Kiev post match reaction thread - PLEASE keep it in here.

[blueinsa]

Uck, keep it civil mate.

My point is that I don't buy into these 'divisions' - we had Carlos handing in a transfer request (two weeks after Rooney, presumably in a bid to get a similarly-improved deal).
On the pitch last night, they were motivated - you only have to look at the effort put in in the last quarter of the match. In recent games where there's been 'aggro', the players have waded in for each other (see Villa - Toure, Balotelli, Hart, Kolarov) - this shows unity. Training reports point to good morale.

I just want to discuss actual facts, and not vague assertions relating to 'body language', and other such stuff.

Add to the fact that a fair few successful managers (Capello, Ferguson for example) aren't one bit interested in being the players' mate, and can you see why I think the issue's being given a little too much weight in these discussions?

Ferguson isn't the "players' mate"?

Seriously?

He's gone out on a limb numerous times to defend his players. Everyone who has worked for him have nothing but great things to say about his man-management skills. The way he treats youth players, makes them feel important and valued, the respect he gets from his team.

Do you honestly think Mancini gets anywher near that level of engagement with his playing staff?

I know you don't think it's important... whereas I think it totally defines the quality of a manager. So we're never going to agree on this. To me management is ALL about motivation and direction. Tactics are simply a by-product of that philosophy.

He buys the wrong players, he plays the wrong formations, he cannot change a game.

Is that tactical enough for you?

Like all the true great military commanders in history, their soldiers will all say the same thing. They had a total belief in what it was they were being asked to do. They would have done anything the man asked...

Leadership is everything.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

Just sit back and enjoy the bride, Rome wasn't built in a Dave.

PMSL
Brilliant mate. Really laughed at that ;-)

It's usually about this point in the thread it all becomes my fault...

 

[ST Coleridge]

So the players are badly underperforming (that's the gist of what i'm reading from a few posters) - why is that not Mancini's fault. One player or two you blame the player. When the team consistently underperforms surely the manager carries the can...

But Billy, you could see that they were up for it. It really wasn't a question of motivation last night.

So the other things RM can alter are:
* Team selection - solid three allowed the fullbacks to bomb on loads, so I've got no qualms with Zabaleta starting (esp. since De Jong, Milner are still on their way back). We had plenty available going forward, the passing and movement just wasn't up to scratch.
* Tactics - we started out by taking the game to them, and kept this going all match. Broadly, the tactics weren't bad, but I'd have like to see Dzeko hold it up more, and Silva/Mario combine better with Micah/AK on the wings to create crossing opportunities.<br /><br />-- Fri Mar 11, 2011 12:13 pm --<br /><br />

Ferguson isn't the "players' mate"?

Seriously?

He's gone out on a limb numerous times to defend his players. Everyone who has worked for him have nothing but great things to say about his man-management skills. The way he treats youth players, makes them feel important and valued, the respect he gets from his team.

Do you honestly think Mancini gets anywher near that level of engagement with his playing staff?

I know you don't think it's important... whereas I think it totally defines the quality of a manager. So we're never going to agree on this. To me management is ALL about motivation and direction. Tactics are simply a by-product of that philosophy.

He buys the wrong players, he plays the wrong formations, he cannot change a game.

Is that tactical enough for you?

Right, two things - Ferguson'll ship you out immediately, as soon as you're no longer useful. Every member of his squad is well aware of this. Relationships with Keane, Beckham, Stam, Van Nistlerooy all deteriorated speedily. But you're right, Mancini doesn't have that level of authority.

More pertinently, why do you think Mancini has failed to 'motivate and direct' the players? This is what I keep getting at - what's your evidence for this?

 

[Sigh]

Malaise.

 

[Bluemoon115]

Thought not.

We can always buy another new team this summer. I'm sure the Sheikh won't mind. I'm sure eventually Mancini will have purchased a team which lives up to his exactingly high standards...

You just going to ignore what i said then Billy and respond to someone who has a one word answer instead of wanting a debate? Fair enough

I'll respond to you, you're one of the more sensible ones...

If last nights performance was in isolation, then I'd throw my arms up, say "that's football", and hope/believe that we'd do something int he second leg.

But we've been bad for a while now.

We start off in first gear, which is better than most. We rarely don't control the opening 10-20 mins. But then the opposition come alive, and we either hit the brakes when we get a goal, or stall going into 5th when we need a goal to get back into a game.

Silva had a poor game last night, that's fine, first one I can remember since he found his feet. But we had no alternative to him. No-one else was gonna play the strikers though, or bring others into the game the way he does. Another one, Zabba has been immense at left back, Kolarov has had freedom in midfield recently. So why oh why did Mancini change it back?

The one thing I have been told for over 12 months is how good Mancini is at getting his sides to defend. Yet yesterday they looked confused, shellshocked and broken at times.

