Mancini fear of failure?

[WNRH]

Come on Dave, quit the childish replies and debate like a proper grown up. Who achieved those finishing places?

It's the elephant in the room which blows your points comparison out of the water. Here it is again:

The City which Mancini inherited were in no way comparable to the Utd which Ferguson inherited.

Utd were second from bottom when he took over. He took them from 21st to 11th in his first season then from 11th to 2nd in his second.

and then back to 13th the season after, i don't know what you are continuing to argue about it, you said that at least Fergie's team made steady progress, well so has Mancini, he has a better record than Fergie in his first 50 league games. 25 years ago or not, it is still 90 mins per game, still 3 points for a win, still 1 for a draw and nothing for a defeat. The fact is and you know it, that you have just made a major mistake in your propaganda against Mancini. First you said all great managers take over a team and make them better straight away, then when i mention Ferguson you say at least he made steady progress, then when i mention two managers who are rightly regarded as two of the greatest managers to ever manage in english football who's steady progress was not as good as this clueless buffoon you think we have in charge.

That is some backtracking even for you mate, you a left footer, you should get down to Carrington and replace Kolarov as we need a left back who can track back well ;-)

 

[tonea2003]

oh the ironing ;)

:- )

For me progress is subjective. Some will see it, others won't. The Fergie comparisons are pretty ridiculous (just as they were last season - just as they were when Hughes was in charged and they were used to demand he get more time).

The right manager for City right now IMO is someone who can instill a winning mentality, a never say die attitude, and a style of play which gets the best out of the playing staff. We already have the raw materials to be a top top team. Whether or not Mancini's that guy only time will tell. Whether or not he gets time isn't down to any of us - it's down to the board. But you can bet your bottom dollar that the powers that be will not care one iota about how much progress Fergie or anyone else showed two decades or more ago. They'll be only interested in seeing if we're progressing.

BTW....if anyone has a spare couple of hours to kill - go to the Guardian chalkboards and choose some identical fixtures from last season and this season to check out the pass/shots stats. Makes for interesting reading...

the fergie comparisons are valid in the fact he was given time, granted by the fourth season the vultures were starting to circle and winning the cup bought him time to develop his dynasty.
i'm not saying for one minute mancini will emulate this or get anywhere near it, but give him more than 18 months, it don't matter how much you throw at it and we know most of our signing are over inflated so we have to take the vat off the true value of the buys.
but time is what you need provinding there is progess, but as i have said fergie was starting to slide untill the cup win.

 

[Failsworth_Blue]

On the basis of blueinsa saying we should compare Mancini to Hughes i thought i'd see how Mancini compares to the other managers since he's took over. It's probably of no use but here goes anyway

League games only

Mancini - 49 games and 88 points
Wenger - 48 games and 96 points
Ferguson - 48 games and 93 points
Ancellotti - 48 games and 94 points
Redknapp - 47 games and 84 points

As i say not really sure what it proves or doesn't but just thought it'd be interesting to see what it was like

 

[ultrasbosnjo]

I dont get why City decided to bring Mancini as manager, there were surely better choices available?
Best City can accomplish with Mancini is maybe one of the national cups, Mancini will never win the league.

 

[taconinja]

I dont get why City decided to bring Mancini as manager, there were surely better choices available?

Name them please.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

It's the elephant in the room which blows your points comparison out of the water. Here it is again:

and then back to 13th the season after, i don't know what you are continuing to argue about it, you said that at least Fergie's team made steady progress, well so has Mancini, he has a better record than Fergie in his first 50 league games. 25 years ago or not, it is still 90 mins per game, still 3 points for a win, still 1 for a draw and nothing for a defeat. The fact is and you know it, that you have just made a major mistake in your propaganda against Mancini. First you said all great managers take over a team and make them better straight away, then when i mention Ferguson you say at least he made steady progress, then when i mention two managers who are rightly regarded as two of the greatest managers to ever manage in english football who's steady progress was not as good as this clueless buffoon you think we have in charge.

That is some backtracking even for you mate, you a left footer, you should get down to Carrington and replace Kolarov as we need a left back who can track back well ;-)

Sigh, here we go again:

You quoted his record in his first 50 games.

I told you that he took the team from 21st to 2nd in his first 50 games.

Which makes the Mancini comparison worthless because Ferguson inherited a much poorer team (relatively) than Mancini did.

The reason we were talking about this in the first place is that someone said it took Ferguson years to make progress. It didn't. He did it straight away.

It couldn't be simpler, it really couldn't.

 

[tonea2003]

They dropped away for a while, although they won the FA Cup. But the credit in the bank from his first two seasons bought him a stay of execution. Mancini does not have that credit yet.

you are right, but give him time to earn the credit, he's not had one full season yet.
there is a wobble on at the moment.and if it all goes tits up come the end of the season then maybe a stewards inquiry will take place.
and you might get your wish.
i understand you don't like his methods and to be honest at times i don't either.
saturday was the worst yet.
but i'm staying optmistic and things will turn around.

 

[flb]

They dropped away for a while, although they won the FA Cup. But the credit in the bank from his first two seasons bought him a stay of execution. Mancini does not have that credit yet.

I sincerely hope for City's sake that Mancini does in fact get a few credits in the bank so to speak as they have historically changed the fortunes of many clubs in the past.

He blew a big big chance to get momentum behind him when he dissed the Carling Cup competition.

He will be the one who brings the axe down on himself-hes dissing the FA Cup aswell to be honest,giving us a fixture pile up that has and will tell in the coming few weeks.

All said and done im of the opinion hes still doing a job and is showing enough progress that for once should give a manager the time he deserves at MCFC.

Mancini's future is in the balance no question.


Both sides of the arguement are making for a good debate so quit the childish shit fellas.

 

[Wellsblue21]

I dont get why City decided to bring Mancini as manager, there were surely better choices available?
Best City can accomplish with Mancini is maybe one of the national cups, Mancini will never win the league.

Thanks for that

 

[taconinja]

Sigh, here we go again:

You quoted his record in his first 50 games.

I told you that he took the team from 21st to 2nd in his first 50 games.

Which makes the Mancini comparison worthless because Ferguson inherited a much poorer team (relatively) than Mancini did.

The reason we were talking about this in the first place is that someone said it took Ferguson years to make progress. It didn't. He did it straight away.

It couldn't be simpler, it really couldn't.

It's as relevant--as in not at all really--as the other argument that we haven't progressed because of the number of points earned this season versus last. Two different situations just as the other argument is two different situations.<br /><br />-- Wed Mar 02, 2011 11:12 am --<br /><br />

I sincerely hope for City's sake that Mancini does in fact get a few credits in the bank so to speak as they have historically changed the fortunes of many clubs in the past.

He blew a big big chance to get momentum behind him when he dissed the Carling Cup competition.

He will be the one who brings the axe down on himself-hes dissing the FA Cup aswell to be honest,giving us a fixture pile up that has and will tell in the coming few weeks.

All said and done im of the opinion hes still doing a job and is showing enough progress that for once should give a manager the time he deserves at MCFC.

Mancini's future is in the balance no question.

I think winning the FA Cup or the Europa League are irrelevant to his job security. He could win both and finish 5th in the PL and I believe he will be unemployed after the season. Sure, posters here will be overjoyed about a banner at the swamp coming down. Won't matter a whit, though.