Hughes..the reality

[Brucie Bonus]

No mate, Hughes is causing the problem because he is incapable and can not do his job, hence the constant whinging that its anything other than him that effects the team, saying Nedum would have disapeared under S.P. is yet more nonsense as not only did he bring him in but he made him a regular in the u/21s and has predicted a big future for the lad, he was good before Hughes started polluting the managers office and then wanted to sell him (Without seeing him play much because of injury), to claim him or Ireland as some pointer to Hughes competance is boll*cks.

The academy staff is made up of coaches who have built up over many years the benchmark for all academies, with the many years of experiance they have in football between them for instance they would know a numpty when they see one..........and in Hughes they do,

As for spreading stories, perhaps the use of the media via leaks from the Hughes camp trying to discredit anyone he wants rid of or bumming him up , should be of more concern than people who have the proven know how and experiance to judge, expressing their opinions to people they know that we have a clueless clown Not being able to do his job.

IIRC Mammutly, Moomba, Scorer, and JMA were disgusted by this back in the Autumn, but at the time there seemed to be few who would attribute such behaviour to Hughes and the staff. Enquiries on a Blackburn forum about whether there were ever cases of leaks, or suspicion of same, whilst Hughes was at Blackburn, might prove useful one way or another. Hughes seeming hypocrisy in giving Elano a slap, whilst he blithely talked about an extension to his own contract raised a few eyebrows. Before he left Blackburn he spoke about honouring contracts and loyalty to the board there. He signed a three-year contract in November 2007 after seeking reassurances from the board, but left pretty quickly.

I remember when Hughes took the job on he understood he was expected to finish in the top six, and thus qualify for Europe.

"Mark Hughes is under instructions to supply Thaksin Shinawatra with a minimum top-six finish, and qualification for Europe, at Manchester City if he wants to avoid the same fate as Sven-Goran Eriksson. Hughes, whose appointment was confirmed yesterday, has been left in no doubt that the owner will not tolerate anything but a concerted effort to gatecrash the Premier League's "big four".
source: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2008/jun/05/manchestercity.blackburn" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2008 ... .blackburn</a>

Shortly after the ADUG takeover it seems to me expectations were "managed" (lowered), whilst the time-frame was lengthened: at the same time many blues began to say, "stop being impatient and unrealistic", and "you're acting like plastic rags, and "it takes time, a lot of time".

Remember this?

"I want this club to advance faster, much faster. Sven is a good football general, but we need more. We must play with more consistency, much more urgency." source: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/leagues/premierleague/mancity/2302463/Thaksin-Shinawatras-vision-for-Man-City.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... -City.html</a>

Did Hughes not agree with Frank on the expectations and timetable during the interview process? I wonder if Frank's short-term goal was adopted by ADUG. I know Sheik Mansour gave Hughes "my absolute mandate to implement his plans", but what ARE his SPECIFIC plans? How do we know if he has implemented them or not?
source:http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2008/nov/13/manchestercity

Are ADUG holding Hughes to Frank's top six finish?

Elano's recent faux pas re Globoesporte.com, Micah, Dunnie, Ned, Sweep, Stevie, and so on...a general question: do City players have to get approval from "someone" at City before agreeing to an interview in any form? Are City players sat in a classroom for so many hours a year learning and brushing up on "how to deal with the media"? Are City players under any contractual obligation to make themselves available to the media?

Oh come on seriously, how many times have you 'planned' to do something and its taken a little longer and more expensive than you planned....christ sake man, just because that was the outlined plan dosnt mean its foul proof, shit happens, situations arise and 9 times out of 10 plans dont go as you expect. with the project at city...it is possibly one of the biggest and most outlandish projects in the world let alone sport, just becasue things havnt gone to plan in the first season donst mean Hughes is not the right man for the job......how the fook do you know mourinho wouldnt have done a worse job?? who says frank Rijkard wouldnt have us fighting relegation right now??

for all the upheaval thats happened this season we should take a evaluated view on the season ending and realise that its a good first season......i mean get mourinho in now and its a new manager who has to learn his new surroundings, get to know his players and what they can do.....more than likely upset a few players and have to deal with the 'trouble makers' again, then say....in jan we need to get rid of the dead wood and bring some more players in....with a huge chance of finishing in mid table mediocraty......id much rather let hughes continue on his foundations and see where he can take us......and he is by no means a bad manager based on this season

But you think Hughes is the right man for the job? That's what I don't understand about blokes who want to keep going with Hughes, and I'm not being patronising or sarcastic. The vastness of the "project" and the man tasked with making it a reality on the pitch seem incredibly incongruous to me.

All we have of Hughes is three seasons at Blackburn, and this strange season at City. I would argue that his time at Blackburn isn't sufficient to give us any true indication abut his abilities. I need more than three seasons at Blackburn to convince me that he has what it takes. As to the plan not going to, er, plan, due to factors beyond his control, that has the potential for use from now until the end of time. My point was that we don't even know for sure what the plan for this season is. We know what it was, 6th place and Europe, but we don't know what happened to the plan / projection upon ADUG taking control. I know Hughes has spoken recently about the goal being 7th, but what was the plan Hughes presented to ADUG months ago? Did he lower his target once he'd had longer to get to grips with the raw materials? He must have agreed to 6th place under Frank, so did he agree to it without a proper evaluation of his players? If Hughes agreed to 6th place under Frank, would it be unreasonable for ADUG to expect the same?

