Mancini Has Failed

[Marvin]

Please explain how his approach has been ultra-cautious

In some games we have not created as many chances as we would have liked, but is that down to good defending and the absence of midfield options?

 

[blueplan]

I don't understand how fans can keep up this Mancini is a cautious manager charge when he plays AJ, Bellamy, Tevez and Adebayor all in the same team.

OK they are not always effective, but that's possibly because some of them are played out of position.

Sometimes its better to have an extra midfielder at the expense of a forward so that you can control possession and get the ball to the remaining forwards. Problem was exacerbated last night because Barry got injured and we had to use Vieira as a straight swap instead of supplementing midfield.

the reason they are sometimes in effective is because mark hughes never bought a good . ball player in mid field. tevez is having to drop very deep to pick the ball up from where we should have someone slotting the ball through for the strikers.

It stands to reason why
1. We hoofed the ball every chance we get to a lone striker
upfront. And castigate him for not winning the ball because he is our winning strategy.
2. Two (2) holding midfielders,
3. Draws or ties i.e losing 2 points against teams that were ripe for the taking.

 

[the goats backside]

It doesnt matter how much money we have, we will achieve nothing until we give a manager time. We have progressed this year so to me were on our way, to change manager again now would set us back 2 years. Lets make sure we get at least a point sunday, qualify for Europa without the worry of tricky qualifiers, then push on next season. We have a better chance next season doing this with RM than with anyone else, and yes that includes Mr Ego

 

[hgblue]

Mark Hughes was sacked and Mancini was brought in because the club's leadership decided to re-evaluate their aim for the season, Mancini was brought in to help City break the top four. In this respect Mancini has failed.

I didn't believe that Hughes should have been replaced by Mancini not because i was a deluded happy clapper but for the simple reason that i don't believe changing managers like your socks achieves anything. I've been underwhelmed by Mancini this season, espcially with his ultra-cautious approach but i think it would be suicide to get rid of him. I just hope that for once in City's recent history City decide to give a manager a decent run at things. For novelty value as much an anything else.

I may be totally wide of the mark here, but I always thought that Hughes got wind of something going on and issued a 'back me or sack me' ultimatum. The club decided to take the latter option, but needed a safe pair of hands to get them to the end of the season. In this respect, I reckon Mancini has done a decent job. Whether this turns out to be good enough remains to be seen....

 

[Flixton blue]

Mark Hughes was sacked and Mancini was brought in because the club's leadership decided to re-evaluate their aim for the season, Mancini was brought in to help City break the top four. In this respect Mancini has failed.

I didn't believe that Hughes should have been replaced by Mancini not because i was a deluded happy clapper but for the simple reason that i don't believe changing managers like your socks achieves anything. I've been underwhelmed by Mancini this season, espcially with his ultra-cautious approach but i think it would be suicide to get rid of him. I just hope that for once in City's recent history City decide to give a manager a decent run at things. For novelty value as much an anything else.

I may be totally wide of the mark here, but I always thought that Hughes got wind of something going on and issued a 'back me or sack me' ultimatum. The club decided to take the latter option, but needed a safe pair of hands to get them to the end of the season. In this respect, I reckon Mancini has done a decent job. Whether this turns out to be good enough remains to be seen....

Don't think this was necessarilly the case but we will never know. Also i don't think the Board were looking for a safe pair of hands because it is now known that Mancini was not the first choice for the job and the Board approached others such as Gus Hiddink first. Either ways, i don't think we should be contemplating sacking Mancini, we need to give him time and hopefully he will get there next season.

 

[stumpy_mcfc]

He's failed to get 4th obviously but since the FA Cup weekend in January Spurs have gone on a great run and over a 16 game period in the leauge are only 3 points worse off than United and Chelsea over that stretch and i don't think anyone could predicted that to happen so fair play to them

Excatly correct - who would have seen the Spuds take maximum points from Chelsea and Arsenal. have to give credit where it is due.

 

[daveduke67]

Why do people keep quoting hearsay in their posts? My mate knows someone who works at the training ground/ticket office/security etc. who heard that <insert dubious story>.

Much of the 'the board wanted this', 'Hughes said that', 'such a player said such a thing' is nothing more than idle gossip with no proof to back it up.

If it hasn't been officially released by the club it has probably been made up by someone who wants to be seen as having access to information that nobody else has. I can't see Mark Hughes telling the girl in the ticket office that he has just issued an ultimatum to the board, or Manchini telling the toilet cleaner that he plans to leave if we don't get 4th place.

It's the same as the press stories - make up enough and one is bound to be right and then there's the headline - 'we told you this would happen last week' - forget about the previous 200 loads of crap we had to make up during the last 6 months - usually in the 15 minutes before deadline.


I used to deal with a guy who knew an apprentice jockey who gave him inside information on horses that were dead certs. So hot were these tips that the guy was declared bankrupt after running up £30k of debts on his credit cards and loans most of which had gone to online bookies.

 

[Bill]

nice man, good manager, just not right for us.

add then that we are a laughing stock thoughout football due to his over cautious approach and i think we need a change.

i think he missed 4th on purpose, 4th would have meant jose coming in and the only way to safeguard his job was to finish 5th.

 

[Failsworth_Blue]

nice man, good manager, just not right for us.

add then that we are a laughing stock thoughout football due to his over cautious approach and i think we need a change.

i think he missed 4th on purpose, 4th would have meant jose coming in and the only way to safeguard his job was to finish 5th.

Stop being silly. We're certainly not a laughing stock and theres no way Mancini missed 4th on purpose, your possibly on a wind up but i suspect you actually believe this

He's only been here 6 months, he deserves more time because he's done a good enough job after coming in mid season and picking up the peices

 

[Soulboy]

nice man, good manager, just not right for us.

add then that we are a laughing stock thoughout football due to his over cautious approach and i think we need a change.

i think he missed 4th on purpose, 4th would have meant jose coming in and the only way to safeguard his job was to finish 5th.

I thought this as well.

And it wasn't only him thinking that way... the players all realised that if we attained 4th. spot they would all be sold and replaced, so they purposely lost last night to make sure they are still at City next season.

That's how much the manager and players love City. They'd do anything not to leave.

We're now in the nightmare Catch 22 situation of having a manager and players that don't want to succeed in case they get off loaded, and no better players will come because we can't get 4th. spot!

How fucking unlucky is that?