Jose for City? (merged)

[Didsbury Dave]

Re: Jose for City?

Bob, as far as I understand, and TH will probably know more, Mourinho came so close to our job before Hughes was sacked he told one of our players he was coming. But he stayed in the CL by the skin of his teeth and told City he wasn't available now but might be in the summer. City wanted him and had a situation on their hands where Hughes had lost it and was obviously out of his depth (before the Arsenal cup quarter I think), round about the Spurs defeat. They started talking to managers. Hiddink said No and went public. . Mancini said "I'll do it and will do it for 6 months to prove myself". Hughes went balistic and had to be fired. So City took Mancini on on that basis - win/win for them. Mourinho agreed to join RM in Spring. The Sheikh took the call then to stick with Mancini as he was honest and was doing OK. He was gutted to not get top 4 but stuck with him, in the full knowledge that Mourinho might not last long at RM.

I'm joining the dots all over the place but that's my take. Also explains the bad blood betwen Hughes and Mancini .

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Re: Jose for City?

I'll give you that. My comment was inaccurate. I think they ceased talking to JM in early March but they were looking at alternatives (including Hiddink) after that. End result is the same.

another bollocks by you mate. everyone well know hiddink is out of the game coz he never want to manage at club level. so is very naive to believe City owner didnt know it. i think you should respect a bit more City owner and officials , they dont are so naive as you seem to think.

I had a very detailed conversation with a respected City source when the Hughes sacking took place, who gave me a picture of what happened and, more importantly, what the plans were going forward. So I'm pretty sure of my ground here.

I actually agree that they shouldn't have approached Hiddink, but more for the reason that he was in Abramovich's pocket. I also believe that it was the knowledge of the approach that started the process that led to Hughes' departure and I strongly suspect some mischief by the Russian. But the fact is that they approached him at least once and possibly again after Mourinho indicated he wasn't coming.

Mancini's body language and whole demeanour at the moment reminds me very much of Kevin Keegan just before he left us.

 

[Mancio]

Re: Jose for City?

Bob, as far as I understand, and TH will probably know more, Mourinho came so close to our job before Hughes was sacked he told one of our players he was coming. But he stayed in the CL by the skin of his teeth and told City he wasn't available now but might be in the summer. City wanted him and had a situation on their hands where Hughes had lost it and was obviously out of his depth (before the Arsenal cup quarter I think), round about the Spurs defeat. They started talking to managers. Hiddink said No and went public. . Mancini said "I'll do it and will do it for 6 months to prove myself". Hughes went balistic and had to be fired. So City took Mancini on on that basis - win/win for them. Mourinho agreed to join RM in Spring. The Sheikh took the call then to stick with Mancini as he was honest and was doing OK. He was gutted to not get top 4 but stuck with him, in the full knowledge that Mourinho might not last long at RM.

I'm joining the dots all over the place but that's my take.

this is the top of the naivety.

you are mancini , you have a 9 euros million year contract at Inter until june 2012 and you quit it to go "on try" 6 months at City ? as i said before , sometime you seem to be coming from mars

 

[Zin 'messiah' Zimmer]

Re: Jose for City?

Bob, as far as I understand, and TH will probably know more, Mourinho came so close to our job before Hughes was sacked he told one of our players he was coming. But he stayed in the CL by the skin of his teeth and told City he wasn't available now but might be in the summer. City wanted him and had a situation on their hands where Hughes had lost it and was obviously out of his depth (before the Arsenal cup quarter I think), round about the Spurs defeat. They started talking to managers. Hiddink said No and went public. . Mancini said "I'll do it and will do it for 6 months to prove myself". Hughes went balistic and had to be fired. So City took Mancini on on that basis - win/win for them. Mourinho agreed to join RM in Spring. The Sheikh took the call then to stick with Mancini as he was honest and was doing OK. He was gutted to not get top 4 but stuck with him, in the full knowledge that Mourinho might not last long at RM.

I'm joining the dots all over the place but that's my take.

He never has any intention of taking the job, we were simply a pawn in the jose chess game

The deal with Madrid was footballs worse kept secret, Peligrini even admitting as much in Jan/feb 2010

I'd seriously alter expectations about jose ever managing city, it won't happen.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

Re: Jose for City?

Bob, as far as I understand, and TH will probably know more, Mourinho came so close to our job before Hughes was sacked he told one of our players he was coming. But he stayed in the CL by the skin of his teeth and told City he wasn't available now but might be in the summer. City wanted him and had a situation on their hands where Hughes had lost it and was obviously out of his depth (before the Arsenal cup quarter I think), round about the Spurs defeat. They started talking to managers. Hiddink said No and went public. . Mancini said "I'll do it and will do it for 6 months to prove myself". Hughes went balistic and had to be fired. So City took Mancini on on that basis - win/win for them. Mourinho agreed to join RM in Spring. The Sheikh took the call then to stick with Mancini as he was honest and was doing OK. He was gutted to not get top 4 but stuck with him, in the full knowledge that Mourinho might not last long at RM.

