For those who like Mancini

[Jim Tolmie's Underpants]

My nan could of got us to the semi finals of the carling cup if she played Crystal Palace, Scunthorpe, Fulham reserves (she wouldn't of needed extra time either!!!) and Arsenal reserves.

Well, perhaps your nan should have been our manager against Stoke then, instead of Mancini!

 

[squirtyflower]

"Elano joined Galatasary and Frank Rijkaard under huge expectations. A debut 25 yard volley instantly made him a fans favourite, but the story since has been one of disappointment rather than success. Last Sunday’s Istanbul derby saw Galatasaray beaten at home by bitter rivals Fenerbahce. While Lucas Neill and Dos Santos avoided any blame, Elano was probably the biggest culprit in the Turkish media. Understandably so given his non-existent performance that, at times, even left me wondering if he was still on the pitch. Rijkaard has brought in a Barcelona-esque 4-3-3 system and Elano is given the creative role in the centre. As a Brazilian who once thrived in such a position in the Premier League, this should have been his chance to shine. Sadly for the Cimbom fans, this hasn’t been the case. With Galatasaray now lying in third place, they have a huge job on their hands to challenge for the league. If they can’t make it, the summer could see the end of Elano’s Istanbul adventure."

 

[Anonymous]

My nan could of got us to the semi finals of the carling cup if she played Crystal Palace, Scunthorpe, Fulham reserves (she wouldn't of needed extra time either!!!) and Arsenal reserves.

Well, perhaps your nan should have been our manager against Stoke then, instead of Mancini!

The same Stoke that held Villa and Liverpool to draws and beat clueless's City side last year?

 

[Jim Tolmie's Underpants]

Well, perhaps your nan should have been our manager against Stoke then, instead of Mancini!

The same Stoke that held Villa and Liverpool to draws and beat clueless's City side last year?

Yeah - the same Stoke that Portsmouth thrashed 4-0 in the Carling and Birmingham and Tottenham beat at the Britannia.

 

[selim]

This debate will never end!, I believe that after a year or two from now, defenders of Hughes won't find anything to say in his defense Because his limited abilities will be completely exposed in his new job .

-- Fri Apr 02, 2010 11:53 pm --

The same Stoke that held Villa and Liverpool to draws and beat clueless's City side last year?

Yeah - the same Stoke that Portsmouth thrashed 4-0 in the Carling and Birmingham and Tottenham beat at the Britannia.

What are you on about? Mancini's results are better than hughes and that is a fact !, that's with a team that is not his,that's with a very very unbalanced team specially in the midfield,i would say that the average football fan would have bought better with 200 millions than Mr dignity and yet some of those who settle for mediocrity are still defending him!

 

[Jim Tolmie's Underpants]

Yeah - the same Stoke that Portsmouth thrashed 4-0 in the Carling and Birmingham and Tottenham beat at the Britannia.

What are you on about? Mancini's results are better than hughes and that is a fact !

By about 0.22 points per game, LOL!


Hughes - "Shit Manager":

P-----W----D-----L-----Points-----P.P.G.
17----7-----8-----2------29----------1.71


Mancini: 'Brilliant Manager':

P-----W----D-----L-----Points-----P.P.G.
14----8-----3-----3------27----------1.93

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.mancityfans.net/mcfnet/viewtopic.php?f=119&t=31390&start=50" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.mancityfans.net/mcfnet/viewt ... 0&start=50</a>

Let's see what the stats say after Mancini has played the same number of games.

 

[Rammy Blue]

What are you on about? Mancini's results are better than hughes and that is a fact !

By about 0.22 points per game, LOL!


Hughes - "Shit Manager":

P-----W----D-----L-----Points-----P.P.G.
17----7-----8-----2------29----------1.71


Mancini: 'Brilliant Manager':

P-----W----D-----L-----Points-----P.P.G.
14----8-----3-----3------27----------1.93

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.mancityfans.net/mcfnet/viewtopic.php?f=119&t=31390&start=50" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.mancityfans.net/mcfnet/viewt ... 0&start=50</a>

Let's see what the stats say after Mancini has played the same number of games.

That's a strange post from a Hughes defender, it rather proves exactly what we are on about.

Hughes had 18 months and spent 200mil and then produced at the beginning of a season, after having all summer with his squad, the set of results above.

Mancini takes over someone else's side mid-way through the season with no additions other than Johnson and Vieira and produces a better points to games ratio than Hughes.

