Lancet Fluke said:
BillyShears said:
Mancini said Vicky should've done more to stop the stories. Even the journos were surprised by this comment and suggested it was the board's job to give her the mandate to quash the stories and they hadn't so Vicky's hands were tired - which is true.
It's also worth noting that Mancini isn't some wet behind the ears kid who doesn't understand the way the press work or the way big political football clubs like City work. He will have known why the stories weren't being squashed. Again he could've asked Ferran or Khaldoun to instruct Vicky to kill the stories.
What is coming to light is that Mancini's relationship was so poor with so many people behind the scenes that communication was almost non existent.
It seems to be reasonably well accepted that Mancini is not a particularly nice guy. Any interviews with ex team mates from his playing days confirm this, they all talk of him being an extremely difficult person. Now I know he isn't at the club to be everyone's best mate but the bottom line is that if he has pissed off large parts of the playing squad and plenty of his colleagues at the club (and potentially the decision makers above him) then he is completely reliant on being successful on the pitch to keep his job. It seems pretty obvious to me from the way the club have handled this that there is little or no goodwill towards Mancini at the club and now performances on the pitch have dipped significantly, he's fucked.
Disagree with that, plenty of people support him. It's true they say he's not exactly 'best mates' with everybody, but neither is/was Ferguson. Both have the attitude that THEY are the boss, and you either accept it, or don't play / leave.
One man's steely determination is another's stubbornness - often depending on the result they achieve.
There's are some 'nice guys' out there too, ones that might capitulate to a strong willed player. Is that what we want? Maybe we do?
I'm not saying Mancini's attitude is right or wrong, merely that when results aren't going well, the manager will either be too soft or too stubborn, and when results are going well, those attributes are applauded.
He is what he is, and it's who City chose. Mancini didn't choose City, they chose him. They did their homework, right? They knew his manner last year when they offered a new deal, right? Has he changed his tune, or have Manchester City changed theirs?
I think it's been a disappointing but not disastrous season. We've had a dip. The fans are upset at results and speculation, and I suspect the club itself is rather torn on what to do for the best.
I think it's wise for the club and the fans to take a deep breath, look at the league table, secure second place, KNOW we are in CL once AGAIN for next year, and look forward to freshening up parts of the team. We've had a dip in form, not a death in the family.
Keep calm and carry on Manchester City... 3 years ago I'd have more than settled for what Mancini's brought us. I see no reason to now think it's not enough.
