Kompany/DeJong/Hughes

[stimo]

It's often argued that Kompany and DeJong were signed by Hughes to give him credit.

1. They were spotted by scouts.
2. Kompany was played out of position in midfield.
3. Kompany played very rarely at the start of the 2009/10 season - since Mancini's first game, Kompany has played nearly every match and at CB.

Hughes played him out of position and clearly rated him behind toure and lescott, and even played onouha ahead of him at CB in one game against Spurs away (3-0 loss).

4. De Jong is very limited. He shields a back 4, and nothing more. Everyone is seeing Barry doing this and also getting forward/passing etc...
5. De Jong no longer is of the quality needed to play in our 1st choice team but is a good squad player.
6. Given his role as a sweeper-upper, his position in midfield with Kompany in a 4-4-2 was not correct.

7. Given essentially 6 defenders(back 4 + CM 2), how was Hughes so bad at getting us defensively prepared?

let it go fella


ohh, and your assessment of kompany & nige are just so wide of the mark

this. let it go!

 

[Clubber]

No matter what you think, these players were brought in under Hughes, so give him credit for it.

You try to say Kompany was 'scouted', but isn't every player, so by that statement, no manager should get the credit for their signings.

Kompany is one of the best CB in the Prem (If not Europe) and De Jong is an excellent DM, who seems to have lost his place of late, but is still an extremely talented player.

The OP's comment just seems bitter and even more strangely, out of the blue. Leave Hughes to try to continue his career, as he is still a decent manager, we just didn't have the time to see what may have come with him at the helm (I dobt we'd be as good as now, but we will never know). When we see Hughes on telly speaking against us, people say he is bitter, so us doing the same is equally as bitter.

Move on.

 

[malg]

Pointless, just pointless.

 

[Bill]

It's often argued that Kompany and DeJong were signed by Hughes to give him credit.

1. They were spotted by scouts.
2. Kompany was played out of position in midfield.
3. Kompany played very rarely at the start of the 2009/10 season - since Mancini's first game, Kompany has played nearly every match and at CB.

Hughes played him out of position and clearly rated him behind toure and lescott, and even played onouha ahead of him at CB in one game against Spurs away (3-0 loss).

4. De Jong is very limited. He shields a back 4, and nothing more. Everyone is seeing Barry doing this and also getting forward/passing etc...
5. De Jong no longer is of the quality needed to play in our 1st choice team but is a good squad player.
6. Given his role as a sweeper-upper, his position in midfield with Kompany in a 4-4-2 was not correct.

7. Given essentially 6 defenders(back 4 + CM 2), how was Hughes so bad at getting us defensively prepared?

yawn. move on ffs.

 

[Darco]

well i agree with you mate. Kompany shud have been played at centre back from day one- hughes's fault! How can you justify playing onuoah ahead of him.
As for de jong his injury was a blessing,only then did we start playing the attacking style we are seeing today. De jong is great at what he does but doesnt do enough forward decisive passing, unlike barry and ya ya. Since when has ferguson ever won the league playing a midfielder constantly protecting the back four? Never?
I think he's a great bench player, and I thought he should have come on a bit earlier at arsenal once we had the lead to protect the back four, and maybe chelsea.
Ferguson once made a dig at benitez saying you'll never win the league defending, and he's right.
We are title contenders because of our new signings; barry, milner, yaya and silva's improved form this season; and de jong being dropped from the startin 11
Hughes out again!

 

[Corky]

Kompany had a brocken toe and was recovering at he start of 2009/10.

He came back in the Bolton 3-3 and had a poor match and was not ready.

HE played in both positions under Hughes, but we lacked quality midfielders more than centre backs at the time. We had not signed Yaya, Barry, Milner etc in his first season, and someone had to play there.

To be fair to Coulson he never watched city under Hughes if he thinks we ever played 4-4-2 under him.

 

[coulsonblue]

It's often argued that Kompany and DeJong were signed by Hughes to give him credit.

1. They were spotted by scouts.
2. Kompany was played out of position in midfield.
3. Kompany played very rarely at the start of the 2009/10 season - since Mancini's first game, Kompany has played nearly every match and at CB.

Hughes played him out of position and clearly rated him behind toure and lescott, and even played onouha ahead of him at CB in one game against Spurs away (3-0 loss).

4. De Jong is very limited. He shields a back 4, and nothing more. Everyone is seeing Barry doing this and also getting forward/passing etc...
5. De Jong no longer is of the quality needed to play in our 1st choice team but is a good squad player.
6. Given his role as a sweeper-upper, his position in midfield with Kompany in a 4-4-2 was not correct.

7. Given essentially 6 defenders(back 4 + CM 2), how was Hughes so bad at getting us defensively prepared?

I don't really understand what you're point is with this? When we signed Kompany he was bought as a defensive midfielder so therefore wasn't played out of position. We had a couple of injuries a centre half and Kompany filled in the role, he performed so well there he's made it his own ever since.

I find your observations about De Jong to be very naive. He's much more than a 'sweeper upper'. The work rate he produces and the protection he gives not only to the back four but how much of a licence he gives the attacking players is unbelievable.

He's struggle to get a 1st team spot this season due to the outstanding performances of the team as a whole. He's still got a huge part to play at this football club.

Mark Hughes is just another small part of this glorious football club. Let's just leave him where he belongs, in the past

Nonsense. The top teams need midfielders who don't do 1 job alone.

Keane, Essien etc... Vieira!

-- Sat Dec 24, 2011 1:12 pm --

Fair points I think. Mind you, one should ask, if you don't see De Jong as important, who do you see as the immediate replacement in the first team?

er hello. Gareth Barry. James Milner.<br /><br />-- Sat Dec 24, 2011 1:14 pm --<br /><br />

No matter what you think, these players were brought in under Hughes, so give him credit for it.

You try to say Kompany was 'scouted', but isn't every player, so by that statement, no manager should get the credit for their signings.

Kompany is one of the best CB in the Prem (If not Europe) and De Jong is an excellent DM, who seems to have lost his place of late, but is still an extremely talented player.

The OP's comment just seems bitter and even more strangely, out of the blue. Leave Hughes to try to continue his career, as he is still a decent manager, we just didn't have the time to see what may have come with him at the helm (I dobt we'd be as good as now, but we will never know). When we see Hughes on telly speaking against us, people say he is bitter, so us doing the same is equally as bitter.

Move on.

No. Certain players are scouted, like dejong and kompany.

Bellamy and Roque santa cruz were pursued by Hughes, and look how great they turned out to be.

 

[T_Bone]

Let's sack him again!

 

[coulsonblue]

Kompany had a brocken toe and was recovering at he start of 2009/10.

He came back in the Bolton 3-3 and had a poor match and was not ready.

HE played in both positions under Hughes, but we lacked quality midfielders more than centre backs at the time. We had not signed Yaya, Barry, Milner etc in his first season, and someone had to play there.

To be fair to Coulson he never watched city under Hughes if he thinks we ever played 4-4-2 under him.

wright phillips kompany dejong bellamy
tevez adebayor.

looks suspiciously like 4-4-2 to me.

 

[City Raider]

festive fishing, if not have you considered therapy? 20 year marriages that end in divorce need less counselling