Mancini >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hughes

 

[Bill]

had we kept hughes we'd be looking forward to yet another wembley visit, 4th would have been already secured. the sheer disruption of removing him has cost us big time. mancini is a pawn in the politics of manchester city.i feel for him.

 

[Rammy Blue]

had we kept hughes we'd be looking forward to yet another wembley visit, 4th would have been already secured. the sheer disruption of removing him has cost us big time. mancini is a pawn in the politics of manchester city.i feel for him.

Morning Bill, can tell you are bored.....

I agree about Bob being the pawn but stop it with the stuff about Hughes, I am pretty sure our owner gave him the boot when he saw his wishlist for the window - Upson, Parker et al would not have got us 4th and he certainly wouldn't have beat the scum over 2 legs considering how poor we were against them in the games under his stewardship.

 

[Bill]

had we kept hughes we'd be looking forward to yet another wembley visit, 4th would have been already secured. the sheer disruption of removing him has cost us big time. mancini is a pawn in the politics of manchester city.i feel for him.

Morning Bill, can tell you are bored.....

I agree about Bob being the pawn but stop it with the stuff about Hughes, I am pretty sure our owner gave him the boot when he saw his wishlist for the window - Upson, Parker et al would not have got us 4th and he certainly wouldn't have beat the scum over 2 legs considering how poor we were against them in the games under his stewardship.

we were robbed at cold trafford under hughes, my beef is not manager v manager(although bob is off his fucking rocker)it was why the hell did we make the change at all when we did, end of season, yes, at the takeover yes, even last august yes, not though half way through a campaign.then we tie the new managers hands behind his back with billions in the bank gaining interest.

can't fathom it tbh.

 

[Rammy Blue]

Morning Bill, can tell you are bored.....

I agree about Bob being the pawn but stop it with the stuff about Hughes, I am pretty sure our owner gave him the boot when he saw his wishlist for the window - Upson, Parker et al would not have got us 4th and he certainly wouldn't have beat the scum over 2 legs considering how poor we were against them in the games under his stewardship.

we were robbed at cold trafford under hughes, my beef is not manager v manager(although bob is off his fucking rocker)it was why the hell did we make the change at all when we did, end of season, yes, at the takeover yes, even last august yes, not though half way through a campaign.then we tie the new managers hands behind his back with billions in the bank gaining interest.

can't fathom it tbh.

I know you started a thread previously about "the window" being wasted and that element is still the part that I don't understand. I am sure that Hughes would have been expecting to spend 40+mil and even if the board didn't fancy his wishlist it still makes no sense whatsoever that they didn't allow Bob the same luxury of spending a few quid when it has been plainly obvious that 4th place was always the target and cups were a distraction.

The owner sacked him because he didn't think he would get us 4th yet you then don't give the new man the best possible chance of getting us that spot, as you say can't fathom it.

 

[BlueRockape]

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/apr/02/roberto-mancini-manchester-city" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010 ... ester-city</a>

 

[ElanJo]

What are you on about? Mancini's results are better than hughes and that is a fact !

By about 0.22 points per game, LOL!


Hughes - "Shit Manager":

P-----W----D-----L-----Points-----P.P.G.
17----7-----8-----2------29----------1.71


Mancini: 'Brilliant Manager':

P-----W----D-----L-----Points-----P.P.G.
14----8-----3-----3------27----------1.93

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.mancityfans.net/mcfnet/viewtopic.php?f=119&t=31390&start=50" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.mancityfans.net/mcfnet/viewt ... 0&start=50</a>

Let's see what the stats say after Mancini has played the same number of games.

0.22 points extra per game is nearly an extra 10 points at the end of the season. 10 extra points would have had us on 66 points right now. 2 points behind Arsenal with a game in hand. Win that game in hand and that's 3 points behind Utd with Utd yet to play Chelsea and yet to come to our place.

So, let's recap... Mancini would have has us challenging for the title ...and with someone elses team!.

;)

 

[Neil McNab]

All over the press today that he's eyeing a move to Juve, which job is his number 1 choice I wouldn't be too sure, does he know his day could be numbered or are numbered?
Is it Mancini's reaction to fan criticism or would he want to move to Juve even if he got 4th with us?
His future is anybody's guess at the moment, shame if he leaves without bringing in some players first though!<br /><br />-- Sat Apr 03, 2010 8:49 am --<br /><br />

By about 0.22 points per game, LOL!


