You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Home Truths: Why We've Won Naff All In 34 Years.
- Thread starter Stiss
- Start date
DoubleDenimDave
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 11 Nov 2010
- Messages
- 73
Balti said:Johnno is still best as an impact sub imo
ha ha ha ha ha!
You think a player of that calibre will hang about to be an 'impact sub'?
No offence, but you're dead wrong anyway.
Millwallawayveteran1988
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 Sep 2010
- Messages
- 38,481
AntMcfc said:United's last two games have been arguably as bad as ours, don't hear them calling for their manager's head though.
Maybe because he has won them 18 trophies.
Its not the draw or even defeat I object to.
Its the complete lack of tempo and boring football.
DoubleDenimDave
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 11 Nov 2010
- Messages
- 73
Millwallawayveteran1988 said:AntMcfc said:United's last two games have been arguably as bad as ours, don't hear them calling for their manager's head though.
Maybe because he has won them 18 trophies.
Its not the draw or even defeat I object to.
Its the complete lack of tempo and boring football.
Ignore all that mate.
Mancini has a lovely scarf and a sound, wavey hair-cut.
Did you see the reaction to the Derby from Utd at Villa? That was one of the worst performances I've seen from Utd.Millwallawayveteran1988 said:AntMcfc said:United's last two games have been arguably as bad as ours, don't hear them calling for their manager's head though.
Maybe because he has won them 18 trophies.
Its not the draw or even defeat I object to.
Its the complete lack of tempo and boring football.
Last 2 teams at City have both defended very well. If the ref had given the Tevez goal we'd have won today's game comfortably
Millwallawayveteran1988
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 Sep 2010
- Messages
- 38,481
AntMcfc said:Lol boring football. Bring back Sven, 10th in the league, an 8-1 loss to a shit side, but hey we played some nice footy that year.
Yes an 8-1 loss when he had already been told he was going and a £20m transfer budget instead of a £200m budget.
What part of today or Wednesday did you find interesting?
DoubleDenimDave said:I think people are forgetting that it's not us that need to be convinced to give Mancini time - it's Mansoor.
He's come in and wants instant succes, like Mourinho had at Chelsea.People are saying 'Give him 2 or 3 years' - delusional as Audley Harrison.If Mancini doesn't have us pushing the top 2 this season, and quickly, he'll be out.
I'm more worried about the effect this kind of result and continued lack of us looking like a class team will have on Mansoor.He's lobbed £300m at us and we still look miles off.The commitment some of our players have shown and are showing, especially the ones on a criminal amount of cash, has to leave our owner wondering if it'll ever happen here.We (especially the ones backing Mancini) need to start thinking about how long Mansoors gratitude and interest will last if we keep failing.
34 years and it's going to be longer :(
Where do you get this impression from? I'm not saying he'll be happy with us finishing midtable for the next decade but he sure as hell wasn't expecting the title this season. I think he knew what he was getting into (maybe not the spoilt moaning fans who are more up for a boo than urging their team on) when he took over and appreciates it won't happen overnight unlike some ''fans''.
Newlunar
Well-Known Member
pedigreeblue said:I really do think that City fans or at least some City fans may well be responsible for a lack of trophies. I know we have great fans and can give great support but the one constant over the last 34 years is our fans. No matter which manager we put in charge it always seems to go tits up. I believe in Karma, in the Manchester (Munich remembrance) derby when i saw the respect the City fans gave to the minutes silence i just had a instinct that we would win that game, our players where proud of us and they played for us. Players today and on many previous occasion must think to them selves 'what the fek am i doing here', our boo boys have always been there, and yes i hear your 'paid my money entitled to boo' crap, but when will you learn IT DOESN'T HELP. No matter how much money a player is getting paid, for us to get that extra percentage out of them to take us from contenders to winners they need to believe in us and want to play for us. I sit behind the dug out and can see the expressions on players faces when boos ring out, it must be so demotivating for them. The 12h man can be so important, but in our case i think he scores too many own goals...
Perfect.<br /><br />-- Sun Nov 14, 2010 9:22 am --<br /><br />
Petetheblu said:Newlunar said:We're talking about why we sack managers and appoint different ones. Please tell me which of the following were appointed/sacked to do with financial matters?
Malcolm Allison John Bond John Benson Billy Mcneil Jimmy Frizzell Mel Machin Howard Kendall Peter Reid Brian Horton Alan Ball Steve Coppell Frank Clarke Joe Royle Kevin Keegan Stuart Pearce Sven Goran Ericson Mark Hughes......
Apart from the ones that walked all with the exception of SGE were appointed and sacked because Manchester City fans demanded change.
Look I don't want to come across as being arguementative, BUT.....
Chairmen of football clubs sack managers due to fans behavour and not down to standing to loose a small fortune? Suprising then they hired Mark Hughes as he was quite disliked by the majority of City fans. Then theirs the fans favourite Platt, he's surely walking the loose tight rope of the fans circus?
Let's play devils advocate them which of the named above managers would you have NOW at City if they god forbid sacked Bobby tomorrow. Bond, Kendall.
Managers are sacked due to there in ability to maintain funds and not because of a few shouts or boo's by a bunch of pissed up blokes.
Pete, you're not being argumentative, you're putting your point across and you do it well.
I think the point you make about Mark Hughes is inaccurate though. Cast your mind back.
When we sack a manager at City it usually goes like this. Team plays poor - Fans boo team plays worse- Fans chant and boo-board panics- board sacks manager. (Now at this point the board don't lobby the fans for who they want in.) Board looks around at who's available - Board panics - Board appoints. Fans Grumble - Team have a run of bad results Fans Boo ....and so on ad nauseum . My point is Fan reaction gets managers sacked.
To your second point - the game moves on, with the exception of 1 person all the top managers from the 80's and 90's are out of the game. That's nothing to do with City.