But by far the most worrying thisng is that not one of these issues look like being resolved.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

More pertinently, why do you think Mancini has failed to 'motivate and direct' the players? This is what I keep getting at - what's your evidence for this?

I'll give you some evidence:

Our performances for the last three months. Our results in important games. Our constant underachievements.The comments made by ex-players to the press. The body language on the field. The rumours off it. The transfer requests. The poor substitutions.

now you give me some evidence of his ability to motivate and direct please.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

What was the gameplan, what was the shape?

I saw neither.

Just a significant proportion of the team who are not good enough and impact out performance week by week.

Mancini is reported as saying we controlled the game. Now he is kidding himself, not just us.

 

[Failsworth_Blue]

You just going to ignore what i said then Billy and respond to someone who has a one word answer instead of wanting a debate? Fair enough

I'll respond to you, you're one of the more sensible ones...

If last nights performance was in isolation, then I'd throw my arms up, say "that's football", and hope/believe that we'd do something int he second leg.

But we've been bad for a while now.

We start off in first gear, which is better than most. We rarely don't control the opening 10-20 mins. But then the opposition come alive, and we either hit the brakes when we get a goal, or stall going into 5th when we need a goal to get back into a game.

Silva had a poor game last night, that's fine, first one I can remember since he found his feet. But we had no alternative to him. No-one else was gonna play the strikers though, or bring others into the game the way he does. Another one, Zabba has been immense at left back, Kolarov has had freedom in midfield recently. So why oh why did Mancini change it back?

The one thing I have been told for over 12 months is how good Mancini is at getting his sides to defend. Yet yesterday they looked confused, shellshocked and broken at times.

But by far the most worrying thisng is that not one of these issues look like being resolved.

Fair enough mate, appreciate that and completely understand where you are coming from but i agreed with the way Mancini set up last night in that there was space down the sides of the full backs and early on both Micah and Kolarov got past the full back and in behind, unfortunately when they went a goal up they defended deeper which meant the space in behind wasn't there for Kolarov and Micah to get forward. Zab played poorly and i'd have subbed him at half time for De Jong as we needed someone in the middle to protect when they broke forward on their counter attacks

We have the players to break teams down even without Silva playing that well, unfortunately Yaya, Balo and Dzeko didn't keep the ball well enough when sometimes against teams like Kiev it's all about keeping posession and waiting for openings. Our passes were so sloppy last night after the goal and it meant we couldn't get any grip of the game, of course Mancini has to take part of the blame but i thought he got his team selection and tactics spot on at the start but goals change games and we weren't good enough to break them down afterwards. I completely agree that over the past couple of months, performances haven't been great and things need to improve.

We have an extremely difficult game against Kiev next week but we are good enough to go and win the game and the tie if our players are on form, we are still in pole position for 4th and are in the quarter finals of the FA Cup. Theres still plenty of positives in terms of where we are and i think it's silly for some posters to completely write Mancini off when we are in a strong position coming into the last 9 weeks of the season. If we perform like last night for most of the remaining games of the season then Mancini will be in big trouble but i'm still optimistic in respect that i think we'll beat Reading and i think we'll finish in the top four but at this stage no-one really knows

 

[Rammy Blue]

This is one of my main concerns with the tactics and squad we have at our disposal.

I didn't think we played that badly last night however when we go behind we don't seem capable of picking up the pace/tempo to put the opposition under pressure.

How many times did we get in behind the Kiev defence last night?

Answers on a postcard please.....

Rammy, you do realise it's extremely tough to get in behind a defence when they sit deep? Theres no room in behind them because they were basically defending on their 18 yard box in the second half. Kiev are a well drilled team and they defended with two banks of four and got plenty of men behind the ball which made it difficult. We should have been better but i don't think there was much chance to get in behind last night and thats due to how Kiev defended so fair play to them

I still think it's a very poor effort when a player of the calibre of Dzeko can play a full 90 mins without a single attempt on goal - I don't blame him, it's the system.

 

[Failsworth_Blue]

What was the gameplan, what was the shape?

I saw neither.

Just a significant proportion of the team who are not good enough and impact out performance week by week.

Mancini is reported as saying we controlled the game. Now he is kidding himself, not just us.

Before the goal the set up and shape for me was spot on. Richards and Kolarov were getting up the pitch and getting in behind and Silva was getting space in the hole, we were controlling the game but the goal changed the game and we went to sloppy passing and looking like we had no idea how to break them down for the rest of the half. Second half i thought we did ok in terms of keeping the ball but we weren't good enough in terms of creating chances and that was a problem

I think we had shape and a gameplan, unfortuately we defended the two goals pretty poorly and didn't keep the ball well enough in their half