. I hope he turns it around - he seems a nice bloke - but early signs are that he doesn't look a great manager.

Let's not forget that he has taken over what's widely acknowledged as the best squad in the division - but we've already scraped past hull and lost away to Cardiff, villa and Sunderland. Hardly premier league heavyweights!

 

[Anonymous]

This is an interesting discussion m8 - but I really don't get your optimism for the Pellegrini regime. Yes we were fantastic against Newcastle and Norwich but he has made the same mistakes in each of the away games. Tinkering with his team and taking the opposition lightly IMO.

Disagree about Garcia being his only option in mid. IMO Milner could do a better job in the middle and I'm sure that Rodwell could do too. I hope he turns it around - he seems a nice bloke - but early signs are that he doesn't look a great manager.

Let's not forget that he has taken over what's widely acknowledged as the best squad in the division - but we've already scraped past hull and lost away to Cardiff, villa and Sunderland. Hardly premier league heavyweights!

I suppose it becomes about what you want to focus on. Our goal difference is already well ahead of our rivals. We've qualified from our CL group. Our home form is as good as it has been in the last couple of seasons. We've won the first derby we've played. Our out of form players from last season are all back at close to their best.

Yes, I totally agree the away results haven't been in the least bit good enough. But I can balance that with the performances we put in against the likes of Chelsea and Villa where but for being very very unlucky we'd have at least taken a point.

And yes, there's no doubt Pellegrini's made mistakes since he joined the club, and will continue to do so. I don't think any manager is infallible. But real judgements on his class as a manager can't be made based on 11 league games in charge IMO.

 

[franksinatra]

Gareth Barry would have happily stayed but the management chose to replace him with a 29 year old costing 33 million. Similarly Sinclair was loaned out and replaced by a player costing 17 million. Demichaelis could have also been picked up for free a month before we signed him also.

A few corrections here. I don't know if you're deliberately exaggerating things to make your point or unknowingly, but:

- Fernandinho had just turned 28 the month before joining City and cost £30million after he waived his loyalty bonus. So he's not 29 and won't be until nearly the end of the season. (and is far better than Barry, IMO, with more dimensions to his game)
- Navas cost £14.9million rising to £15.9million if we win stuff (in which case the added revenue offsets the extra).
- Demichelis joined Atletico closer to 2 months than 1 month before City signed him (11 July <-> 1 September), and yes City could have signed him for free, but were pursuing their main target Pepe at that point. So it's a moot point because as rich as the club is, they aren't in possession of psychic foresight or a time machine, and there was still a good chance they could have signed Pepe back in July (then Varane's injury was worse than expected and they refused any sort of deal).

I must admit I never checked my points on wikipedia and I know that such inaccuracies make the primary point of any discussion redundant to some on this forum.

However the point I was making was naturally when players are sold and others brought in it is perfectly natural to compare the players leaving, particualarly if this is the managers choice, and compare them and the cost with the players being signed.

If fernandinho is better than Barry is open to discussion however I concede he needed to be replaced eventually, howver his current form suggests he had another season at the highest level. Fernandinho definitely has a wider skill set however I would argue he does not protect the back four or understand the english league as well as Gareth Barry and the relevance of his age (28) is he will have little sell on value and probably only 3 or four year at best playing at his current level. So I think the fee, choice of player and loaning Gareth Barry is worthy of discussion.

If Navas cost 14.9 million/15.9 million or 17 million the point was in relation to whether this is worthy of debate i.e spending X amount of money on a player.

Demichaelis you are correct we pursued Pepe and one point we can agree on the Sheikh does not have a time machine, however the fact we spent the 4 million to replace Toure on a 32 year old, again with no sell on value, and limited time span is once again worthy of debate whether this is value for money.

 

[franksinatra]

Well Balo left in January so if anything losing Balo was to the detriment of Mancinis reign. The money spent may have replaced players but, with the exception of Tevez the spending of the money and loaning out of Sinclair, Barry etc was the choice of management. Gareth Barry would have happily stayed but the management chose to replace him with a 29 year old costing 33 million. Similarly Sinclair was loaned out and replaced by a player costing 17 million. Demichaelis could have also been picked up for free a month before we signed him also.

Surely it is obvious those decisions will be judged and the additional cost scrutinised. Similarly Mancini was judged on his signings and I fail to remember any objectivity in that debate stating he had to replace Bellamy, Ireland, Robinho, Adebayor and rightly not as these decisions along with the league position is what we judge managers on.