Hughes - "Shit Manager":

P-----W----D-----L-----Points-----P.P.G.
17----7-----8-----2------29----------1.71


Mancini: 'Brilliant Manager':

P-----W----D-----L-----Points-----P.P.G.
14----8-----3-----3------27----------1.93

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.mancityfans.net/mcfnet/viewtopic.php?f=119&t=31390&start=50" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.mancityfans.net/mcfnet/viewt ... 0&start=50</a>

Let's see what the stats say after Mancini has played the same number of games.

0.22 points extra per game is nearly an extra 10 points at the end of the season. 10 extra points would have had us on 66 points right now. 2 points behind Arsenal with a game in hand. Win that game in hand and that's 3 points behind Utd with Utd yet to play Chelsea and yet to come to our place.

So, let's recap... Mancini would have has us challenging for the title ...and with someone elses team!.

;)

The extra 10 points is calculated for the end of the season not to be added on with 7 games to go pmsl!
Flawed logic= bullshit
38 x 1.93 = 73.34 - end of season
73.34 x (31/38) = 59.83 - where we would be at now
Don't mess with maths to prove a point if you have no ability!

 

[Marvin]

He's reportedly on a short term contract so his future is a little uncertain.

Don't understand the coments about why we didn't strengthen in January. We bought Johnson, and lined up Mariga who went to Inter in the end because the appeals panel turned down the work permit. It's one thing strengthening a mid-table team in January, another thing strengthening a top 6 team.

You can criticise Parker - I think he's a good player - but it's highly unusual for really good players to become available mid-season. We bought the best that was available.

mancini's record at City is short, but very good. The criticism I have read is ill-informed, and amounts to little more than prejudice. "He's Italian and therefore defensive" (despite him fielding the most attacking formations in the country) and his English isn't great. We've picked up a lot of points despite some players being upset by losing the manager who bought them. On top of that we have lost Ireland which leaves our midfield unbalanced and forces us to play 4 forwards at times

 

[scorer]

why the hell did we make the change at all when we did, end of season, yes, at the takeover yes, even last august yes, not though half way through a campaign.then we tie the new managers hands behind his back with billions in the bank gaining interest.

can't fathom it tbh.

I think it was because the penny finally dropped that Hughes was taking us nowhere and swift action was required before our club went in to total freefall.

Here are the FACTS - undisputed when you compare like with like, Hughes last 14 league matches vs Mancinis first 14 league matches

Hughes

P W D L F A Pts GD
14 4 8 2 28 27 20 +1

Mancini (With Hughes Team)

P W D L F A Pts GD
14 8 3 3 25 12 27 +13

Now what stat above gives any indication whatsoever that Hughes was/is a better manager than Mancini and that the descision to remove Hughes was wrong? The standard of opposition was comparable we lost away to Hull when we only drew at home with them, compares to us beating Fulham away when we could only Draw at home with them. Chelsea we beat twice though having seen both games I would argue the overall performance at their place was better than that which we turned in at Eastlands.

Bearing in mind the amounts of money spent by both Managers there is absolutely nothing I can see in the facts that even begin to suggest Hughes is a better manager than Mancini. The fact we scored one goal more (under his attacking football style) certainly is countered by the fact we conceeded 15 more.

It is so obvious I really do wonder what posters on this site are looking at.

The above equates to 0.5 points a game better - 19 points a season!!

 

[Skashion]

why the hell did we make the change at all when we did, end of season, yes, at the takeover yes, even last august yes, not though half way through a campaign.then we tie the new managers hands behind his back with billions in the bank gaining interest.

can't fathom it tbh.

I think it was because the penny finally dropped that Hughes was taking us nowhere and swift action was required before our club went in to total freefall.

Here are the FACTS - undisputed when you compare like with like, Hughes last 14 league matches vs Mancinis first 14 league matches

Hughes

P W D L F A Pts GD
14 4 8 2 28 27 20 +1

Mancini (With Hughes Team)

P W D L F A Pts GD
14 8 3 3 25 12 27 +13

Now what stat above gives any indication whatsoever that Hughes was/is a better manager than Mancini and that the descision to remove Hughes was wrong? The standard of opposition was comparable we lost away to Hull when we only drew at home with them, compares to us beating Fulham away when we could only Draw at home with them. Chelsea we beat twice though having seen both games I would argue the overall performance at their place was better than that which we turned in at Eastlands.

Bearing in mind the amounts of money spent by both Managers there is absolutely nothing I can see in the facts that even begin to suggest Hughes is a better manager than Mancini. The fact we scored one goal more (under his attacking football style) certainly is countered by the fact we conceeded 15 more.

It is so obvious I really do wonder what posters on this site are looking at.

