"I would rather lose a tournament than break my word to a player"

[Dribble]

Yes but you have to understand he's made that statement with the benefit of hindsight and as such it's not detrimental to anyone whether it's the club, management, players or fans. If we had lost I don't think he would have made the same statement.

By saying I'd rather lose than go against my word, he's actually enhancing his own reputation as trustworthy and as a human I think trust is absolutely essential in any business. You only have to look at what's happened at FIFA, whatever happens now no one will ever trust that organisation. If we want Willy Cabellero, Angus Gunn to stay next season or if we want to bring in another keeper then being able to look them in the eye and say whatever happens you'll be playing domestic cup competitions is vital.

Again, the promise to Willy is completely understandable and was never an issue for me. The issue was 'I'd rather Lose'. The good thing about this healthy debate is I think there is a consensus forming that Manuel made that statement after the fact whilst caught up in the emotion of the occasion.

If that was the case, I kind of understand he may not have fully meant it in the way it came out, but many fans on here have taken it to literally mean "I would rather lose a tournament than break my word to a player" which I doubt you'll find anywhere in his job description let alone have the agreement of our owners judging by their less than impressed response to our trophyless season last year.

 

[Dribble]

I've been toe to toe with them for years, mate. I'm smiling too ;-)

Toe to toe? More like mouth to arse.

As predictable as night following day, we've not had to put up with your inane, irrelevant twaddle for weeks, but Manuel has a good 5 days and you're back like a lingering soggy fart.

Oh btw, where's this dossier you were banging on about? Still looking for it 3 years later?

 

[The perfect fumble]

Again, the promise to Willy is completely understandable and was never an issue for me. The issue was 'I'd rather Lose'. The good thing about this healthy debate is I think there is a consensus forming that Manuel made that statement after the fact whilst caught up in the emotion of the occasion.

If that was the case, I kind of understand he may not have fully meant it in the way it came out, but many fans on here have taken it to literally mean "I would rather lose a tournament than break my word to a player" which I doubt you'll find anywhere in his job description let alone have the agreement of our owners judging by their less than impressed response to our trophyless season last year.

I think you've nailed it right there.

To put it in to perspective imagine this conversation...

Pellers: "Willy, you're in goal for the cup competitions"

Willy: "Thanks boss"

Pellers: "That is unless we get to the final, then you can f**k off I'm going with Joe"

Willy: " Perfectly understandable boss, I feel really motivated to do my best now".

Once you realise how ludicrous that is, you begin to understand why Pellers did what he did.

 

[fatbloke]

Again, the promise to Willy is completely understandable and was never an issue for me. The issue was 'I'd rather Lose'. The good thing about this healthy debate is I think there is a consensus forming that Manuel made that statement after the fact whilst caught up in the emotion of the occasion.

If that was the case, I kind of understand he may not have fully meant it in the way it came out, but many fans on here have taken it to literally mean "I would rather lose a tournament than break my word to a player" which I doubt you'll find anywhere in his job description let alone have the agreement of our owners judging by their less than impressed response to our trophyless season last year.

I refer you back to your quote on Page 21:
"What I also find laughable is fans who've never met our club's hierarchy but they're happy to make comments on their behalf that this is what our owners would want."

 

[Rolee]

Mate I love attacking football and that's why I loved Pep's Barcelona and hated Maureen's anti football. The issue I had with Manuel was that his brand of attacking football was reckless and was detrimental to our once rock solid defence. What Manuel should have done when he first arrived was to build upon what was already here, not pull it apart with his Keegan-esque style football.

Last Wednesday, Sunday at Wembley and against Sevilla away all proved that we can set our team up in a solid formation and still be dangerous in attack. There are times when we need to be pragmatic to get the win, but when I saw the team sheet before we played Barca at the Etihad, I just wanted to go home because I knew what was coming as did nearly everyone sat near me that night. 442 against Barca with Milner and Fernando in a midfield 2 against Xavi, Iniesta and Busquets was sheer lunacy. This is the side of Manuel's attacking philosophy that I don't get. My other point regarding his 'He'd rather lose' statement' was perhaps it stems from his belief that he'd rather lose an exciting match 5-6 than win a regulation 1 nil game.

Ultimately he stuck by his principles last season and I think our owner's actions after the season ended has shown what they think of Manuel's all out attacking philosophy.

Our owner's actions? Giving him a 12 month extension you mean?

