A
A
Anonymous
Guest
Re: Discuss Pellegirini...
A cracking post from top to bottom Matty.
I think it's fair to say from Soriano's own words that the club hierarchy don't see management appointments in terms of long dynasties ala Ferguson or Wenger, but rather cycles of 3 -5 years. What will be important moving forward as you allude to above, is continuity both on the field and off the field. This absolutely feeds into the idea of developing your own managers in house, but it also forces you as a club to ensure that basic footballing principles remain intact and any managerial appointment must first adhere to those principles.
To put it another way, and I know it can feel contentious at times, but it basically means success isn't the be all and end all of what we're building. Success will follow, in the eyes of the executive team and I suppose by extension Khaldoon and Sheikh Mansour, from adhering to certain footballing and non footballing principles and allowing them to become the identity of the club.
Pellegrini ticked all the most important boxes last summer (if you accept that success alone in terms of trophies wasn't an important box which it clearly wasn't) and has so far shown to be capable of not only working within the structure the club provide, but doing so in a manner which also incorporates actually tangible (trophy) success. That's not to say there won't be failures or moments where he doesn't succeed, but the pressure which will come to bare on him if he has a poor season will not be the kind of scrutiny Mancini was under last season because ultimately he's a good fit as a manager and by virtue of this will be afforded more time/space than someone who actively kicks against the structure the club has.
Matty said:
A cracking post from top to bottom Matty.
I think it's fair to say from Soriano's own words that the club hierarchy don't see management appointments in terms of long dynasties ala Ferguson or Wenger, but rather cycles of 3 -5 years. What will be important moving forward as you allude to above, is continuity both on the field and off the field. This absolutely feeds into the idea of developing your own managers in house, but it also forces you as a club to ensure that basic footballing principles remain intact and any managerial appointment must first adhere to those principles.
To put it another way, and I know it can feel contentious at times, but it basically means success isn't the be all and end all of what we're building. Success will follow, in the eyes of the executive team and I suppose by extension Khaldoon and Sheikh Mansour, from adhering to certain footballing and non footballing principles and allowing them to become the identity of the club.
Pellegrini ticked all the most important boxes last summer (if you accept that success alone in terms of trophies wasn't an important box which it clearly wasn't) and has so far shown to be capable of not only working within the structure the club provide, but doing so in a manner which also incorporates actually tangible (trophy) success. That's not to say there won't be failures or moments where he doesn't succeed, but the pressure which will come to bare on him if he has a poor season will not be the kind of scrutiny Mancini was under last season because ultimately he's a good fit as a manager and by virtue of this will be afforded more time/space than someone who actively kicks against the structure the club has.