I'm joining the dots all over the place but that's my take.

this is the top of the naivety.

you are mancini , you have a 9 euros million year contract at Inter until june 2012 and you quit it to go "on try" 6 months at City ? as i said before , sometime you seem to be coming from mars

...and you're out of your depth, if I'm honest, Mancio.

A million miles out of your depth.

Listen to what you are being told. Your judgement has been impaired because there's a squad of yapping, nipping lapdogs around some of our heels on an ongoing basis on this forum.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

Re: Jose for City?

So what's your argument?

As I said, Mancini's settlement coincided very nicely with his availability to replace Hughes.

Hiddink was approached first. As for Jose, he was in no position to walk out on Inter with a Champions League tie v Chelsea just out the bag.

please dont force me to call also you naive , please. mancini resolved his contract with inter only AFTER had found the agreement with City, its not difficult to understand

Wrong. Inter could not afford to pay Mancini the monies he was owed at £9m a year.

He had been paid on the drip and the agreed gardening leave was up.

If, as you say, Mancini ended his agreement on Oct 30th, please tell me how it is that it took another SEVEN WEEKS for Hughes to be dismissed?

That Mancini was also offered a post at Notts County PRIOR to an approach from City.

Because I can tell you in the proceeding weeks, a decision to sack Hughes came following a 1-1 draw at home to Hull on Nov 28th

And that Hiddink was approached only after.

You can take that as gospel.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

Re: Jose for City?

Bob, as far as I understand, and TH will probably know more, Mourinho came so close to our job before Hughes was sacked he told one of our players he was coming. But he stayed in the CL by the skin of his teeth and told City he wasn't available now but might be in the summer. City wanted him and had a situation on their hands where Hughes had lost it and was obviously out of his depth (before the Arsenal cup quarter I think), round about the Spurs defeat. They started talking to managers. Hiddink said No and went public. . Mancini said "I'll do it and will do it for 6 months to prove myself". Hughes went balistic and had to be fired. So City took Mancini on on that basis - win/win for them. Mourinho agreed to join RM in Spring. The Sheikh took the call then to stick with Mancini as he was honest and was doing OK. He was gutted to not get top 4 but stuck with him, in the full knowledge that Mourinho might not last long at RM.

I'm joining the dots all over the place but that's my take.

He never has any intention of taking the job, we were simply a pawn in the jose chess game

.

That's one take on it, Zin, and I can see why you think that.

I don't believe it personally, I don't think that's how he operates. But it's just two differing opinions based on the same set of facts.

 

[Zin 'messiah' Zimmer]

Re: Jose for City?

He never has any intention of taking the job, we were simply a pawn in the jose chess game

.

That's one take on it, Zin, and I can see why you think that.

I don't believe it personally, I don't think that's how he operates. But it's just two differing opinions based on the same set of facts.

'If' it is all time and place, we are certainly fucked again because i believe he will win the champs league this year for Real, which would elevate him to god like status with the gringos and make it nigh on impossible to leave.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

Re: Jose for City?

please dont force me to call also you naive , please. mancini resolved his contract with inter only AFTER had found the agreement with City, its not difficult to understand

Wrong. Inter could not afford to pay Mancini the monies he was owed at £9m a year.

He had been paid on the drip and the agreed gardening leave was up.

If, as you say, Mancini ended his agreement on Oct 30th, please tell me how it is that it took another SEVEN WEEKS for Hughes to be dismissed?

That Mancini was also offered a post at Notts County PRIOR to an approach from City.

Because I can tell you in the proceeding weeks, a decision to sack Hughes came following a 1-1 draw at home to Hull on Nov 28th

And that Hiddink was approached only after.

You can take that as gospel.

Answers on a postcard, pretty PLEASE?

 

[taconinja]

Re: Jose for City?

I think the chances of Mourinho leaving Madrid has taken a knock..
Stronger efforts will be made to keep him now he's broken a hoodoo.

Will he be convinced to stay? If you want him you have to be aggressive.

No offense, but beating Lyon isn't going to convince anyone at Real of anything. Real has two objectives: Win the Champion's League and beat Barca... at any cost. Mourinho's term depends on those two factors, not doing what everyone at Real expects to do, which is beat a team like Lyon. Yes, they've had a hard time, but recall how... well, arrogant Real is. They dismiss every team. You will never meet an organization and fanbase more self-assured. They're the Nicklas Bendtner of organizations.