ESPN writer: Mancini is not the man to deliver City's dreams

[afro2007]

nobody talks about us that way except us the fans or supporters who have a say in the club but not u ESPN.simply trying to discourage us from looking at the fact at hand and what i wold have said to him the writer will be get the hell out of our way.

 

[jay_mcfc]

But on the wider point, not many foreign managers succeed in England. Many come with great reputations and fail. Capello appears to be going down that road. Poor English is a factor for me. Also, I feel the game is so different that these guy have to change their mindsets. Im not sure it's possible to export foreign methods and tactics wholesale.

Like you I'm no expert but I get the distinct impression that many foreign players are a bit more mature and self-sufficient. A bit less arsed about going out on the piss. A bit less ego-centric and pampered.

I don't think aloofness works over here. As a nation we are naturally anti-authoritarian, a bit bitchy and quite aggressive. I think Jose knew how to harness that. I once read about him going to a charity auction with his players at Chelsea and the whole squad including him were having a few beers and a right good laugh, outdoing each other on the bids. The writer commented that the bond was clear to see. Can you see Mancini doing this?

My other post was a reply to the thread, not just you, but thanks anyway.

Not every foreign manager succeeds but they have far more success than the Brits do. Take Ferguson out of the equation and the rest really are a desperate bunch of journeymen going from one mid-table club to another. Capello is doing a poor job as England manager but Steve Mclaren, the next best English manager apparently, screwed that up long before Capello got anywhere near the team. English is reasonably important but not the be all and end all. Ranieri at Chelsea couldn't speak more than a few words of English but he did a cracking job. Besides, there is nothing wrong with Mancini's English. You can see him opening up more in interviews and I bet when he's addressing the players his English is much better than he shows on tv.

The problems you mention about the British traits compared with foreigners are solely the fault and attitude of our homegrown players. To think that because we're playing in England so we need to adhere to English society rules is naive. You only have to look at the list of the players in our squad who are going backwards and will be leaving as soon as they can be offloaded to see that the problems lie with the English players. Not everyone will agree with that but imo it is the English that need to realise they're paid very well to do a job and part of that job is to be an athlete. If they can't reign in their behaviour for the length of their £100k per week contracts here then I don't want them to be honest. Not sure I think much of the Mourinho story either, yes it would be good if everyone was singing off the same hymn sheet but I fear you're under estimating the job Mancini is trying to do in turning this club from where we've been to where we want to go. That in itself is a hundred times harder than what Mourinho had to do with Chelsea. Every step we take up the league now is the hardest because of the quality and size of the clubs above us. Getting to 4th is the easy bit, the work starts now and it seems Mancini understands this more than our fans do.

 

[Matty]

There are certain parts of that article that I disagree with, however in equal measure there are parts I find I'm nodding along to whilst reading it.

Mancini, for me, isn't the manager that will deliver City the title. He'll no doubt achieve Champion's League football, but I just don't see him masterminding a title challenge that sees us finish above United, Chelsea and Arsenal. I see him as tactically inferior to Ferguson, Ancelotti and Wenger.

Please expand....Mancini's team has beaten Chelsea on the last 3 occasions in the league.

Didnt we beat Arsenal at our place last year in the league and cup and draw away?

Winning head-to-head matches against other "big" teams doesn't equate to you being tactically superior to the opposing manager, certainly not in the long run. Sunderland beat Chelsea 3-0 last weekend, does that make Steve Bruce Ancelotti's tactical superior? Of course not.

Ferguson, Ancelotti and Wenger have found a way to regularly win the games they SHOULD be winning, Mancnini hasn't necessarily demonstrated that with City thus far.

 

[Anonymous]

I'm a confirmed Mancini 'inner' so wanted to make my position clear before I started.

I've always thought Mancini will lead us forward, but have to admit, I do not know how far.

The games vs Liverpool and Chelsea this season show us how good we can be. The games against Blackpool and Newcastle show we can play poorly yet still win. However, the defeats against Wolves, West Brom and Sunderland - plus the mad error against Blackburn amply demonstrate, that in spite of spending significant amounts of cash, we are very much work in progress still.

The amount of stories 'leaked' or made up by the press is astonishing which feeds our paranoia. Then there's the style of football we play. Lots of us feel it is unnecessarily negative, others enjoy the tactical battle. We are certainly better defensively and we keep the ball very well. But that is not enough for a fan base used to seeing the attacking flair of Paul Walsh, David White, Peter Barnes, Mike Summerbee, Ali Benarbia, Eyal Berkovic etc.

We've got David Silva who can do this for us in spades. We've got defensive midfielders (really?) to protect the back four. What we're missing is a box to box, balls out aggressive midfielder. We have Johnson already at the club who can do this - but is he ever gonna get back and play, let alone to the level he was previously? So we need to buy one, but who could we realistically get?

My final point is that for most of us, we do not know what success looks or feels like. The level of expectation has been cranked up to a Spinal Tap 11 and with that comes the fear of failure. What the others will say if we fail; look at all that money; still a comedy club; another false dawn.

I don't believe we'll fail. I still like Mancini, I still think we will succeed with him but do question how he has us playing sometimes. But I do think, in spite of targets or trajectories, success will perhaps take a little longer than we are currently demanding.