Surely it's obvious that if you sell/loan five players out and replace them with five players, you haven't added to your squad. You've replaced out going players. So saying "Pellegrini spent 100 million" is disingenuous. Everything else you've written is IMO to try and obfuscate the salient point. Which is simply five out/five in.

I don't dispute the spending has made the squad stronger, because Fernandinho is an upgrade on Barry, Navas on Sinclair, and Jovetic/Negredo on Balo/Tevez IMO. However when people talk about our squad being 100 million pounds stronger that's frankly a laughable assertion considering how many people think that the players we signed in fact weren't as good as the ones we let go.

There's more than one or two who simply cannot let a positive comment about Pellegrini pass without feeling the need to criticise him. That in and of itself is fair enough, it's the nature of forums. Unlike the little Hitlers last season who wanted all discussion on the manager banned because it wasn't fair, I happen to think both sides of the discussion are interesting. What I can't abide, I've said it before and I stand by it, are the small minority who didn't want Mancini sacked, and for that reason took against Pellegrini from even before he was appointed, and now take every opportunity to do down him down. That type of childish ignorance should be called out.

Well I must admit I did not want Mancini sacked and admittedly had my reservations about Pellegrini from the outset but like to think my arguments are objective and reflect my view on the teams performances.

Negredo will prove to be a great signing and I still have high hopes for Jovetic. I have not been overly impressed with Fernandinho and think the money could have been better spent on Ozil the one world class player available this summer. Similarly Demichaelis I believe was partially culpable for the goal at Sunderland, inexplicably stepping in front of the ball rather than covering behind James Milner. Yes the nature of forums is when things go wrong we are like a moth to flame we like to vent our spleen. Incidentally I still think we will be successful this year as our greatest nemesis has been severely weakened and no other club has picked up the baton. This unquestionably is our best chance, with our best squad of cementing our place as the best team in England. It would be a shame if that does not happen

 

[Anonymous]

Incidentally I still think we will be successful this year as our greatest nemesis has been severely weakened and no other club has picked up the baton. This unquestionably is our best chance, with our best squad of cementing our place as the best team in England. It would be a shame if that does not happen

I think it's not about it being our best chance, we'll be in with a fantastic chance every season because we're one of the best teams in the league with one of the best squads, if not the best squad. I agree though that it will be a damn shame and an opportunity missed if we don't win the league this season. I happen to think we will, and if we don't we'll miss out by the skin of our teeth. None of this "we'll struggle to finish in the top 4" nonsense.

BTW ... I don't consider you in the minority who've gone against Pellegrini simply because of your love for Mancini. Those who've done that stand out like a naked Kelly Brook in a mosque.

 

[franksinatra]

Incidentally I still think we will be successful this year as our greatest nemesis has been severely weakened and no other club has picked up the baton. This unquestionably is our best chance, with our best squad of cementing our place as the best team in England. It would be a shame if that does not happen

I think it's not about it being our best chance, we'll be in with a fantastic chance every season because we're one of the best teams in the league with one of the best squads, if not the best squad. I agree though that it will be a damn shame and an opportunity missed if we don't win the league this season. I happen to think we will, and if we don't we'll miss out by the skin of our teeth. None of this "we'll struggle to finish in the top 4" nonsense.

BTW ... I don't consider you in the minority who've gone against Pellegrini simply because of your love for Mancini. Those who've done that stand out like a naked Kelly Brook in a mosque.

My love for Mancini was based on the success he brought to the club and as a fan It was a joy to watch the defensive improve initially from the shambles under Hughes, the change in formation to Yaya playing behind the striker and then in the year we won the league the signing of Aguero to add the goals required to make a serious challenge. I watched the team evolve and improve and that excited me as a fan, watching history in the making.

At the minute I still think we are forcing the pressing game onto a set of players not suitable to cope and so I have my reservations and think a few of the uncharacteristic defensive errors are of a consequence of this change. However if the team clicks and the pressing game does not undermine the side defensively I can see the benefits and will happily give Pellegrini the plaudits. I still think it will be between us and Chelsea once the season comes down to the April sprint and I really hope these dropped points will not prove costly. That maybe adds to the frustration in some ways, this season the fact the greatest thorn in our side has retired and yet we do not appear to be taking full advantage.