FAO all Hughes outers

So after decades of chopping and changing managers we've won fuck-all, her's a question for you Moomba..

Surely we've had a manager we should have stuck by. If so which one/s ??

moomba said:
allyboy said:
haven't we learnt from the scum, arse, villa and neverton that consitency with a manager brings results.
Click to expand...


Consistency with the right manager brings results, it's an important difference.
Click to expand...
 
chazmcfc said:
ARE YOU FUCKING HAPPY NOW EH ?

CLUB IS FUCKING IMPLODING.
Click to expand...

Hughes was awful. Didn't make changes and just stuck with it. Least Mancini is trying different things. If you think this is something that is going to happen over night you are wrong.

YOU ALSO SEEM TO FORGET ITS HUGHES' FUCKIN PLAYERS THAT ARE PUTTING IN SHIT PERFORMANCES WEEK AFTER WEEK!
 
TFC said:
Whether you were in or out or shook it all about, the fact remains, the good Lord himself would struggle to get this lot playing as a cohesive unit.

Who will be next up to the poison chalice I wonder.....?

>:(
Click to expand...

And what the original poster doesn't understand is that the majority were all signed by Hughes.
 
TAD said:
£200Million wasn't spent by Mark FACT... Gary Cooke and Marwood signed at least 4 players against Hughes wish FACT. Management starts at the Top we happen 2 guys C&M who everyones pxxxxx off. I say keep Mancini and get rid of Cook and Marwood
Click to expand...

Fuck off with your lies!

Obvious that you have an agenda against Cook and Marwood. 2 posts in and its very clear!
 
The fact that Mancini's struggling to get anything out of these players doesn't make Mark Hughes any less shit than he actually was. You could argue that it means Mancini is shit as well, but it certainly doesn't suddenly transform Mark Hughes into Bill Shankly.
 
I can understand peoples frustrations at the moment with regards to Mancini but lets not kid ourselves into think Hughes was a top manager. The football we played under him was good at times but at other times we played like we had no idea what to do, i remember numerous threads on here after matches asking why do we continue to play the long ball, why don't we create more chances etc yet people on here are trying to make out that under Hughes we played free flowing football when we didn't. Would Hughes have done better than Mancini in the games Mancini has managed? Possibly but we'll never know so it's pretty pointless going over it

The owners and many of our fans thought Hughes wasn't the man to take us forward so they brought in a new manager. Mancini may or may not be the man to take us forward but it's silly to write him off so soon, just as it was silly to suggest how great a manager he was when we won our first four games

Last night we controlled the game for long spells and up until the sending off Stoke had one chance and scored. The sending off changed the game and through a shocking peice of keeping from Given we put ourselves on the back foot although we've only got ourselves to blame, 2 clear one on one chances and we didn't score either of them
 
de niro said:
the removal of hughes was the second worst desision city have ever made.

sacking joe mercer pips it............just.
Click to expand...

I really hope that those who say that we have a special manager lined up at the end of the season, and Hughes had to go because he got wind of it and issued an ultimatum, are right. Otherwise the decision to get rid mid season is baffling. I'd also like to nominate allowing our best player to become so unhappy with his lack of games that he had to be shipped out on loan as being up there in the 'worst decisions this club have ever made' stakes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.