mancini on sky sport

[blue rebel]

Ultimate fence sitter?

I sometimes think you lot could start a punch-up in a play group. Unless I'm mistaken Taconinja is is France so probably doesn't get to many matches so he is the fence sitter
SWP is local so goes to matches and is not the fence sitter. simple misunderstanding

 

[SWP's back]

Few people love to derail topics with their mindless bitching

Not really, I just want to ascertain what makes a well known anti-Mancini poster (who has been very critical of Mancini's dealings with the press in this thread) think that Bluemoon is more pro-Mancini (and therefore is a poor barometer) than the rest of City's fan base.

 

[Cielo Azzurro]

I like RM presser and everything he said I agree. He doesn't looks like a man under pressure, as vast majority on here describing him.
If there was not comments about 7-8 clubs, the media still found another shit to throw at him.. Like Yaya's comment about egoes in the dressing room. But actually Yaya said more, that he want's to end his carrer at City and wants to help the club to achive more, but no, the journalists picked only 'egoes' comment from his interview..
And that Holland reporter 'tell me how good Ajax are' 'City players with big wages can't compete with my team' 'egoes in the dressing room' blah blah blah.. It seems that the whole european press only see City as a price tag. No shame, no respect for the club/manager and team. Disgusting f*ckers.

 

[taconinja]

Ultimate fence sitter?

I sometimes think you lot could start a punch-up in a play group. Unless I'm mistaken Taconinja is is France so probably doesn't get to many matches so he is the fence sitter
SWP is local so goes to matches and is not the fence sitter. simple misunderstanding

I'm from the US and I'm not sure fencesitter means someone that doesn't go to games unless there is some colloquial usage I'm missing. City is the only professional-level club I've ever supported or will ever support.

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

Mancini couldn't care less about what the press thinks, this goes a lot deeper.

He feels he is being left hung out to dry and getting little support from the people that do matter.

Bobby is picking battles with the wrong people and most worringly, he is actively do so.

I'm not surprised, given a 5 year contract and then the club refuse to back him in the transfer market in the summer, I'd feel miffed particularly when the club won't block Guardiola rumours.

 

[Anonymous]

Hate being shown up and ignored the point once again Billy.

It seems I do have to repeat myself with you quite often. Ah well, we'll do it once more. Being shown up on the internet registers a big fat zero on my "do I give a shit" meter. So if I'm ignoring whatever genius point you think you've made, it's for far more prosaic reasons.

You often bemoan the fact that people argue against the poster rather than the post but the above shows your hypocrisy on the matter.

Does it ? I'd hazard a guess you came to that conclusion based on my limited tolerance for your questioning.

I'll ask again, do you really think bluemoon is more pro Mancini than the match going fan base? And if so, what makes you think that seeing as you don't get to go to games given where you live?

My comment

You're going to find a lot more people agree with me than don't. Bluemoon isn't a barometer for anything when it comes to Mancini.

The first line. Talking about the subject me and Taconinja were discussing ie. how City/Mancini handled the Monaco story.

The second line. A reference to the "well done Bobby" brigade in this thread. The point being not that match going Blues don't support Mancini, far from it. The point being that Mancini isn't above criticism, and that when he is criticised it's generally shouted down on the forum, whereas in real life the overwhelmingly vast majority of Blues I know, even if they don't agree with all of the criticism, understand where it comes from.

Now that's the second time this week I've had to spoon feed you the meaning of one of my posts. There won't be a third so i suggest in future you engage your brain, and make sure you are taking the entire conversation into context rather than just firing off inane loaded questions like a tabloid hack spoiling for a fight.

 

[SWP's back]

You're going to find a lot more people agree with me than don't. Bluemoon isn't a barometer for anything when it comes to Mancini.

The second line. A reference to the "well done Bobby" brigade in this thread. The point being not that match going Blues don't support Mancini, far from it. The point being that Mancini isn't above criticism, and that when he is criticised it's generally shouted down on the forum, whereas in real life the overwhelmingly vast majority of Blues, even if they don't agree with all of the criticism, understand where it comes from.

Now that's the second time this week I've had to spoon feed you the meaning of one of my posts. There won't be a third so i suggest in future you engage your brain, and make sure you are taking the entire conversation into context rather than just firing off inane loaded questions like a tabloid hack spoiling for a fight.

Would be almost believable but for the word I highlighted.

And I say again, you can't patronise me Billy, it's water off a ducks back. Lovely talking to you once again though. I'll see you on the next thread where you think you can get some mileage out of anything that goes against the gaffer.

 

[Anonymous]

You're going to find a lot more people agree with me than don't. Bluemoon isn't a barometer for anything when it comes to Mancini.

The second line. A reference to the "well done Bobby" brigade in this thread. The point being not that match going Blues don't support Mancini, far from it. The point being that Mancini isn't above criticism, and that when he is criticised it's generally shouted down on the forum, whereas in real life the overwhelmingly vast majority of Blues, even if they don't agree with all of the criticism, understand where it comes from.

Now that's the second time this week I've had to spoon feed you the meaning of one of my posts. There won't be a third so i suggest in future you engage your brain, and make sure you are taking the entire conversation into context rather than just firing off inane loaded questions like a tabloid hack spoiling for a fight.

Would be almost believable but for the word I highlighted.

And I say again, you can't patronise me Billy, it's water off a ducks back. Lovely talking to you once again though. I'll see you on the next thread where you think you can get some mileage out of anything that goes against the gaffer.

I believe in your language this is what is called a PWNING.

Next time you want to play tennis, at least bring a racket even if you haven't got any balls.

 

[johnny crossan]

Mancini is seemingly on a death wish, rubbing people inside and outside the club the wrong way.
He knows he is in strong position because of his new contract and doesn't give a fuck.
Mancini has dealt on a daily basis with the Italian media for 25 years, the British pack pales in comparison.
He is a very clever guy and having observed similar scenarios play out, elsewhere, the manager is trying to reassert his authority for a reason, which can be dangerous.

and the reason for this very clever, very experienced, very secure, very assured, very successful manager's death wish is?

 

[Anonymous]

Honest answer I think the journalist was quite aware last week's answer was tongue-firmly-in-cheek and wanted to stir the pot because headlines sell. In the sense that it was a completely disingenuous question, yes it's out of line. In the sense that if that's the kind of questioning the club and league will allow, then it's not out of line at all. I realize that may not be as committed an answer as you would prefer from me, but it's not really a yes-or-no kind of topic. At club level, I think it matters but it's something the club and not the manager need to create a strategy to deal with. It's them dropping the ball this time. At league level... well, that's a different story. I'm not sure the Premier League quite understands or even needs to consider brand issues. It's not like football will ever become less popular in England, and they've never had to deal with an upstart that isn't a flash in the pan before the Old Boy's Club made up of the traditional Top 4 reestablishes. I'm not sure the league quite realizes that City remaining in the Top 4 (which is likely) and having multiple championships (which is likely) changes their marketing strategy. It's profitable for the Premier League when negotiating television deals for City to be likable. Allowing one of your clubs to be perceived internationally as a WWE villain is detrimental. I realize that the clubs are distinct entities, but at some point there needs to be a realization that the good of the whole can be affected by how the press portrays one or several clubs.

Interesting take, apologies for missing it whilst swatting that mosquito.

I'm not sure we're being made out as the WWE villain you allude to. We certainly were when Mancini came in but I think things are different now - if anything last week's story makes City look good but Mancini look bad. His answer wasn't tongue in cheek as he clarified today. His ire was raised because in his words he told the truth last week and that should be the end of it. I think he was trying to argue that no matter what the situation, he signed a new contract which means he's happy at City.