Jose for City? (merged)

[Mancio]

the last the best

That's the best argument against Mourinho I've ever seen, because I could do with losing an inch or two off mine :-).

*/

i was talking of that on the front.... not the in the back one....... :=)

 

[samharris]

the last the best

That's the best argument against Mourinho I've ever seen, because I could do with losing an inch or two off mine :-).

Fold it in half then ;)

 

[Damocles]

That sort of pointless response frustrates me and others.

It frustrates me aswell, as I'm sure the foamers post-match frustrate the guys who want a change as they make everybody's positions look bad.

We then move onto the more subjective argument 'how' and with which 'style' we achieve the targets City's managers are set which is far less likely to gain a consensus ;-)

The one which wins us trophies is probably a popular answer. I don't care if we play long ball football, twatting it up to Dzeko and hoping for the best, whilst Tevez plays in net, as long as it wins us that first trophy.

 

[fbloke]

At what point, if any, does how City win games enter peoples calculations?

Yes we grind out results to get into the CL but does next season mean we do the same or do we want better, more attractive, flowing football?

Ah, now we wish to tread the path of Real Madrid whilst skipping all the titles. I keep bringing them up because they're out of their minds. I don't want that for us. They're the height of arrogance and despite all the going on and on about us being arrogant from the press and other fans, I dismiss that talk as silly until I run into posts like this.

Thats the sort of response that suggests either you have pre-judged the posts intent or dont read and understand it fully.

The post was designed to widen the current debate and had two questions and no statements in it - did you notice that both sentences ended with '?' ? - There are a lot of people that obviously expect more immediately delivered, stylish football and I agree that such a thing is still more for the future than the present.

But when (considering the current managerial debate) does it enter peoples calculations about who should manage City?<br /><br />-- Sun Apr 03, 2011 1:53 pm --<br /><br />

That sort of pointless response frustrates me and others.

It frustrates me aswell, as I'm sure the foamers post-match frustrate the guys who want a change as they make everybody's positions look bad.

We then move onto the more subjective argument 'how' and with which 'style' we achieve the targets City's managers are set which is far less likely to gain a consensus ;-)

The one which wins us trophies is probably a popular answer. I don't care if we play long ball football, twatting it up to Dzeko and hoping for the best, whilst Tevez plays in net, as long as it wins us that first trophy.

And what about the second, third or fourth trophies?

 

[2sheikhs]

the last the best

That's the best argument against Mourinho I've ever seen, because I could do with losing an inch or two off mine :-).

If I did that you'd have to call it "gender re-allignment".

 

[hgblue]

That's the best argument against Mourinho I've ever seen, because I could do with losing an inch or two off mine :-).

If I did that you'd have to call it "gender re-allignment".

You'd better get praying for Mourinho then mate. Poor lad :-).

 

[Damocles]

And what about the second, third or fourth trophies?

Still happy to play the same. When we are consistently dominating year upon year, and have a full trophy collection, then this question becomes a bit more legitimate, but even then it's a bit stupid.

Football is a sporting competition. As a fan you have zero rights to be entertained. If you don't like it, don't go, somebody else will take your seat and be happy to watch the sporting competition between two athletes.

This is akin to going to the Olympic Games and bemoaning the fact that the marathon runners should do a quick flip every now and again to make it more entertaining.

If you want entertaining, I hear Chester Zoo is quite good at this time of year. I go to watch a sport.

 

[taconinja]

Ah, now we wish to tread the path of Real Madrid whilst skipping all the titles. I keep bringing them up because they're out of their minds. I don't want that for us. They're the height of arrogance and despite all the going on and on about us being arrogant from the press and other fans, I dismiss that talk as silly until I run into posts like this.

Thats the sort of response that suggests either you have pre-judged the posts intent or dont read and understand it fully.

The post was designed to widen the current debate and had two questions and no statements in it - did you notice that both sentences ended with '?' ? - There are a lot of people that obviously expect more immediately delivered, stylish football and I agree that such a thing is still more for the future than the present.

But when (considering the current managerial debate) does it enter peoples calculations about who should manage City?

No, I get it. Discussions similar to this are part of my career. Yes, I noticed the question marks. Those are called leading questions. What am I supposed to say? No, I don't want attacking, free-flowing football? I wish to say this with as little offense as possible: Leading questions are sophomoric at best. Please keep in mind that you're talking to someone who wants Mourinho as once again I will reiterate that he exceeds Mancini in man-management I feel and I think he can handle the British press better. Tactically? They're close and we'll probably play much the same as we are now since that's a progression no matter how much you wish to think that monies spent equals attacking football.

You've committed two extremely irritating debate fallacies in this thread. First, you attempt to create artificial restrictions regarding answers to your question by saying opponents can't use negatives about sacking the manager as a reason not to sack. By the way, I asked you to name names as to who would come in, do better, and provide no disruption. I ask you again to name names... but since you like artificial restrictions, you aren't allowed to use words or pictures to do so. I won't accept otherwise. Second, you ask leading questions designed to put the opposition into what are frankly poor rhetorical traps. Yes, I would like to see attacking, free-flowing football. I would also like to see us not end back in mid-table where we were headed with the inept Hughes. As a Mourinho fan, I am under no illusion that we would be playing this same grinding style and hanging onto 4th by the skin of our teeth. It's part of the process called "learning to win."

So no I didn't pre-judge, and yes I did get your point. They're just poor points.

 

[fbloke]

And what about the second, third or fourth trophies?

Still happy to play the same. When we are consistently dominating year upon year, and have a full trophy collection, then this question becomes a bit more legitimate, but even then it's a bit stupid.

Football is a sporting competition. As a fan you have zero rights to be entertained. If you don't like it, don't go, somebody else will take your seat and be happy to watch the sporting competition between two athletes.

This is akin to going to the Olympic Games and bemoaning the fact that the marathon runners should do a quick flip every now and again to make it more entertaining.

If you want entertaining, I hear Chester Zoo is quite good at this time of year. I go to watch a sport.

Well we do find ourselves on separate sides of debate there Dam' as I feel quite strongly about how we develop a winning team.

There has to be more to City than being a modern day Wimbledon or more expensive version of Stoke.

 

[taconinja]

Still happy to play the same. When we are consistently dominating year upon year, and have a full trophy collection, then this question becomes a bit more legitimate, but even then it's a bit stupid.

Football is a sporting competition. As a fan you have zero rights to be entertained. If you don't like it, don't go, somebody else will take your seat and be happy to watch the sporting competition between two athletes.

This is akin to going to the Olympic Games and bemoaning the fact that the marathon runners should do a quick flip every now and again to make it more entertaining.

If you want entertaining, I hear Chester Zoo is quite good at this time of year. I go to watch a sport.

Well we do find ourselves on separate sides of debate there Dam' as I feel quite strongly about how we develop a winning team.

There has to be more to City than being a modern day Wimbledon or more expensive version of Stoke.

That's excluding the middle. What you have to do is prioritize your keys to winning. Both Mourinho and Mancini prioritize defense and build from there. Others prioritize attack and build from there. Both of them are much more adventurous than Tony Pulis despite what people claim.