Hughes..the reality

[bizzbo]

I am not posting on here any more but seeing as I have been quoted above I want to clarify it.

I was not disgusted about anything regarding Hughes' management of this club in November. It was only in December (I can pinpoint the date) that I formed the opinion that Hughes lacks the skills required to lead this club to where it needs to be.

The on pitch stuff should be reason alone for his regime to be asked some very searching, aggressive and intrusive questions.

However, the off the pitch stuff is the stuff that I think affects his managerial abilities just as much as his lack of ability to adapt and change a game.

If it is possible to retrieve old posts from last summer you will find on here that I felt Hughes had the ability to be a success at City and should be supported in his quest to do so. As much as I disaproved of Sven's sacking, that was a different matter and has no bearing on Hughes.

My one reservation, and this is 'in print' on here, was that I felt he was the most embarrassing manager in the country (even worse than Baconface) when it came to passing the buck, moaning and blaming everyone else. The point I made then was that at Blackburn he would constantly blame referees for everything, lie and moan about their decisions, never apologise for accusing them of stuff when it was proved he was wrong and bascially do everything he could to avoid having to admit that his team were not good enough or at fault. His prime concern was that everyone formed the opinion that he and his team were hard done by and any setback was the fault of someone else.

In fairness to Hughes, his embarrassing trait of blaming referees and moaning and lieing in aftermath interviews has not surfaced here, imo. That is to be praised.

However, I think the 'press' issues raised above are a continuation of this trait.

The stories about the squad all being shirkers, bastards, wasters and people who are totally different in attitude to every other Premier club have been a constant throughout the season since it became obvious we were underachieving. Constant questioning of the players and claims that the manager was being hindered by them.

They have to have come from a source inside the club. Furthermore, if they had been considered out of order by the manager then it was his duty to deny them. He didn't. Claiming that 'everyone is happy' is a totally different thing to denying that the players are bastards and hindering oyu in the job. The stories have reduced in volume now but they still exist and the willingness for people to believe that Hughes is 'the victim' is still in place. Which is their aim.

However, the most astonishing manifestation of his desire to deflect responsibility comes from his successful campaign to reduce expectations througout the season. A trick that many managers try but not many on such a scale as Hughes.

He came in here with big talk about how the team would be fitter, tougher and more successful under him. There is no proof of any of it (especially when you take into account the resources he has been given and compare any 'progress to what would reasonably be expected with those resources). Yet since Autumn he has embarked on completely contradicting his upbeat comments throughout the summer. Denying that he claimed this could, should and would be a successful season. It just amazes me that so many people swallow it and forget about his own expectations (prior to him being gifted one of the best players in the world and a £100m transfer budget).

He has convinced many that it is impossible to take over a squad and get them to improve, Despite the evidence of the contary existing nearby in the form of Bruce, Megson, Hodgson, Redknapp and Zola.

The best part of it is this constant claim that he is 'laying the foundations' Reference to money spent by the owners behind the scenes (money which would be spent whoever is the manager) and claims that Hughes is somehow uniquely positioned to oversee a complete change of culture at the club. Possessing an ability to 'install success' that is not seen in others. Conviniently ignoring that any manager who takes over at any club changes the cutlure to suit their style and any manager who has owners willing to spend so much money would embark on changing everything to suit them.

Far from being a hinderence to your team's performances, it should be a massive help. The ability to change everything you want to at a club in a short space of time, rather than the years it can take other managers when they join a poorer club, is a massive help. Not a reason why you should produce underpar fare on the pitch.

Never before in the history of football has a manager and his supporters in the club managed to use 'I'm laying the foundations' as an excuse for his poor performance. Painting that he is some sort of managerial guru who is undertaking such detailed and specialised work at the club that we should be grateful he is willing to do so. Work that other managers would not be willing or able to undertake.

Furthermore, there is little to suggest that this 'laying of foundations' is anything other than sanctioning improved facilities and implementing the type of training and discipline that the manager favours. ie: managing the club in the style he believes is best. Just as EVERY other manager in the history of football does. Whether they are 'relaxed' like Sven, Coppell or Rijkaard or discipline men like Fergie, Souness or Alan Ball.

Yet 'laying the foundations' has been pushed so constantly as a method of detracting from his failures to be able to manage this team that it is now accepted by many as some sort of mystic, unfathomable challenge that never needs explaining and never needs any sort of evidence to support it.

