Joycee Banercheck
Well-Known Member
Take off your anti-Hughes glasses. I don't want him back.Gelsons Dad said:
We are playing footbal that is shit. Don't compare it to Hughes. Its just shit.
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.
I miss Hughes
- Thread starter Grand Master Ram Rod
- Start date
We are playing footbal that is shit. Don't compare it to Hughes. Its just shit.
bizzbo
Well-Known Member
it's actually fifteen points from seven games, over two points per game.
and under hughes it was, err... hang on..... one point seven.
and under hughes it was, err... hang on..... one point seven.
Gelsons Dad
Well-Known Member
Joycee Banercheck said:Take off your anti-Hughes glasses. I don't want him back.Gelsons Dad said:Take off your Hughes tinted glasses and look at the actual results.
This season: MH 1.6 points per game RM 1.8.
We are 4th equal on points with 2 games in hand. Possibly 2 points behind 3rd! In his first month in charge Mancini did something Hughes couldn't do in a season and a half. Beat the rags!
We are much better off than we were under Hughes. We have a manager with a world class reputation. We have learned to defend. Our points per game average is up. We have discovered 2 new youngsters who have proved they are up to the riggers of top class football.
The bookies know whats going on even if you don't.
We are playing footbal that is shit. Don't compare it to Hughes. Its just shit.
It works. We are on track for our stated objective. I don't want to watch 3-3 draws I wan't to watch us win something!
scorer
Well-Known Member
Joycee Banercheck said:Sure some tweats moaned about drawing with Burnley and mindlessly bombing forward has been replaced by mindedly (is that a word?) holding. Yes some players are struggling with it, coz they aint fucking Italian (pardon ez mois).
PMSL....
Burnley....?
Try... Burnley, Hull, Birmingham, Wigan, Bolton, Liverpool and being totally outclassed by Spurs....
All after he'd spent £300m+ on HIS players.
Your obsession with Hughes is very unhealthy....
As for being knocked out by Forest and Brighton.... Yup,
Robinho didnt play against Forest but Kompany did, as did Zabaletta and SWP.... at the time Forset were shite and coulbn't win a raffle, yet they beat us 3-0 on our ground... shameful.
Bill
Moderator
put it this way, we would have beaten stoke, we would be going to chelsea with absolute confidence to get a result, now yes we will scrape past stoke then get hammered at chelsea.
JohnMaddocksAxe
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 30 Apr 2008
- Messages
- 2,854
de niro said:put it this way, we would have beaten stoke, we would be going to chelsea with absolute confidence to get a result, now yes we will scrape past stoke then get hammered at chelsea.
For someone who constantly berated and belittled anyone who came up with reasons for Hughes being a poor option for the club, based on his time here, you haven't half come up with some straw clutching stuff in support of him over Mancini on this thread.
The crystal ball reading "We would definitely be third" and "we would definitely have beaten Stoke/Hull/whoever" stuff is amazing.
In fact, it is embarrassing to think that someone can say it with a straight face.
Passs that crystal ball over here. Wait, wait, wait, yes, is there....... wait, wait, yes, these's a man, he is wearing a scarf, he is at St Andrew's and he is dancing, and there he is again, he's at COMS now and there's a man with a sun tan looking glum. And wait, the man with a scarf is now at COMS again and he is dancing in front of a Scottish man who is wearing maroon. And there again, in front of a man with a sombrero and a man who is twitching.
So, you see, that is my PROOF that if Mancini had been in charge then we would have DEFINITELY beaten Spurs away, Hull at home, Wigan away, Burnley at home, Birmingham away. Etc, etc, etc.
And I am saying this with a completely straight face and offering it as the cornerstone of my Mancini>Hughes argument. It's pretty easy this "we would have......" lark, isn't it.
Hang on, there's some men in white coats at the door, I'll be back in a second. They probably just want to congratulate me on my new found, completely rational line of argument.
Petetheblu
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Sep 2007
- Messages
- 7,319
de niro said:put it this way, we would have beaten stoke, we would be going to chelsea with absolute confidence to get a result, now yes we will scrape past stoke then get hammered at chelsea.
Come on Bill if we did lose away against Chelsea what shame would be in that, teams won't just lie down for City. This injection of money has many positives for us, but one of the negatives is that teams now really want to BEAT us and that goes for the likes of Chelsea to.
Clubber
Well-Known Member
bizzbo said:it's actually fifteen points from seven games, over two points per game.
and under hughes it was, err... hang on..... one point seven.
Do you have no numbers on your key board?
Neil McNab
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 7 May 2009
- Messages
- 3,371
Why?mcfcliam said:Hate saying this as I was a staunch Hughes outer but I'm starting to feel we should have given him more time.
The players we have at the club that are letting us down were broubht in by him, Mancini has to undo stuff before weaving his own magic.
Chippy_boy
Well-Known Member
Neil McNab said:Why?mcfcliam said:Hate saying this as I was a staunch Hughes outer but I'm starting to feel we should have given him more time.
The players we have at the club that are letting us down were broubht in by him, Mancini has to undo stuff before weaving his own magic.
I agree. And apart from anything else, Hughes had plenty of time AND MONEY. He had something like 80 game and £250m and we were still playing shit and leaking goals. Enough was enough.
Mancini has had very little money and only a handful of games.