Mancini On Soriano

[Prestwich_Blue]

The simple facts are these as I see them:

1) We have a lot to thank him for.

2) He's not as good a manager as he thinks he is.

3) Unless your record makes you completely untouchable you have to be able to work with your owner, executive and players and he couldn't do that.

4) If you piss off the guy who signs the cheques it's only going to end one way.

 

[daztrueblue91]

It’s all a game – mancini is doing what all managers do – making his tenure seem as positive as possible.
Pellegrini actually blamed the fact he had too many star players at Madrid as the reason he didn’t succeed (no pianists etc etc). He also blamed his superiors. Doesn’t make him a twat – it’s just the way it is.
It’s just spin.
What i can’t understand is the vitriol that still exists on here towards mancini.
I support city not a manager and i can understand why people didn’t rate him.
But why people can’t just be appreciative of what the club, as whole, achieved while mancini was manager and move on without the bitterness i have no idea.
I find it quite sad that people have so much antipathy to such a successful period of our history.
Just lighten up and enjoy the ride FFS

There is a massive difference in the circumstances between Mancini at City and Pellegrini at Madrid. First of all Pellegrini had practically no say in what signings went on at Madrid and they sold players against his wishes. Mancini on the other hand was backed all the way with his transfers. He spent over 80 million on strikers yet spat his dummy out when we didn't add RVP.

Pellegrini was never Madrid's first choice manager and was never fully backed. So IMO he had every right to blame the board. My biggest problem with Mancini was how he wanted to replace the players he had bought and complained when he couldn't. At the end of the day the board is only going to back a manager to a certain extent and when our manager is demanding that he needs a 25 million pound striker to replace another 25 million pound striker there is something wrong.

 

[OB1]

You probably know better than me TH, but I would have thought that it would have been little more than a rubber stamping exercise by Khaldoon and co. If they have hired Los Dos Amigos to do a job then I would have thought that they would have let them get on with it and not try and undermine the first major decision they made.

I keep saying Mancini would have been out of the door if Aguero had not scored that goal. I say that because of a few comments passed on to me that come from someone who I know and know has relevant contacts.

One comment that I will not repeat emphasized the delight of one player at winning the title and the accompanying despair that it meant Mancini would keep his job.

I do not for one moment believe that Mansour and Khaldoon merely rubber stamped Mancini's departure.

 

[Anonymous]

The simple facts are these as I see them:

1) We have a lot to thank him for.

2) He's not as good a manager as he thinks he is.

3) Unless your record makes you completely untouchable you have to be able to work with your owner, executive and players and he couldn't do that.

4) If you piss off the guy who signs the cheques it's only going to end one way.

End of thread then?

Thank fuck for that.

 

[mcfcphil]

It’s all a game – mancini is doing what all managers do – making his tenure seem as positive as possible.
Pellegrini actually blamed the fact he had too many star players at Madrid as the reason he didn’t succeed (no pianists etc etc). He also blamed his superiors. Doesn’t make him a twat – it’s just the way it is.
It’s just spin.
What i can’t understand is the vitriol that still exists on here towards mancini.
I support city not a manager and i can understand why people didn’t rate him.
But why people can’t just be appreciative of what the club, as whole, achieved while mancini was manager and move on without the bitterness i have no idea.
I find it quite sad that people have so much antipathy to such a successful period of our history.
Just lighten up and enjoy the ride FFS

There is a massive difference in the circumstances between Mancini at City and Pellegrini at Madrid. First of all Pellegrini had practically no say in what signings went on at Madrid and they sold players against his wishes. Mancini on the other hand was backed all the way with his transfers. He spent over 80 million on strikers yet spat his dummy out when we didn't add RVP.

Pellegrini was never Madrid's first choice manager and was never fully backed. So IMO he had every right to blame the board. My biggest problem with Mancini was how he wanted to replace the players he had bought and complained when he couldn't. At the end of the day the board is only going to back a manager to a certain extent and when our manager is demanding that he needs a 25 million pound striker to replace another 25 million pound striker there is something wrong.

