Ferran Soriano & Txiki Begiristain

[bluethai]

Mancini's disastrous season brought 2nd in the League and runner-up FA Cup. Now I'm looking forward to see what a peaceful and harmony season will bring come May though.

 

[BlueAnorak]

BTW I think they will be successful - I'm just saying the way it now is.

 

[daztrueblue91]

Soriano & Begiristain got shot of Mancini because they didn't get on with him. Their choice Pellegrini now has to do better than Mancini - i.e. 1 top rank trophy every season. That is what the owner demands and £92m on transfers says that Pellegrini has been given the ammunition. He now has to hit the ground running or he will be gone. Sooner rather than later.

I really hope they do it because there will be no transition period. Success is demanded and if it is not achieved quickly, Pellegrini will be gone in short order and probably Begiristain not far behind him. Maybe Soriano too if the appointment after Pellegrini doesn't do so well. Anyone who thinks otherwise is living in cloud cuckoo land.

Spot on. If the season is an absolute disaster they will all be out. Good job for them that we have a piss easy CL group.

First of all we don't have a 'piss easy' CL group, it gives us a favourable chance of qualifying but CSKA are no mugs and it would be foolish to write them off.

And to BlueAnorak how on earth have you managed to come up to that conclusion based on what has happened so far?

 

[moomba]

Re: Ferran Soriano & Txiki Begiristain

They've been bought in to improve the club financially and on the pitch. If they can do that it doesnt really matter who they hire and fire to get there.

I've been disappointed in some of the things they've done post the Mancini sacking, but as far as whether they're good for the club or not, we're a long way from knowing.

They deserve the benefit of the doubt. Its not as if they're football rookies, and nothing they've done do far has made me worry that we've got the wrong people in charge.

 

[BlueAnorak]

They've been bought in to improve the club financially and on the pitch. If they can do that it doesnt really matter who they hire and fire to get there.

I've been disappointed in some of the things they've done post the Mancini sacking, but as far as whether they're good for the club or not, we're a long way from knowing.

They deserve the benefit of the doubt. Its not as if they're football rookies, and nothing they've done do far has made me worry that we've got the wrong people in charge.

They have been given control, rightfully as they were put in charge by the owner. Their excuse (Mancini) is gone. They now have to step up to the plate - and talk is cheap.

Walking the walk is all that matters now and there is NO time to learn to walk.

 

[LoveCity]

Soriano and Txiki has been tasked with a long-term project that is already in progress, so even if this season is a disappointment they will be going nowhere (Soriano is also doing a fantastic job on the financial side). ADUG want as much stability as possible and wouldn't even have consented the sacking Mancini if he was able to get along with people and show himself to be compatible with the club's direction.

 

[Bill]

Both men deserve huge amounts of praise. The transfer business we've conducted is the best of the top 6 clubs with possibly the exception of Spurs.

mmmm, not only is the jury still out it hasn't even been picked yet.

better than Ed across the road I suppose.

 

[cmdub]

Re: Ferran Soriano & Txiki Begiristain

Both men deserve huge amounts of praise. The transfer business we've conducted is the best of the top 6 clubs with possibly the exception of Spurs.

mmmm, not only is the jury still out it hasn't even been picked yet.

better than Ed across the road I suppose.

I'll wait till Christmas to give any kind of real judgement but it seems like we've done good business on both ins & outs. Better than last summer I suppose.

 

[MadchesterCity]

The manager we had needed backing not sacking. In that they failed.

Agreed

 

[MadchesterCity]

A league and FA Cup winning manager who ended our trophy drought and took us into the Champions League for the first time but you want to call him a ****. Idiot.

He blatantly was. A despicably arrogant bad loser with abysmal man management skills. Sheikh Mansour's money won us those pots. Numerous managers could've achieved it and some with more diplomacy would still be in charge now.

What's the point of taking us in to the Champions League when we can't get past the group stages?