The above equates to 0.5 points a game better - 19 points a season!!

Well, based on your stats Mancini has lost one more game and scored three fewer goals. Which proves he's a defensive idiot. I couldn't care less whether he's won more points or has a superior goal difference! What's that got to do with football?

 

[ElanJo]

All over the press today that he's eyeing a move to Juve, which job is his number 1 choice I wouldn't be too sure, does he know his day could be numbered or are numbered?
Is it Mancini's reaction to fan criticism or would he want to move to Juve even if he got 4th with us?
His future is anybody's guess at the moment, shame if he leaves without bringing in some players first though!

-- Sat Apr 03, 2010 8:49 am --

0.22 points extra per game is nearly an extra 10 points at the end of the season. 10 extra points would have had us on 66 points right now. 2 points behind Arsenal with a game in hand. Win that game in hand and that's 3 points behind Utd with Utd yet to play Chelsea and yet to come to our place.

So, let's recap... Mancini would have has us challenging for the title ...and with someone elses team!.

;)

The extra 10 points is calculated for the end of the season not to be added on with 7 games to go pmsl!
Flawed logic= bullshit
38 x 1.93 = 73.34 - end of season
73.34 x (31/38) = 59.83 - where we would be at now
Don't mess with maths to prove a point if you have no ability!

Here's an equation for ya...

Y = C

(Y being You)
(C being Clarkie)

 

[TTS]

I think it was because the penny finally dropped that Hughes was taking us nowhere and swift action was required before our club went in to total freefall.

Here are the FACTS - undisputed when you compare like with like, Hughes last 14 league matches vs Mancinis first 14 league matches

Hughes

P W D L F A Pts GD
14 4 8 2 28 27 20 +1

Mancini (With Hughes Team)

P W D L F A Pts GD
14 8 3 3 25 12 27 +13

Now what stat above gives any indication whatsoever that Hughes was/is a better manager than Mancini and that the descision to remove Hughes was wrong? The standard of opposition was comparable we lost away to Hull when we only drew at home with them, compares to us beating Fulham away when we could only Draw at home with them. Chelsea we beat twice though having seen both games I would argue the overall performance at their place was better than that which we turned in at Eastlands.

Bearing in mind the amounts of money spent by both Managers there is absolutely nothing I can see in the facts that even begin to suggest Hughes is a better manager than Mancini. The fact we scored one goal more (under his attacking football style) certainly is countered by the fact we conceeded 15 more.

It is so obvious I really do wonder what posters on this site are looking at.

The above equates to 0.5 points a game better - 19 points a season!!

Well, based on your stats Mancini has lost one more game and scored three fewer goals. Which proves he's a defensive idiot. I couldn't care less whether he's won more points or has a superior goal difference! What's that got to do with football?

Fook me I'm glad I read that through twice, I almost lost my faith in humanity :)

 

[scorer]

I think it was because the penny finally dropped that Hughes was taking us nowhere and swift action was required before our club went in to total freefall.

Here are the FACTS - undisputed when you compare like with like, Hughes last 14 league matches vs Mancinis first 14 league matches

Hughes

P W D L F A Pts GD
14 4 8 2 28 27 20 +1

Mancini (With Hughes Team)

P W D L F A Pts GD
14 8 3 3 25 12 27 +13

Now what stat above gives any indication whatsoever that Hughes was/is a better manager than Mancini and that the descision to remove Hughes was wrong? The standard of opposition was comparable we lost away to Hull when we only drew at home with them, compares to us beating Fulham away when we could only Draw at home with them. Chelsea we beat twice though having seen both games I would argue the overall performance at their place was better than that which we turned in at Eastlands.

Bearing in mind the amounts of money spent by both Managers there is absolutely nothing I can see in the facts that even begin to suggest Hughes is a better manager than Mancini. The fact we scored one goal more (under his attacking football style) certainly is countered by the fact we conceeded 15 more.

It is so obvious I really do wonder what posters on this site are looking at.

The above equates to 0.5 points a game better - 19 points a season!!

Well, based on your stats Mancini has lost one more game and scored three fewer goals. Which proves he's a defensive idiot. I couldn't care less whether he's won more points or has a superior goal difference! What's that got to do with football?

Now that just does not add up... at all. Would you like to reconsider and edit...?

TIP: If he's scored three fewer goals it may suggest he's an attacking idiot not sure how defensive works into the equation.

Second TIP: Read neil McNabs advice...

Oh and by the way, it's points that win you prizes.