I agree – i’m not having a pop at pellegrini. He may well have been correct but by the same token he was given a squad most managers in world football could only dream of.
My point is that you will be hard pushed to find any manager anywhere in the world that doesn’t say they didn’t deserve to sacked and find some kind of mitigating circumstances as to why they were shown the door – whether justified or not.

 

[Anonymous]

End of thread then?

Thank fuck for that.

The thread will end when people are done posting in it ... which I suspect won't be for at least another day or two. However if you want you can pretend it's the end of the thread then never open it again thus ensuring for you it is indeed the end of the thread ... :)

 

[Cobwebcat]

It’s all a game – mancini is doing what all managers do – making his tenure seem as positive as possible.
Pellegrini actually blamed the fact he had too many star players at Madrid as the reason he didn’t succeed (no pianists etc etc). He also blamed his superiors. Doesn’t make him a twat – it’s just the way it is.
It’s just spin.
What i can’t understand is the vitriol that still exists on here towards mancini.
I support city not a manager and i can understand why people didn’t rate him.
But why people can’t just be appreciative of what the club, as whole, achieved while mancini was manager and move on without the bitterness i have no idea.
I find it quite sad that people have so much antipathy to such a successful period of our history.
Just lighten up and enjoy the ride FFS

I like this post. I picture the Mancini haters as Sheldon on Big Bang going "Wheaton!"

He's gone. Time to move on. Let's see how we get on with Pelle. Pelle might do even better or we might come to look back at Mancini's time as the best team we ever had. Nobody knows.

 

[Anonymous]

I do not for one moment believe that Mansour and Khaldoon merely rubber stamped Mancini's departure.

I guess on this point we both agree. This isn't a dig at anyone, if anything it's a dig at the owners, but the five year contract was a joke. If indeed Mancini held them to ransom, as I've heard he did, they should've bitten the bullet and sacked him and brought in someone on an interim basis for 12 months and then let Txiki and Ferran have the whole season to find a suitable replacement.

In the end what's done is done but I certainly think Khaldoun in particular needs to ask himself what he was thinking rubber stamping that new contract knowing that Mancini was a swing of Aguero's right leg away from being sacked anyway.

 

[Braggster]

I do not for one moment believe that Mansour and Khaldoon merely rubber stamped Mancini's departure.

I guess on this point we both agree. This isn't a dig at anyone, if anything it's a dig at the owners, but the five year contract was a joke. If indeed Mancini held them to ransom, as I've heard he did, they should've bitten the bullet and sacked him and brought in someone on an interim basis for 12 months and then let Txiki and Ferran have the whole season to find a suitable replacement.

In the end what's done is done but I certainly think Khaldoun in particular needs to ask himself what he was thinking rubber stamping that new contract knowing that Mancini was a swing of Aguero's right leg away from being sacked anyway.

Fully agree. I posted to that effect a while ago, saying that, if the difference between sacking him and keeping him was really Aguero's goal, they should've sacked him anyway.

And certainly, if he played hardball over the contract, they should have called his bluff.

Not too impressive from Khaldoon, if true.

 

[OB1]

I do not for one moment believe that Mansour and Khaldoon merely rubber stamped Mancini's departure.

I guess on this point we both agree. This isn't a dig at anyone, if anything it's a dig at the owners, but the five year contract was a joke. If indeed Mancini held them to ransom, as I've heard he did, they should've bitten the bullet and sacked him and brought in someone on an interim basis for 12 months and then let Txiki and Ferran have the whole season to find a suitable replacement.

In the end what's done is done but I certainly think Khaldoun in particular needs to ask himself what he was thinking rubber stamping that new contract knowing that Mancini was a swing of Aguero's right leg away from being sacked anyway.

Good point about the contract; although it's still unclear to me whether or no there was some sort of break clause in there; claims that we are still paying him, suggest that there may not have been.

Sacking him immediately after winning the title would have produced a lot of negative reactions and it is hard to know whether or not they were best avoided. However, the club might have been able to engineer a resignation if they had played hard ball on a new contract. I do think that him swanning off to Monaco would have been the best outcome for City.