OB1 said:NQCitizen said:OB1 said:How many truly legitimate goals have we conceded in the league from long balls? Sunderland doesn't count as legit in my definition.
Well then it becomes pretty hard to discuss. It was a goal, we lost to it.
But it should have been disallowed and there is no reason to believe that Milner would not have dealt with it if he had not been shoved in the neck and lost his balance. The long ball was not a problem; the foul was.
How many other instances of goals conceded were there?
NQCitizen said:OB1 said:NQCitizen said:Well then it becomes pretty hard to discuss. It was a goal, we lost to it.
But it should have been disallowed and there is no reason to believe that Milner would not have dealt with it if he had not been shoved in the neck and lost his balance. The long ball was not a problem; the foul was.
How many other instances of goals conceded were there?
A loss to our main title rivals, the loss at villa, the key goal against bayern. That's just off the top of my head.
Cabal junior takes Cabal elder to task - lolDidsbury Dave said:Prestwich_Blue said:I've posted the facts I know for certain but it wouldn't surprise me if they'd started making plans after the CL disaster or even before. But I doubt the deal would have been signed and sealed that early. It could have been no more than "Yes, if you need a manager I'd be interested" which us the same scenario I believe we had with Mourinho in December 2009.The cookie monster said:So when pellegrini was backed from 33/1 to 6/4 in the middle of feb
And his name was mooted for the first time on here on that date and in the rag tops
Gives me the impression the deal was done long before April.
Yeah, that would be about right. I reckon a verbal agreement in principle was agreed with Pellegrini in February. I base that on the leak which came from Chile around then that one was in place. Duncan Castles was running stories even before then about our approaches to Pellegrini and one or two others. That doesn't necessarily contradict your timescales about when the decision was finally taken, but it was in the offing for a long while before it happened.
Pablo1 said:Who were all the clubs in for Pellegrini which made him highly sought?BillyShears said:Skashion said:and when Pellegrini ended up at Malaga after Real Madrid?
When Pellegrini took over at Malaga the idea was that they were going to be the Spanish equivalent of City. A club bank rolled by Oil money with huge ambitions. One of the reasons he was so sought after the summer just gone is because whilst the promise of money turned into Malaga consistently selling their best players, Pellegrini still managed to have them overachieving on a grand scale.
But this is largely irrelevant. If the discussion is about Pellegrini, then our away form is shit and needs to improve but he's making progress in enough areas that he's under no pressure IMO. If it's about the rights and wrongs of sacking Mancini - well then you know as well as I do his time was up and regardless of his replacement, he needed to go. If it's about Mancini v Pellegrini - outside the bubble of MCFC supporters there really is no comparison. Pellegrini is clearly the more respected coach because he was highly sought after this summer whilst, like I say Mancini ended up in Turkey. That's not to say Galatasary are a small club, not by a long stretch. But the Turkish league is a footballing backwater when compared to Spain, Italy, England, possibly even France these days.
Just to be clear, that bubble of MCFC supporters who rate Mancini above Pellegrini do so because there's solid evidence in the form of trophies. Even though Pellegrini has been in the game much longer it would be hard to argue that he's more successful than Mancini, or even that he'll win as many trophies with us than Mancini did.
Being respected is great, I'm glad that we've got somebody in charge who isn't being goaded by the press every week or having to deal with leaks within the club because their confidence has been shattered through not being spoken warmly enough.
You can state all day long, as you often do, about the nasty Italian being only good enough to manage backwater teams. It doesn't make you right though, my guess is Mancini will finish his career with more European and domestic trophies than Pellegrini.
gelly said:Strikers should in no way be sold in the middle a season challenge for the league. Dont care how much he sulked. Sold from under the manager.
OB1 said:NQCitizen said:OB1 said:But it should have been disallowed and there is no reason to believe that Milner would not have dealt with it if he had not been shoved in the neck and lost his balance. The long ball was not a problem; the foul was.
How many other instances of goals conceded were there?
A loss to our main title rivals, the loss at villa, the key goal against bayern. That's just off the top of my head.
So it's really two long balls that have legitimately been scored from in the league but you say we've been undone time and time again - interesting.
There's no doubt though that the one at chelsea should have been easy to deal with.
I'm not comparing them over 11 games, that post was a general one in response to Billy. I've said on here many times that Mancini had to go and I'm supportive of Pellegrini.prestonibbo_mcfc said:Pablo1 said:Who were all the clubs in for Pellegrini which made him highly sought?BillyShears said:When Pellegrini took over at Malaga the idea was that they were going to be the Spanish equivalent of City. A club bank rolled by Oil money with huge ambitions. One of the reasons he was so sought after the summer just gone is because whilst the promise of money turned into Malaga consistently selling their best players, Pellegrini still managed to have them overachieving on a grand scale.
But this is largely irrelevant. If the discussion is about Pellegrini, then our away form is shit and needs to improve but he's making progress in enough areas that he's under no pressure IMO. If it's about the rights and wrongs of sacking Mancini - well then you know as well as I do his time was up and regardless of his replacement, he needed to go. If it's about Mancini v Pellegrini - outside the bubble of MCFC supporters there really is no comparison. Pellegrini is clearly the more respected coach because he was highly sought after this summer whilst, like I say Mancini ended up in Turkey. That's not to say Galatasary are a small club, not by a long stretch. But the Turkish league is a footballing backwater when compared to Spain, Italy, England, possibly even France these days.
