pudge said:If the club didn't wish to make a rod for their own back then maybe they shouldn't have publicly courted another manager during the season.
BillyShears said:OB1 said:BillyShears said:I'm not sure it's that cut and dried. I suspect that although there's an informal agreement in place between City and MP, there's no signed contract ergo if Barcelona really do want him, and he really does want to go there, we might have a problem.
If that does happen, whoever is behind MP on our shortlist (my guess De Boer) - will have already agreed unconditionally to take the job if it was offered.
I hope you are right that de Boer is next in line but I fear it could be Rafa.
Absolutely no chance. Why would two die hard catalans employ a harder dyed madridista who's footballing philosophy is the opposite of what you're looking for? Don't know where that story started from but it's fucking nonsense IMO.
MSP said:robbieh said:Huge disrespect being shown to Mancini by Barca duo. Mancini whether you want him gone or not is a City legend. These clowns have it all to do.
You probably have missed Mancini claiming that they are not his bosses and that he is not responsible to them but only Khaldoon.
Marvin said:Granted. If we had decided to replace him, should have sacked him there and then. Unless the man we wanted was in a job and couldn't be released mid-seasonpudge said:But with people saying the club couldn't have made a statement if the rumors were true because then they'd be seen as liars obviously, the way to avoid that is to not allow for said rumors to start by publicly pursuing another manager whilst you already have one.Blue Haze said:To be honest, outside of this forum I have not seen us bludgeoned for sacking Mancini.
The City hierarchy seem unconcerned. The loss to Wigan blunted any significant criticism of the move outside of City fans.
I keep reading on this forum that we've embarrassed ourselves, that we've handled it badly, but it seems the only thing we've done wrong is allow Mancini to stay and make embarrassing statements to the press. If the club had known he would use the press conferences as forum to bash club employees, we might have shown him the door after the Wigan loss.
BillyShears said:OB1 said:BillyShears said:One thing's for sure. After six months of moral outrage at the notion that alternatives to Mancini should be discussed - I think we're on safe territory from here on forwards chatting about the relative merits of De Boer v Pellegrini etc.
Cards on table: de Boer would be my choice ahead of all but Klopp and Mou but neither of those are happening.
I can see the pros and cons in both. MP has proven he can do it in Europe, but is much older than FdB who I guess potentially is a legacy builder, but is far less proven. I think both men would have the characteristics to be successful at City and they both have obvious links to Txiki. Wasn't there a story that Johann Cruyff had even recommended FdB to Txiki for the City job?
pudge said:If the club didn't wish to make a rod for their own back then maybe they shouldn't have publicly courted another manager during the season.
If Pellegrini, for example, wouldn't leave Malaga until after he season then he'll still be there by the time our season finishes.Marvin said:Granted. If we had decided to replace him, should have sacked him there and then. Unless the man we wanted was in a job and couldn't be released mid-seasonpudge said:But with people saying the club couldn't have made a statement if the rumors were true because then they'd be seen as liars obviously, the way to avoid that is to not allow for said rumors to start by publicly pursuing another manager whilst you already have one.Blue Haze said:To be honest, outside of this forum I have not seen us bludgeoned for sacking Mancini.
The City hierarchy seem unconcerned. The loss to Wigan blunted any significant criticism of the move outside of City fans.
I keep reading on this forum that we've embarrassed ourselves, that we've handled it badly, but it seems the only thing we've done wrong is allow Mancini to stay and make embarrassing statements to the press. If the club had known he would use the press conferences as forum to bash club employees, we might have shown him the door after the Wigan loss.
The perfect fumble said:Blue Heaven said:The perfect fumble said:86 pages of waiting for Godot.
Vladimir or Estragon?
Estragon ""Nothing to be done."
pudge said:But with people saying the club couldn't have made a statement if the rumors were true because then they'd be seen as liars obviously, the way to avoid that is to not allow for said rumors to start by publicly pursuing another manager whilst you already have one.Blue Haze said:pudge said:If the club didn't wish to make a rod for their own back then maybe they shouldn't have publicly courted another manager during the season.
To be honest, outside of this forum I have not seen us bludgeoned for sacking Mancini.
The City hierarchy seem unconcerned. The loss to Wigan blunted any significant criticism of the move outside of City fans.
I keep reading on this forum that we've embarrassed ourselves, that we've handled it badly, but it seems the only thing we've done wrong is allow Mancini to stay and make embarrassing statements to the press. If the club had known he would use the press conferences as forum to bash club employees, we might have shown him the door after the Wigan loss.