 

[felixbg]

no, not at all. agreeing with some of the article is fair enough. maybe mancini isn't suited for england, however there is no way you agree with the article portraying mancini as never having won anything, our owners as being idiots for appointing a nobody, whilst sarcasticly mocking ballotelli as being a complete lunatic, tevez a puff & johnson (adam ;) ) a raging piss-head. manager, players and owners, im surprised he didnt find a way to insult our support or mock our history.

 

[Mike D]

When he starts comparing Mancini with Hughes the whole thing just falls on its arse. Hughes has won and will win nothing as manager Mancini has the medals to back him up.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

When he starts comparing Mancini with Hughes the whole thing just falls on its arse. Hughes has won and will win nothing as manager Mancini has the medals to back him up.

No it doesn't. The past doesnt matter a jot.

Both have been manager at Manchester City and spent a fucking fortune.

It is fair enough to compare their records. Mancini spent money to improve Hughes's squad to it would be difficult to argue that his results should be better than Hughes's.

 

[ono]

The author of the article falls into the same trap as everyone else when dis-crediting Mancini for his Scudetto wins.

It is correct that Inter finished 3rd when Juventus won the Scudetto. In the second season, Juventus were relegated, Milan were deducted 8 points, Fiorentina deducted 15 points, Lazio deducted 3 points and Reggina deducted 11 points.

What the author fails to mention is that Inter still won the league by a margin of 22 points, with Roma finishing second (Roma were never deducted points in the first place). Milan finished in 4th, 36 points behind Inter. Without their deduction, Milan would have still finished 28 points behind Inter.

The only detraction i can make is the fact that Juventus weren't present in the league. However, since Inter recorded 17 straight league wins in a row, taking 97 points, i find it hard to make a case for Juventus challenging them.

Juventus' relegation did enable Inter to sign Zlatan Ibrahimovic and i've often read about this being the reason for Inter's Scudetto win, but again this isn't really fair. Ibrahimovic wasn't prolific at Juventus, nor did he play as often as a central striker. He finished the 2005/2006 season with 7 league goals in 34 games. Mancini deserves credit for seeing something in him and for turning him into a world class player, as opposed to being merely a technically gifted player.

At Inter, Ibrahimovic became more prolific than he had ever been. He scored 15 league goals in his first season for Inter, although the rest of the team were responsible for the other 65. They were hardly a one man team.

During Mancini's 3rd season, Inter held an 11 point lead over Roma only to wobble a little down the stretch. This allowed Roma to still be in with a shout on the final day of the season. Inter won with Ibrahimovic scoring both goals and Roma drew their game. Maybe this is where the 'one man team' comes from as Inter struggled by their standards, when he was injured. However he still only scored 17 out of Inter's 69 League goals.

It's odd that you never hear about Ibrahimovic taking the credit for Mourinho's first title win, despite scoring 25 league goals in 35 games during Mourinho's 1st Scudetto win. Besides, Mancini took a lot of flak for almost allowing Roma to catch them during the 2007/2008 season. Last season Mourinho's Inter were actually over-taken by Roma, only for Roma to throw it away at home to Sampdoria. It wasn't the only time Inter got out of jail. I remember the great game against Siena where they were 3-2 down in the 89th minute. Sneijder scored a long range free-kick and i think Walter Samuel scored the winner, even though he was a mile offside.

Anyway, another striker, Diego Milito was on fire for Inter and he went on to score the title clinching winner against Siena in the return fixture, on the last day of the season, as well as scoring the winner in the Coppa Italia final, and of course the two great goals in the Champions League final. Again, no mention of Mourinho's Inter being a one man team.

I think some people's faces fit with the media, and some don't. I can guarantee that if when we win something with Mancini in charge, the press will credit Tevez for it. I just hope we don't cave in to their agenda before then.

 

[hgblue]

no, not at all. agreeing with some of the article is fair enough. maybe mancini isn't suited for england, however there is no way you agree with the article portraying mancini as never having won anything, our owners as being idiots for appointing a nobody, whilst sarcasticly mocking ballotelli as being a complete lunatic, tevez a puff & johnson (adam ;) ) a raging piss-head. manager, players and owners, im surprised he didnt find a way to insult our support or mock our history.

Can't speak for anyone else but my reply clearly stated that the article accurately represented how a minority feel about MANCINI. Like it or not, some of his previous achievements are tainted by what was happening in Italy at the time imo, and he was sacked for failing miserably in the CL, something that a top quality manager was able to achieve within two years.

 

[i kne albert davy]

There are certain parts of that article that I disagree with, however in equal measure there are parts I find I'm nodding along to whilst reading it.

Mancini, for me, isn't the manager that will deliver City the title. He'll no doubt achieve Champion's League football, but I just don't see him masterminding a title challenge that sees us finish above United, Chelsea and Arsenal. I see him as tactically inferior to Ferguson, Ancelotti and Wenger.

Please expand....Mancini's team has beaten Chelsea on the last 3 occasions in the league.

Didnt we beat Arsenal at our place last year in the league and cup and draw away?

don't want to picky with the facts but mancinis team has only beat chelsea in the league the last 2 times the other win was hughes team as was the defeat of arsenal in league and cup the nil nil at emirates and the nil 3 at home were mancinis