Nonsense.

Aren't you the notorious Hughes fanboy?

He couldn't do it could he? In spite of all the money he threw at it.

The denigration of Mancini's character and his achievements at City following his sacking, by some blues, really turns my stomach.

Seems to be fashionable now too, which is even worse.

Mancini was a hard task master, but his impact at City was immediate. He knocked heads together, when he was appointed he transformed us from a shambolic team of individuals who couldn't defend a two goal lead into a solid and cohesive unit almost overnight.

He was an autocrat, but at that period of our development it was effective. He accepted nothing but ultimate commitment to the cause, anyone who undermined him or didn't pull his weight was sent packing. We had countless players on the books who weren't fit for purpose, were here for all the wrong reasons (money) and didn't have the right attitude to be a success at City. Mancini either whipped them into shape or included them in a massive cull of deadwood.

Too many of the playing staff didn't have the attitude of winners, too many accepted defeat and didn't have the required mental fortitude to cut it at the level we aspired to.

Mancini recognised those players and disposed of them like household waste. A good thing as far as I'm concerned, we didn't have the time for sentiment back then.

The players whom Mancini recognised to be made right stuff were drilled and drilled until they knew and fully understood their role in his set-up, no stone was left unturned.

Numerous players were transformed from wildly inconsistent and under performing, to key stalwarts of the side that represents us in the Champions League today.

Kompany was on the bench when Mancini arrived. Usually deployed in defensive midfield, he was being kept out of central defence by the then manager's two big money signings, Lescott and Kolo Toure. Both players couldn't buy a clean sheet and then defence was a shambles. Mancini immediately introduced Kompany into the side, and transformed him into a player who is now considered one of the greatest players in his position, in the whole of Europe.

Richards was erratic and didn't understand the core responsibilities of his position. Mancini transformed him into a reliable fullback while maintaining his attacking threat.

Zabaleta was a hardworking but apparently average player who rarely played, and when he did he was rash in the tackle and average both defensively and going forward. Today Zabaleta is regarded as the league's best right back and was the club's player of the year last season.

Barry was wholly unreliable, uncomfortable in possession, slow in thought and had many people openly doubting his worth to the side. Became the first name on the team sheet under Mancini, established himself as our most reliable performer, shielding the defence and keeping the ball moving quickly in midfield. Proved himself instrumental in our title winning season.

Joe Hart was on loan at Birmingham, and was questioning his future at City. Mancini brought him back from loan, introduced him back into the side dropping Given, to the tune of a man of the match performance at WHL. Quickly established himself as among the best in the league and became England's number one. Has since won 3 golden gloves.

Improved both Lescott and Kolo Toure, the former became a key player in our title winning season.

I'm sure there are more, but you catch the drift.

We went through an enormous transition under Mancini. When he took over we were a mid-table side with ambitions of a top four place. When he left 3 and a half years later we were an established member of the 'elite' and had an FA Cup and league title to our name.

He never did the arm round the shoulder, but his 'win at all costs' mentality and attention to detail earned us a Premier League title. It also saw us play some of the best football the division has seen since Arsene Wenger's invincibles.

It saw us take Chelsea's fortress record in a 2-4 win at Stamford Bridge. It saw us win the FA Cup. It saw us humiliate United 1-6 at Old Trafford. It saw us win the Premier League.

I think there is an argument that Mancini began to grate for many at the club, his autocratic ways and harsh manner souring the mood as results suffered.

Maybe we needed the fresh start, a fresh pair of hands? A more diplomatic manager who is liked by his players, and able to soothe the supposed unrest that developed.

But like Mancini and Hughes before him, he will be measured by results. I just fear that many of our players needed an autocrat, there shall be no such excuses from them in May should we fail to improve on last season.

But I digress. The disparaging terms many on here talk of Mancini is absurd, and I think you should reflect more closely on your critique of him as a manager.

Post of the seasom