Mancini Has Failed

[Bill]

You lot would of been better off with Hughes. I know one thing, he would not have set up for a draw against Arsenal. That was a stupid plan, which has cost you fourth. It was a worthless point. Arsenal were incredibly vulnerable and if you had attacked purposefully like in all you victories over them you would have won.

spot on, post of the day.

 

[kacoo]

You lot would of been better off with Hughes. I know one thing, he would not have set up for a draw against Arsenal. That was a stupid plan, which has cost you fourth. It was a worthless point. Arsenal were incredibly vulnerable and if you had attacked purposefully like in all you victories over them you would have won.

under hughes we drew at home with fulham, burnley and hull. dont talk bollox

I'm baffled at the dislike and criticism aimed at Hughes. Tell me how has Mancini been a great improvement? What are his stats compared to Hughes? All I know is you were playing much better football under Hughes, beat Arsenal 4-2 and 3-0, Chelsea 2-1 and lost narowely 4-3 against Man U in one of the most exciting games of the season. And were not far behind fourth.
Yes, you were drawing too many games but that could of changed. I believe it would. The players looked more united under Hughes and eventually would have produced top 4 form. Like I said the plan against Arsenal was a stupid one.
It was a useless point.

 

[Mattyc55]

I think if you asked the players (and Mancini) whether or not his tenure has been a success - it would be folly to suggest that they would consider it to be so, as they have failed to qualify when it was in our hands. As a proffessional, that in itself would be deemed as a failure.

However, that doesnt mean that I want to see the man sacked. If Mourinho becomes available to us, im sorry but I would take him in a heartbeat, but as I dont think he'll come and manage a side outside of the CL - i'd stick with Mancini.

Its been a good season in terms of how far we've come along, but last night (like the three derby's) left us all with a sinking feeling that weve come to feel far too often as a blue. We've bottled it in the big, big games and Mancini has lost far too many of them; that certainly has to change next season.

 

[pedros]

Since Mancini took charge we have had 24 games against premiership sides[including cup games]W12 L7 D 5. In that sequence we also had 6 games where we failed to score.This record is not a disaster but neither is it a ringing endorsement of his capabilities .He should be given more time in my opinion but for some posters to be so sure he is the man to take us forward beggars belief.

 

[wrongun73]

under hughes we drew at home with fulham, burnley and hull. dont talk bollox

I'm baffled at the dislike and criticism aimed at Hughes. Tell me how has Mancini been a great improvement? What are his stats compared to Hughes? All I know is you were playing much better football under Hughes, beat Arsenal 4-2 and 3-0, Chelsea 2-1 and lost narowely 4-3 against Man U in one of the most exciting games of the season. And were not far behind fourth.
Yes, you were drawing too many games but that could of changed. I believe it would. The players looked more united under Hughes and eventually would have produced top 4 form. Like I said the plan against Arsenal was a stupid one.
It was a useless point.

without going into it mancini does have better stats than hughes.
anyway would mancini have paid 18million for santa crud? no.
would he have paid 22 million for lescott? no.
would he have paid 14million for de jong? no.
hughes paid vastly over the odds for pretty average players IMO, thats the main thing i have against him and i'm ultra confident that mancini's signings will show any doubters why he was chosen.

 

[Citizen Green]

unbelievable!
jose was never coming whether 4th, 5th or fucking 1st!...if your'e not having a wind and really believe what you've posted why do you bother shelling out X amount of pounds a year to watch. if i thought like that i wouldn't bother.

i agree, i am thinking why do i bother, we have been dire since mancini took over, i can only assume its because the players dont understand what he's on about, if he keeps the job we will soon find out his tactics for next season by his first signing.
really who wants to watch that bile for another season?
the worst of it is we were doing so well under hughes and making good progress.
one thing though we dont want moyes, hodgson yes but not moyes.