It needs no more explanation than the simplistic "he's laying foundations" and the even more simplistic "we haven't won a trophy for a long time so progress won't be possible for ages". Again, despite the fact that numeorus managers through history have taken over unsuccessful team and made them perform, without anywhere near comparible resources.

The constant repeating of mythical and unmeasurable 'laying the foundations', along with the constant seeping of blame towards players and away from the manager, are, imo, symptomatic of the excessive 'blame deflection' that is built into Hughes' character and detracts from his ability tobe as good a manager as he could be.

That he is so succesful at doing it though and that people are willing to swallow his complete reversals and about turns regarding what should be reasonably expected of him is astonishing but points to what a good job both he and COok have done of battering this 'laying the foundations' myth through the press to save their own skins.

This is a massive character fault (in managerial terms) and one that, even though Ferguson has it, is even more important in the modern game where managers are more accountable to players and cannot simply rely on the 'I am never wrong' approach. It holds him back and it is holding us back imo.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

The Accademy has been running since the sixties, and prior to Jim Cassell was run by Dave Uwining, it was restructured in 1998 but only to bring together the younger element at platt lane, and most of the staff remain, as does the system.

As for the rest of your drivel, its answered by most people in football ranking it as the best in the country, as opposed to you, who knows better because?

There's a valid question here. How many players have we produced, SWP, Micah, Jonno, Sturridge, Ireland and Evans, ok, but we will never know how good they are until have a squad/team that is so strong that they aren't first, or even 2nd choices as it stands right now. Thats why I'm certain Hughes is a *ucking car crash and please stop going on about sacking managers to early, name one manager who has left City in the last 60 years who went on to win anything elsewhere? You can't. City's problem is the quality of manager we have appointed, even Sven was past his sell by date, we are now have funding that puts City in a unique position, which throws out all the normal procedures for building a team and achieving success. I have not seen anything on the pitch, nor any arguement, or facts to support the continued tenure of Hughless. O'Neil has more promise and has won more, Moyes has performed better, but even these would be none starters when with either, Rijkaard, Jose, Mancinin, or Hiddink, can takeover, with superior records from virtually the same length of time in management and attract the quality of players we need without playing European football next season. With the right manager City can go out and buy 12 players who with what we have got that will see us breaking the top four next season, not in 4 *ucking years.

Croft & Flood looked good when they first came into the first team so it's too early to say whether Sturridge and Evans will make it. I doubt either will be here next season. However you do have a point that the academy players will have to be that much better in the future to break through. Which is why they won't unless we change the way things are done. No one can rest on their laurels and while I fully agree that the academy has done a good job for us while we were skint, we need to up our game if there's going ot be a home-grown players rule.

But to say O'Neill would do a better job than Hughes is laughable. 2 wins since the end of January? Even Pearce did better than that.

 

[Soulboy]

I find it bizarre that Hughes supporters on here, such as Prestwich Blue, argue for his retention based on "stability and patience". That we should give him a decent time to get things right. That we shouldn't judge him over the space of 10 months.

Yet that is the very argument being given about Cassell and the youth set-up!

Hughes has come in and made conclusions based on just 10 months at the club. Is he all for giving Cassell a decent chance? Is he going to be patient and stick with stability?

Is he fuck.

Hughes will cut and slash where he thinks is right. He will sell players and buy new ones, he will sack coaches and replace them. All within the space of the first 10 months.

So how come they don't get the same "patience and stability" argument?

I wouldn't mind so much if it wasn't for the fact that Hughes has absolutely no record of bringing youth players through at Blackburn.

Or even having as successful a CV as Cassell!

But, then again, changes behind the scenes, chopping the team about... it's all about these mythical foundations he's building...and it makes it look like he's doing a job, doesn't it?

Maybe he should just concentrate on the first team, as if he doesn't get that bit right, the youth set-up is all pretty much irrelevant!

 

[allblues09]

JMA,
Here is the issue I have with your eloquent and extremely L-O-N-G post, why do you define this season as being unsuccessful?

Considering the lack of continuity, the lack of form of the club for half a year prior to Hughes coming in, the lack of discipline prior to Hughes coming and the lack of professional training prior to Hughes represented a major obstacle to 'success' this year. Each of those issues coupled with playing in Europe in July and the number of injuries we have had with a limited squad; yet, we are still in the running for 7th.

