squirtyflower
Well-Known Member
nahMCfcBOB said:
a month ago there were lots wanking themselves silly after the momentous demolition of boro in the cup
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Mancini or Hughes - you decide ?
- Thread starter 183sash
- Start date
a month ago there were lots wanking themselves silly after the momentous demolition of boro in the cup
mammutly
Well-Known Member
Lord BLue said:law74 said:I wasnt sure that sacking Hughes was the right move.
I wasnt sure appointing Bobby was the right move.
The club decided to make both moves so I will support them, and in doing so support the current manager (although there are some tactics he wouldnt use).
pretty much agree with this.
imo anyone giving the answer 100% in favour of one or the other is a numpty. if you want to comment on the topic you have to analyse strengths and weaknesses fairly. and imo there is very little fact available, just opinion and conjecture.
player procurement both managers targets have been subject to much conjecture, but we can only really judge them on the facts. i think hughes was extremely good on this score. mancini is still to be judged.
defensive coaching (or when they have the ball) mancini
offensive coaching (or when we have the ball) hughes
starting 11 some curious ones by mancini, petrov belongs on the left wing surely!
in game tactics up until today i'd have said mancini. still do tbh.
substitutions
handling of media i think both guys have been fine on this score
handling of superstar egos unsure on this i thought hughes did ok whereas mancini has shipped robbie out.
academy development weiss got a couple of games under hughes. but the introduction of boyata has been a master stroke. so full marks to mancini on this one.
cup runs hughes
performances against sky 4 both managers 100% at home, lost to rags away.
performances against minnows too many draws by hughes. clinical by mancini
performances against rivals lost to spurs and everton away so about equal i guess.
Results:
Only criteria that matters.
Hughes (aided by cook) was all spin and bullshit. In Mancini, we have a manager who understands that 'projections', 'trajectories', and 'five year plans' etc. are worth precisely fuck all if you don't actually win football matches.
Challenger1978
Well-Known Member
mammutly said:Results:
Only criteria that matters.
Hughes (aided by cook) was all spin and bullshit. In Mancini, we have a manager who understands that 'projections', 'trajectories', and 'five year plans' etc. are worth precisely fuck all if you don't actually win football matches.
Fucking brilliant reply fella.
Neville Kneville
Well-Known Member
mammutly said:Lord BLue said:pretty much agree with this.
imo anyone giving the answer 100% in favour of one or the other is a numpty. if you want to comment on the topic you have to analyse strengths and weaknesses fairly. and imo there is very little fact available, just opinion and conjecture.
player procurement both managers targets have been subject to much conjecture, but we can only really judge them on the facts. i think hughes was extremely good on this score. mancini is still to be judged.
defensive coaching (or when they have the ball) mancini
offensive coaching (or when we have the ball) hughes
starting 11 some curious ones by mancini, petrov belongs on the left wing surely!
in game tactics up until today i'd have said mancini. still do tbh.
substitutions
handling of media i think both guys have been fine on this score
handling of superstar egos unsure on this i thought hughes did ok whereas mancini has shipped robbie out.
academy development weiss got a couple of games under hughes. but the introduction of boyata has been a master stroke. so full marks to mancini on this one.
cup runs hughes
performances against sky 4 both managers 100% at home, lost to rags away.
performances against minnows too many draws by hughes. clinical by mancini
performances against rivals lost to spurs and everton away so about equal i guess.
Results:
Only criteria that matters.
Hughes (aided by cook) was all spin and bullshit. In Mancini, we have a manager who understands that 'projections', 'trajectories', and 'five year plans' etc. are worth precisely fuck all if you don't actually win football matches.
That will only start to apply if we beat Hull & Bolton rather than drawing. The other comparable results are exactly the same.
There is a Light
Well-Known Member
Are people really debating this?
Mancini came into a unbelievably pressured situation. The whole of the media and football wanted him to fail, but he has charmed the arses off the lot of them. He has the ability to see when things aren't going well and is brave enough to change tactics to win matches. Clean sheets win football matches and beating the mediocre teams puts you in a higher league position. Mancini ensures City do both and he wins hands down for me.
Mancini came into a unbelievably pressured situation. The whole of the media and football wanted him to fail, but he has charmed the arses off the lot of them. He has the ability to see when things aren't going well and is brave enough to change tactics to win matches. Clean sheets win football matches and beating the mediocre teams puts you in a higher league position. Mancini ensures City do both and he wins hands down for me.
squirtyflower
Well-Known Member
if i rarely spent my hard earned to go and watch city then 3 points at the end of a hard afternoon watching teletext and some crappy foreign stream would be perfect
but for those that actually go and spend upwards of £250 to see them play might want commitment, passion and desire from the players and maybe a modicum of skill to put poor teams to the sword for the whole 90 minutes
but for those that actually go and spend upwards of £250 to see them play might want commitment, passion and desire from the players and maybe a modicum of skill to put poor teams to the sword for the whole 90 minutes
The Fat el Hombre
Well-Known Member
Challenger1978 said:mammutly said:Results:
Only criteria that matters.
Hughes (aided by cook) was all spin and bullshit. In Mancini, we have a manager who understands that 'projections', 'trajectories', and 'five year plans' etc. are worth precisely fuck all if you don't actually win football matches.
Fucking brilliant reply fella.
Correctamundo
Neville Kneville
Well-Known Member
There is a light said:Are people really debating this?
Mancini came into a unbelievably pressured situation. The whole of the media and football wanted him to fail, but he has charmed the arses off the lot of them. He has the ability to see when things aren't going well and is brave enough to change tactics to win matches. Clean sheets win football matches and beating the mediocre teams puts you in a higher league position. Mancini ensures City do both and he wins hands down for me.
If we actually beat the teams that Hughes failed to beat then there'll be a good case. Until then there is no case whatsoever, we've just beaten the same teams that Hughes beat, won games Hughes would have been expected to win & lost games Hughes would probably have lost. Let's actually see what happens & give credit if & when it's due.
bizzbo
Well-Known Member
but hughes drew against burnley etc. mancini has been winning those games, with a considerable injury list. or am I missing something?
marco
Well-Known Member
squirtyflower said:if i rarely spent my hard earned to go and watch city then 3 points at the end of a hard afternoon watching teletext and some crappy foreign stream would be perfect
but for those that actually go and spend upwards of £250 to see them play might want commitment, passion and desire from the players and maybe a modicum of skill to put poor teams to the sword for the whole 90 minutes
what for 90mins a game x 38 games you want it week in week out,get real squirty even real madrid can't put that show on,your posts are hitting an all time low