Essentially what he's saying is that he would prefer to stick by his principles even it ultimately meant losing than doing it in a way that he's not comfortable with. The same applies both to the situation at the weekend and his general managerial philosophy. I see absolutely nothing wrong with that, in fact I admire it.

 

[Neville Kneville]

Absolutely! And I believe contrary to the often hyperbolic fan based opinion, Willy was performing. This by the way is relative. In his sib role for City against Southampton he made 7 save, 3 of which were Hart-esque. But in the aftermath of the game, all moat wanted to talk about was how he could never keep a clean sheet. As if clean sheets were strictly down to the keeper.

The coach's on the other hand judge him on actual concrete metric s. Sure I don't know what those are, as I'm not a City coach, but I'm absolutely certain it not based on the 'for me, Hart would have saved that' metric most fans subscribe to.

I would suspect that the coaches also think Hart is a better keeper, & the majority of goalkeepers would agree. Why ? Because he looks better & has nicer hair perhaps? Or just maybe for other reasons you are unable to pick up on.

 

[Dribble]

Our owner's actions? Giving him a 12 month extension you mean?

Essentially what he's saying is that he would prefer to stick by his principles even it ultimately meant losing than doing it in a way that he's not comfortable with. The same applies both to the situation at the weekend and his general managerial philosophy. I see absolutely nothing wrong with that, in fact I admire it.

Yes a 12 month extension that 4 months into it he was essentially given notice he'd be leaving in the summer. We all knew he was only given that extension to stop media speculation into his future.

Like I keep saying, I have no issue with Manuel giving his word to Willy and sticking to it (unlike many others) but at what point do you think our owners would be happy with their main employee stating 'I'd rather lose' in respect to what he's actually here to do which is not to lose? I think the answer can be found in Khaldoon's end of season address where he said another trophyless season would not be tolerated and there was no caveat of 'Unless it meant breaking the manager's word to Willy.'

I'm a very principled person, but experience has taught me the clever thing to do is to never rule anything in or out and always leave yourself with enough wriggle room so you can be flexible. As Richard Branson put it, 'That's the difference between a calculated risk and a reckless gamble.' and that philosophy hasn't done him much harm to date has it? And before you say it, playing Willy was NOT a reckless gamble imo.

 

[Eccles Blue]

Did we win the Capital One Cup? I was there & was sure we did but I'm beginning to wonder after reading some of the drivel in this thread!!

We won, get over it. Mr Pellegrini is an honourable man, Willy played a great game, Joe might or might not have done the same & one of the first people that Willy praised for helping him was Joe.

If Willy had had a better game against Chelsea the week before I don't think people would have thought anything of Mr Pellegrini playing him in the final.

Just my humble opinion!!

 

[Rolee]

Yes a 12 month extension that 4 months into it he was essentially given notice he'd be leaving in the summer. We all knew he was only given that extension to stop media speculation into his future.

Like I keep saying, I have no issue with Manuel giving his word to Willy and sticking to it (unlike many others) but at what point do you think our owners would be happy with their main employee stating 'I'd rather lose' in respect to what he's actually here to do which is not to lose? I think the answer can be found in Khaldoon's end of season address where he said another trophyless season would not be tolerated and there was no caveat of 'Unless it meant breaking the manager's word to Willy.'

I'm a very principled person, but experience has taught me the clever thing to do is to never rule anything in or out and always leave yourself with enough wriggle room so you can be flexible. As Richard Branson put it, 'That's the difference between a calculated risk and a reckless gamble.' and that philosophy hasn't done him much harm to date has it? And before you say it, playing Willy was NOT a reckless gamble imo.

A 12 month extension in recognition of a job well done imo, a golden handshake if you will. I can't imagine our owners are naive enough to think that by giving him the extension the speculation would stop so I don't buy that that was the reason.

We're not going to agree on this, I find absolutely nothing wrong in what he said, it is them very principles that Pellegrini espouses that were part of the reason he was hired in the first place and one of the main reasons he's so respected in the game.

 

[Dribble]

I refer you back to your quote on Page 21:
"What I also find laughable is fans who've never met our club's hierarchy but they're happy to make comments on their behalf that this is what our owners would want."

Yes, this is how our owner reacted to failure. Eight months after Khaldoon's end of season address that troohyless seasons are not acceptable, Manuel was given notice he was going to be relieved of his position in June. Kind of shows what our owner thought of not winning a pot even though we had the strongest squad in the league by a country mile.

Do you honestly think if Pep had been available in the summer, Manuel would still be here holding a 12 month extension?