You state that we should do better, but it takes time for teams to gel, and in the last couple of months we have shown much better form and are starting to look like a team (as opposed to a group of individuals).

Clearly, when Hughes came in he changed everything at the club (more than the culture). We play a completely different style, we train in a different style, etc. It takes time for players to adjust to so many changes. Moreover, as you said we brought in many players, many of whom were not EPL tested. It takes time for players to settle (which is not a trait limited to City, it occurs at every club with the majority of players).

As for the stories in the press. There may be some truth to what you say, but I believe you are giving too much credence to the press. Some (I would say lots) of stories seem to be sensational and not believable. Cook and Hughes has said that there are elements attempting to derail what is occurring at City. Perhaps they has a point (and no I do not mean a conspiracy). I mean that some of the less reputable journalist will get hold of a rumor and manifest it into a FACT embellished with sensational additions (which may or may not be true), and attribute the information to "a source close to..." or with the key phrase "apparently." When I see these type of lead-in's I stop reading as it is generally inaccurate and gauged to selling paper (not necessarily reporting the truth).

With that said, of course you are free to believe whatever you feel is correct.

Oh, on a side note, do you not think that Phil Brown and his embarrassing actions at City and then again after the Arsenal game are much more embarrassing than 'Baconface.'

 

[allblues09]

so why are the "Bitter and disgruntaled"?, because they disagree with you and see Hughes as an idiot without a clue on even the most basic level.........backed up by the way with the evidence of some of his own decisions this season.

It goes far deeper than the accademy staff, from tea ladies to ground staff, players and ex players alike dont think much of him, and if you care to look around the support is split only because of wanting stabillity rather than just clueless.

Ha. IS that something you have manifested in you head and is now the truth?

Because I do not believe one word of that.

Do you have any proof (and no, what you called evidence is nothing but conjecture), or does it just fit nicely to back-up your argument?

Not a very god attempt.

 

[C_T_I_D]

2 away wins all season.

Robinho and Ireland and individual strikes from players like Zabaleta, SWP, Elano etc keeping him in a job so far this season.

Taking Elano off and putting on Gelson 'Headless Chicken' Fernandes quite often. Playing the Swiss fella in right back when Zabaleta got injured.

If it was not for the form of several players we'd still be battling relegation to this very day.

Him going all out to sign RSC and not lining up an alternative in case he received a negative response from Blackburn Rovers, messing up our transfer window hopes in reality.

Signing Tal 'The Terrible' Ben Haim and Jo 'away'.

 

[blueonblue]

In fact Hughes was at it after less than three months at the club, never mind ten, this blew up with him ranting and raving at some of the younger players, and being told he was out of order and talking through his ar*e.

Soulboy beat me to it on the stabillity and time factor that you want for clueless but ignore for anyone else, besides the accademy being far from the flop Hughes is, did I see you asking for Jo to be given time to settle in?, or maybe because he went under a decent manager and did exactly what numpty said he could not has effected your memory.

The very fact you have such a low opinion of the players who have come through the youth system, together with your pathalogical defence of clueless marks you out as not worth arguing with.

 

[Joycee Banercheck]

In fact Hughes was at it after less than three months at the club, never mind ten, this blew up with him ranting and raving at some of the younger players, and being told he was out of order and talking through his ar*e.

Soulboy beat me to it on the stabillity and time factor that you want for clueless but ignore for anyone else, besides the accademy being far from the flop Hughes is, did I see you asking for Jo to be given time to settle in?, or maybe because he went under a decent manager and did exactly what numpty said he could not has effected your memory.

The very fact you have such a low opinion of the players who have come through the youth system, together with your pathalogical defence of clueless marks you out as not worth arguing with.

I'm waiting for the 'worst manager in 50 years' bullshit to make this post complete.

 

[allblues09]

In fact Hughes was at it after less than three months at the club, never mind ten, this blew up with him ranting and raving at some of the younger players, and being told he was out of order and talking through his ar*e.

I assume you are referring to the incident with Richards, which occurred less than three months ago, not in his first three months. After which, Richards had his game of the season.
But do not let 'facts' get in the way of your argument.

 

[blueonblue]

Worst manager we have ever had............In my opinion, as is my opinion that you and the other two muppets on here spouting the same nonsense are either one and the same, or some sort of clown convention from trafford