Just to be clear, that bubble of MCFC supporters who rate Mancini above Pellegrini do so because there's solid evidence in the form of trophies. Even though Pellegrini has been in the game much longer it would be hard to argue that he's more successful than Mancini, or even that he'll win as many trophies with us than Mancini did.
Being respected is great, I'm glad that we've got somebody in charge who isn't being goaded by the press every week or having to deal with leaks within the club because their confidence has been shattered through not being spoken warmly enough.
You can state all day long, as you often do, about the nasty Italian being only good enough to manage backwater teams. It doesn't make you right though, my guess is Mancini will finish his career with more European and domestic trophies than Pellegrini.
Look, I was a fan of Mancini as much as the next man, but FFS you cannot compare 1 after 11 games against the other
after 3 years. I remember Mancini's first year and it was not pretty and I often wondered where it was all leading.
Well it turned out not too bad at all and I have a gut feeling it's going to turn out even better.
This is based on wonderfully entertaining football at home, and i'm sure with tweeks here and there, and more importantly
our much missed injured, our away form will pick up.
jma said:Prestwich_Blue said:Let's get this right. The decision to sack him was taken in Abu Dhabi in early April, just after the Newcastle & was ratified at a board meeting just before the derby match. He certainly knew about it because it was his meetings with Sheikh Mansour & Simon Pearce in Abu Dhabi that week that brought it about.St Helens Blue (Exiled) said:The way they went around the sacking of he who shall not be named was disgraceful but we are a club who do things the right way apparently?
The intention was to part company at the end of the season but the news that we had been talking to Pellegrini was deliberately & maliciously released (not by anyone at City) just before the cup final in order to cause maximum disruption, which it did. The board then had to decide whether to let things be or bring forward the sacking that Mancini knew was coming. They decided to do the latter.
Those are the stone-clad facts.
It was reported in numerous places, months before April that the Barcelona pair (or at least one of them) had been meeting, in public, no less, with Pellegrini. The bookmakers received hefty bets and adjusted their odds accordingly too.
When the decision was actually finally ratified and branded with the official watermark is not really here nor there in a discussion as to whether it was a shoddy process.
Allowing the replacement of your manager to become a matter of public speculation, thanks to your own actions, way before any final decision is made and way before the manager and his team had reached a point whereby the season (or the squad situation) became lost is just poor. No matter how you dress it up.
Everything that was speculation. The meetings with Pellegrini, plotting to get rid of Mancini relatively early in the season before anything of substance was decided - mere months after winning the league. It all turns out that it was true.
Prudent planning might be what Garry Cook was up to, talking to Mancini a few weeks before Hughes came to the end of his year and a half of under achievement and dross. Doing the same thing, a few months after your manager has won the league and months before you reach a situation whereby sacking him becomes a consideration, that is plotting and snide. If only because the plotting, the inconsiderate way it was done - less than secretive - and the whole affair, actually contributed to a situation where it was a self fulfilling prophesy. The open speculation and knowledge that they were meeting Pellegrini made the manager's position much less secure and made it much easier for players to stop performing, culminating in the disgraceful open revolt in City shirts that sacrificed the FA Cup final.
Let's not dress the way the approach to Pellegrini up as prudent or as the actions of men who were forced to act in an untenable situation. It was snide, calculated and designed to get their own men in, from a long way out.
Not that any of that should be held against Pellegrini. But if Pellegrini doesn't work out, it should certainly be held against those who appointed him in such a way.
Didsbury Dave said:And I simply do not buy this theory that the players somehow "threw" the cup final to get rid of Mancini. The players knew well before that game that he was history. By the morning of the cup final every person every person in England knew Mancini was toast regardless of the result.
So why would the players throw the game when they knew its outcome had no effect on the manager? And why did they disguise it so well that they dominated and made big chances for long periods of the game?
GaudinoMotors said:BillyShears said:flb said:So his away form both at City and before that Malaga doesn't worry you?
This is the trouble with you guys who just look at numbers on a piece of paper rather than actually spending a bit of time researching the facts behind the figures. You reach systematic damning conclusions which are a long way from reality.
To begin with, why would you look at Malaga's away record when they were a club in a totally different situation than the one City are in. If anything you should avoid talking about Malaga like the plague, because the truth is that at Malaga, just like at Villareal, Pellegrini took nothing teams into the latter stages of the CL whilst still remaining relatively competitive in the domestic league. Malaga supporters were delighted with Pellegrini and his time in charge of them, as were the Villareal supporters. This suggests that they could see that with the limited resources he had, the job he did was excellent.
Better to focus on our away form, which isn't good enough and really needs to fix up tout suite. It's subjective, but for me our performances on the whole have gotten better. The goals we've conceded have been largely down to individual player error rather than any systematic failure on the manager's part. Yes ultimately the responsibility lies with the manager - so if at the end of the season we're still conceding soft goals, still not winning games away from home, and have not won any trophies, then it's fair to have a go. In fact, if we're 12 points off the title in January/February it's fair to have a go.
What I find knee jerk and a bit sad is that it's all going on in November when there are more positives than there are negatives in our progress under Pellegrini and we're still in every competition we've entered. That's already progress on this time last season.
Don't forget that after we won the league and whilst still in Europe you were calling for Mancini to be replaced - for many there were way more positives than negatives then. At least those expressing concerns now - have 4 points out of 18 to discuss. Yes yes progressing in Europe - but Frank Clark would have got through that group.