No we havn't

City 3-0 Wolves
City 4-1 Blackburn
City 2-1 United
Chelsea 2-4 City
Burnley 1-6 City
City 5-1 Birmingham
City 3-1 Villa

We have played some great stuff under him.<br /><br />-- Thu May 06, 2010 1:09 pm --<br /><br />

I'm baffled at the dislike and criticism aimed at Hughes. Tell me how has Mancini been a great improvement? What are his stats compared to Hughes? All I know is you were playing much better football under Hughes, beat Arsenal 4-2 and 3-0, Chelsea 2-1 and lost narowely 4-3 against Man U in one of the most exciting games of the season. And were not far behind fourth.
Yes, you were drawing too many games but that could of changed. I believe it would. The players looked more united under Hughes and eventually would have produced top 4 form. Like I said the plan against Arsenal was a stupid one.
It was a useless point.

without going into it mancini does have better stats than hughes.
anyway would mancini have paid 18million for santa crud? no.
would he have paid 22 million for lescott? no.
would he have paid 14million for de jong? no.
hughes paid vastly over the odds for pretty average players IMO, thats the main thing i have against him and i'm ultra confident that mancini's signings will show any doubters why he was chosen.

Come off it mate, de Jong has been one of our best players this season, Lescott was fastly improving under Mancini before his injury at Fulham. de Jong looks to be worth £15m to me but yes I will admit we overpaid for Lescott who is really around a £10m player.

You are right though Hughes overpaid on the likes of Bridge and RSC.

 

[davymcfc]

under hughes we drew at home with fulham, burnley and hull. dont talk bollox

I'm baffled at the dislike and criticism aimed at Hughes. Tell me how has Mancini been a great improvement? What are his stats compared to Hughes? All I know is you were playing much better football under Hughes, beat Arsenal 4-2 and 3-0, Chelsea 2-1 and lost narowely 4-3 against Man U in one of the most exciting games of the season. And were not far behind fourth.
Yes, you were drawing too many games but that could of changed. I believe it would. The players looked more united under Hughes and eventually would have produced top 4 form. Like I said the plan against Arsenal was a stupid one.
It was a useless point.

we have scored a lot more goals under mancini than we did under hughes and conceded a lot less. the point is aswell under hughes you could tell that we werent going to improve. people need to let it go. he isnt coming back and he was sacked for a reason. mancini has come in and ultimitely got more points on the board than hughes did for city yet some people still bum hughes. whats is moaning about the current manager going to do apart from cause unrest and give the press more fuel to add to the flames? we have mancini and he will lead us forward. end of. get over it!

 

[wrongun73]

i agree, i am thinking why do i bother, we have been dire since mancini took over, i can only assume its because the players dont understand what he's on about, if he keeps the job we will soon find out his tactics for next season by his first signing.
really who wants to watch that bile for another season?
the worst of it is we were doing so well under hughes and making good progress.
one thing though we dont want moyes, hodgson yes but not moyes.

No we havn't

City 3-0 Wolves
City 4-1 Blackburn
City 2-1 United
Chelsea 2-4 City
Burnley 1-6 City
City 5-1 Birmingham
City 3-1 Villa

We have played some great stuff under him.

-- Thu May 06, 2010 1:09 pm --

without going into it mancini does have better stats than hughes.
anyway would mancini have paid 18million for santa crud? no.
would he have paid 22 million for lescott? no.
would he have paid 14million for de jong? no.
hughes paid vastly over the odds for pretty average players IMO, thats the main thing i have against him and i'm ultra confident that mancini's signings will show any doubters why he was chosen.

Come off it mate, de Jong has been one of our best players this season, Lescott was fastly improving under Mancini before his injury at Fulham. de Jong looks to be worth £15m to me but yes I will admit we overpaid for Lescott who is really around a £10m player.

You are right though Hughes overpaid on the likes of Bridge and RSC.

i agree with lescott he will come good next year, im not NDJ's biggest fan, like somone said before he's like gelson on steroids!

 

[bobmcfc]

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.

Facepalm

 

[Matty]

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 don't believe for one minute that Mancini aimed to miss out on 4th, however there is some truth in your final statement in as much as City finishing 5th has actually improved Mancini's chances of keeping the job. Had we finished 4th then such managers as those of Mourinho's ilk would have been much easier to attract, the same with players of the highest calibre out there. The fact that next season we are a Europa League side means that top managers won't be as enamoured by the prospect of joining, the same can be said for top players. If we spend some money on slightly lower level players and keep Mancini, with the aim of finishing in the Top 4, then I wouldn't be surprised. I still want a manager like Mourinho, I just don't think we'll get one having missed out on the Champion's League. Managers and players at the highest level really couldn't care less about the Europa League.