If Mancini was here, we would be...

[ctidcarl]

Leaving all the tactical stuff and lineup decisions out of it, just a small observation:

Something about Bob getting up and va fangul-ing the ref and the players in glorious Italian irritation for the entire second half today would've made me feel better than Pellegrini scrunched down in his seat looking like a sad furbie.

I still understand why Bob had to go and all that.. I just..

There was nobody like Mancini on the sideline. He would take not one bit of shit from anyone. Losing was not acceptable to him. It happened sometimes, but one got the feeling that he was going to smash a few tea cups and say some horrific things once he'd gone down the tunnel. He would choke the shit out of his own players before he would ever give the outward impression that allowing a bad goal or losing a winnable match was acceptable to him.

And I liked that.

A bit like Paolo Di Canio

Ha! It's funny you mention that, because the thought of him crossed my mind as I typed my post.

As I stated, my comment had more to do with my personal preference than with any comment on how touchline demeanor translates into managerial ability.

That said, though their passion bleeds through in the same way at times, Paolo Di Canio and Roberto Mancini are miles apart in class (though I gather similar in the way that they angered and sometimes alienated their players, so perhaps your point is fair!)

I think Di Cannio is too passionate and that is his downfall - he cannot distance himself. He also cannot accept players do not share his own high standards (whatever they may be)

I think Mancini is very passionate but, unlike Di Cannio, he can be more rational (sometimes!!)

My guess is that we have gone from a manager who wears his heart on his sleeve, and is animated on the touchline - therefore displaying passion - to a manager who is calmer, overall.

I cannot say which is the better method overall, because time will tell who was the better manager for City.

But the lame performance against Sunderland by the lacklustre players is irrelevant to who is in charge - Mancini had a woeful record at The Stadium of Light, Pellegrini has started no better.

I've (like many) supported City long enough to know that losing is part of football and if you've given it your best and then got beat.....well, shit happens.

However, to put in a soft, half hearted "effort".......there is no excuse, and today we were soft, lethargic, lacklustre and got what we deserved - fook all.

Not good enough.

 

[burnley blue mcfc]

fighting in lumps,but 5 pts clear at the top!

 

[Chi-town blues]

fighting in lumps,but 5 pts clear at the top!

I agree....he would've punched those senior players and the lazy ones .

 

[roj]

moaning

 

[gelly]

Mancini would have walked the PL with Wenger as his only adversary. Probably have one away lost at Sunderland. He might have struggled to qualify for Europe though. He still would have problems working with Ferran and Txiki, who would be undermining him every step.

 

[Balti]

I believe we would be stronger

I still believe we have shot ourselves in the foot

Again

And I will still be delighted if and when I am proved wrong in this opinion

CTID

 

[tommyhair]

We dropped a bollock sacking him

 

[Blue Note]

Calling for his head after losing to Sunderland yet again.

 

[kanovic]

We wouldn't have Negredo and I would trade him for Mancini any day!!!

 

[Bluekiwi]

Calling for his head after losing to Sunderland yet again.

But remember he wasn't going to play at Sunderland anymore, just donate them the three points and one goal for, none against.
The fans would have saved money. The players would have had a rest. And we wouldn't be so pissed off with yesterday's game.