gio's side step
Well-Known Member
Been thinking about the whole Mancini thing again recently and I am not convinced the whole 'cautious tactics' perception is based on some vague interpretation of him being Italian and us playing a Serie A style of football. There may likely be 'an' element to this, but I think the whole thing has been over simplified.
My belief is this.
Mancini has identified the correct weakness in the squad he inherited. Not a significant lack of quality (of course he has signed some strong names on paper to make us appear even better) rather a SIGNIFICANT lack of 'fear of failure' winning mentality. I think the lack of discipline (I don't mean yellow/red cards, rather composure, concentration, ability to see out games) was something he identified as being perhaps the biggest ingredient to overcome. All the talk pre-season was about 'gelling'. I disagreed then and still disagree now. That isn’t to say, the more players train and play together they won't gain a fuller understanding of systems, formations, tactics, each other etc, of course they will. But to say 'we just needed to gel' was missing the major factor. Which was, are we brutal, are we strong, can we completely break the spirit of the opposition, like the top sides (I refer to champions here) do.
The performance against Liverpool and Chelsea are an example of the BIGGEST change I have seen at City in a very very long time. Composure, calmness, intelligence, discipline, control, belief, strength. We had technical ability prior. However, under Mancini we have certainly developed our mentality to a higher level so far, (albeit in the big games). This still requires testing in the Newcastle fixture etc.
This is where the other issue (which those who critique Mancini are correct). Caution, negative are the new buzz words about City, by the media, and by some of us supporters. It's far more aesthetic to watch Johnson, or SWP go at players, and to see two up front sometimes. This perception of caution I feel however, was always going to exist, because Mancini always NEEDED to develop this mentality and maturity first. I do hope, he TRUSTS his players at some point, because that is what it comes down to, trusting them, in games against the lower sides, that the mentality is conditioned, the discipline is constantly improving and free the caution a little, to impose ourselves more intensely, rather than taking complete control of the game in midfield for 90 minutes.
So for me, he is doing what has been necessary. Develop the mentality first. This is what Mourinho did at Chelsea. Yes they were further in development than we were when he took over, but he did set the platform, for the way Ancelotti has taken them forward less cautiously. That is because Mourinho did all of the mentality, discipline and control work first. Some fans will say, they prefer Ancelotti. But that lacks critical thought, about why they are now able to play the way they do. That's because the key ingredients 'fear of failure' were conditioned as the first pathway to success.
Mourinho's genius, was that he won whilst still developing this. However it did lack style and creativity at times.
My belief is this.
Mancini has identified the correct weakness in the squad he inherited. Not a significant lack of quality (of course he has signed some strong names on paper to make us appear even better) rather a SIGNIFICANT lack of 'fear of failure' winning mentality. I think the lack of discipline (I don't mean yellow/red cards, rather composure, concentration, ability to see out games) was something he identified as being perhaps the biggest ingredient to overcome. All the talk pre-season was about 'gelling'. I disagreed then and still disagree now. That isn’t to say, the more players train and play together they won't gain a fuller understanding of systems, formations, tactics, each other etc, of course they will. But to say 'we just needed to gel' was missing the major factor. Which was, are we brutal, are we strong, can we completely break the spirit of the opposition, like the top sides (I refer to champions here) do.
The performance against Liverpool and Chelsea are an example of the BIGGEST change I have seen at City in a very very long time. Composure, calmness, intelligence, discipline, control, belief, strength. We had technical ability prior. However, under Mancini we have certainly developed our mentality to a higher level so far, (albeit in the big games). This still requires testing in the Newcastle fixture etc.
This is where the other issue (which those who critique Mancini are correct). Caution, negative are the new buzz words about City, by the media, and by some of us supporters. It's far more aesthetic to watch Johnson, or SWP go at players, and to see two up front sometimes. This perception of caution I feel however, was always going to exist, because Mancini always NEEDED to develop this mentality and maturity first. I do hope, he TRUSTS his players at some point, because that is what it comes down to, trusting them, in games against the lower sides, that the mentality is conditioned, the discipline is constantly improving and free the caution a little, to impose ourselves more intensely, rather than taking complete control of the game in midfield for 90 minutes.
So for me, he is doing what has been necessary. Develop the mentality first. This is what Mourinho did at Chelsea. Yes they were further in development than we were when he took over, but he did set the platform, for the way Ancelotti has taken them forward less cautiously. That is because Mourinho did all of the mentality, discipline and control work first. Some fans will say, they prefer Ancelotti. But that lacks critical thought, about why they are now able to play the way they do. That's because the key ingredients 'fear of failure' were conditioned as the first pathway to success.
Mourinho's genius, was that he won whilst still developing this. However it did lack style and creativity at times.