Jose for City? (merged)

[fbloke]

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.

And I think you will find that I have named names of alternatives to the current manager in direct response to that very question. Apologies if it wasn't your question but I have answered it.

 

[taconinja]

And I think you will find that I have named names of alternatives to the current manager in direct response to that very question. Apologies if it wasn't your question but I have answered it.

No, you have my apologies as I missed that. Sprawling thread sprawls.

 

[fbloke]

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.

You've hit the nail on the head there, as its the apparent need for the fast forward button, perhaps brought on by the massive amount of money being spent, that leads to panic in many senses.

Thats said I firmly believe that we will get where we want to go quicker under either Mancini or Ancelotti.

 

[Damocles]

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.

Really? Why? Who says?

Developing a winning team is nothing to do with entertaining football and I'm not sure why you have mentioned it?

 

[fbloke]

And I think you will find that I have named names of alternatives to the current manager in direct response to that very question. Apologies if it wasn't your question but I have answered it.

No, you have my apologies as I missed that. Sprawling thread sprawls.

He, he, he I know what you mean these conversations are sometimes like having a satellite delay during a phone call.

For the record I said Mourinho, Ancelotti or my personal like for Ranieri gets him an outside vote ;-)

 

[taconinja]

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.

You've hit the nail on the head there, as its the apparent need for the fast forward button, perhaps brought on by the massive amount of money being spent, that leads to panic in many senses.

Thats said I firmly believe that we will get where we want to go quicker under either Mancini or Ancelotti.

Your Freudian Slip is showing. ;)

I'm unconvinced we would get there quicker under anyone than Mourinho. Been surprised before though and will doubtless be again.

 

[fbloke]

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.

Really? Why? Who says?

Developing a winning team is nothing to do with entertaining football and I'm not sure why you have mentioned it?

I mention it because it quite clearly is part of many posters' desire to see Mancini moved out.

The call for less 'boring' football has been loud and clear.<br /><br />-- Sun Apr 03, 2011 2:27 pm --<br /><br />

You've hit the nail on the head there, as its the apparent need for the fast forward button, perhaps brought on by the massive amount of money being spent, that leads to panic in many senses.

Thats said I firmly believe that we will get where we want to go quicker under either Mancini or Ancelotti.

Your Freudian Slip is showing. ;)

I'm unconvinced we would get there quicker under anyone than Mourinho. Been surprised before though and will doubtless be again.

Ooops, fbloke must limit the windows he has open :-(

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

You can't measure progress on points

You write these long posts which are so full of twisted logic and lack any sort of intellectual rigour.

So if we get 67 points this season and 75 next we can't say that's progress? Don't be stupid.

 

[taconinja]

You can't measure progress on points

You write these long posts which are so full of twisted logic and lack any sort of intellectual rigour.

So if we get 67 points this season and 75 next we can't say that's progress? Don't be stupid.

Not if we end up in 5th next season with 75 points, no it isn't progress.

 

[FantasyIreland]

So if we get 67 points this season and 75 next we can't say that's progress? Don't be stupid.

The fact we will have won 3 or so more games is irrelevant PB - It's only our position that matters remember........