 

[bluedan12]

can i ask about the attack on the youth coaches and youth system. maybe i am missing out on something or being naive, but if you look at city's team now, it contains onuoha, richards, ireland, swp, johnson(if fit), sturridge on bench (if fit).
i dont see anything like that anywhere else, the best liverpool have produced in recent years is jack hobbs, look where he is now, off the top of my head, i dont remember much more coming from utd, chelsea, villa. everton hav rodwell and gosling, who also haven't proved anything. however, maybe i'm wrong?

 

[JohnMaddocksAxe]

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.

 

[OB1]

Helluva post JMA and a fair point of view.

I would just add that early on in his regime one of the senior players commented (privately) that Hughes should stop complaining and get on with managing as he had more resource at his disposal than Sven but was achieving less. And no I'm not naming the player.

 

[Bluebeer]

But you think Hughes is the right man for the job? That's what I don't understand about blokes who want to keep going with Hughes, and I'm not being patronising or sarcastic. The vastness of the "project" and the man tasked with making it a reality on the pitch seem incredibly incongruous to me.

All we have of Hughes is three seasons at Blackburn, and this strange season at City. I would argue that his time at Blackburn isn't sufficient to give us any true indication abut his abilities. I need more than three seasons at Blackburn to convince me that he has what it takes. As to the plan not going to, er, plan, due to factors beyond his control, that has the potential for use from now until the end of time. My point was that we don't even know for sure what the plan for this season is. We know what it was, 6th place and Europe, but we don't know what happened to the plan / projection upon ADUG taking control. I know Hughes has spoken recently about the goal being 7th, but what was the plan Hughes presented to ADUG months ago? Did he lower his target once he'd had longer to get to grips with the raw materials? He must have agreed to 6th place under Frank, so did he agree to it without a proper evaluation of his players? If Hughes agreed to 6th place under Frank, would it be unreasonable for ADUG to expect the same?

to be truthful, im 60-40 in favour, ok hes not achieved trophies yet, but he's not had the luck, two semi finals isnt bad for a team like bburn. also in his 3rd season their he engineered the double over the rags and had more success over the other top for, thats after he had established and evolved his team the way he wanted.

all i think is its stupid to bring in a new manager after a season which has been unspectacular....but has more positives than negative. the team is starting to really gel after 9 new players. dispite all the ITK on here, the behind scenes look more steady....with all good things coming from the players about the coaching staff. people take note of hughes appeal butt the guys played for bayern, chelsea, barca, rags etc....not that bad. a new manager coming in now will need time to set his methods, the players will have to adapt to a new manager, new coaching staff, new ways of playing, possibly a new formation, the manager likewise will need to spend time getting to know the players, what they can and cant do, weak areas of the team, then your looking at players getting unsettled, probably more unrest behind the scene (we all know elano cant keep sthum) etc....while hughes has spent the year appling his methods, tactics, getting to know the players, even enforcing his character and solidifying his role, plus everything else behind the scenes......and were already to judge him after on season. ok the cup exits were shocking....but he more than made up for it in europe.....so for me i want to see him have another season to continue building whats hes started and give him the chance to make his mark.

for all we know a new manager could send us the opposite way, while were looking up lets, for once, not fuck it up!

 

[Kirkstall Blue]

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.

Hope you don't stop posting on hear, as I for one, read your posts with interest, as you always make valid, well written and thought out posts.

 

[Nelly's Left Foot]

Did I read somewhere in this thread that Hughes was seeking to sell Onuaha earlier in the season?
Absolute garbage if it did.

 

[MCFCinUSA]

Did I read somewhere in this thread that Hughes was seeking to sell Onuaha earlier in the season?
Absolute garbage if it did.

I think that was someone picking up on a news story from the turn of the year, which is obviously out of date now.

Still, it's worth checking in on here to catch postings like the one above from JMA in the midst of some pretty good argument & debate in threads like this; even when the subject is getting a bit worn out & we're all suffering from fatigue going round and round in circles.



footnote: It's unfortunate that unlike some continental clubs where the fans get to vote on who's in charge and what their mandate is, as City supporters we have next to no influence. Then again, they dont' have Rob selling his hoodie; where are you Rob? Did you succumb to a gov't conspiracy? You are sorely missed... you just can't beat the humour on here, and of course our fanbase* who are second to none in my opinion.

* excluding the moronic element, which every club unfortunately has some of.

 

[Rammy Blue]

i won't quote JMA's post because it takes up too much space on board however i must say it is one of the best and most thorough posts i have read on the subject. O.K. i am a "Hughes outer" but i can't see that anyone could read that and not think it all makes sense, maybe the reason "Hughes inners" have not responded is because there is no valid response they can rustle up???

personally just glad we only have a couple of weeks left of Hughes managing the club before he gets moved on to pastures new.

roll on end of May.

 

[flb]

Absolutely correct-we are in danger of misusing a fabulous oppertunity to take advantage of the worldwide recession by flexing our financial muscle,europes big clubs wont be skint forever.


The reality is Hughes hasnt the charisma or a tropy winning cv to attract big players and if we give this plank the 4/5 years he wants then some other clubs will have been taken over by a multi billionaire and steal a march.


Jose all the way