Love_Each_Day
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 May 2009
- Messages
- 2,174
Re: Who should City get to replace Mancini?
Sam Allardyce
Sam Allardyce
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 out (Merged)
- Thread starter larderland
- Start date
Re: Mancini out
Yes the players are taking time to gel, but they did last week. Finally we gel so what does he do? Changes the team..... how the fuck are they supposed to gel with a different side each week.
Why start Dzeko and keep playing AJ on the right? Surely we need a player that can cross into the box, so why play him on the right where he has to cut back in every time?
We are poor in defence without De Jong and poor in attack without Silva so he rests them both until we are down 3 - 0?
So what if we do make the champions league.... if we can make a poor Liverpool side look that good imagine what Barcelona will do.
Yes the players are taking time to gel, but they did last week. Finally we gel so what does he do? Changes the team..... how the fuck are they supposed to gel with a different side each week.
Why start Dzeko and keep playing AJ on the right? Surely we need a player that can cross into the box, so why play him on the right where he has to cut back in every time?
We are poor in defence without De Jong and poor in attack without Silva so he rests them both until we are down 3 - 0?
So what if we do make the champions league.... if we can make a poor Liverpool side look that good imagine what Barcelona will do.
larderland
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 3,045
Re: Mancini out
thia nd totally this,this gelling thing is the biggest scapegoat ever,if he cant gel a team in 18 months he doesnt belong here
DD said:DSonBlue said:Getting bored of saying this, but...
We're 4th in the league, the players have had less than a year to gel, and we were better than Utd at Old Trafford recently. We won 5 nil last week, playing some good stuff.
We've lost (admittedly playing poorly) at Anfield, where not long ago so did Utd (ableit playing slightly better than we did).
End of season is the time to judge - and be realistic when doing so (or stick to Champ Manager where you assemble a squad and get instant results...)
Impatient, vain kneejerkers are the worst kind of fan.
Stop listening to the press.
If creating a team to challenge the best were that easy, and since money is the main criteria, look at all the millions other clubs have "wasted" on players over the years.
It all takes time, which means patience, realistic expectations, and possibly most importantly, continuity.
Spurs went from bottom to 4th in 18 months.
Fossils have formed quicker than we are gelling.
Wake up and smell the salt son. You sound like the wife who has been cheated on and knocked about a bit but who says "he's lovely really and he loves me you know".
thia nd totally this,this gelling thing is the biggest scapegoat ever,if he cant gel a team in 18 months he doesnt belong here
ashton-blues
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 20 Sep 2008
- Messages
- 173
Re: Who should City get to replace Mancini?
Beat me to that one.
Even big sam thinks he could manage real madrid barca and any top club in the world.
BIG SAM My arse
Love_Each_Day said:Sam Allardyce
Beat me to that one.
Even big sam thinks he could manage real madrid barca and any top club in the world.
BIG SAM My arse
Re: Who should City get to replace Mancini?
We clearly need someone who the players would want to play for, although I think that could be anyone else after this match. The usually proffesional Milner showing his frustration just confirms for me he has to go.
His tactics completely baffle me. I'd seriously take a reallistic Owen Coyle or Martin O'neill once Mancini gets the boot. The players need to be a team and need a manager they can respect, enjoy playing for and who would play them in a tactical set-up which makes sense.
We clearly need someone who the players would want to play for, although I think that could be anyone else after this match. The usually proffesional Milner showing his frustration just confirms for me he has to go.
His tactics completely baffle me. I'd seriously take a reallistic Owen Coyle or Martin O'neill once Mancini gets the boot. The players need to be a team and need a manager they can respect, enjoy playing for and who would play them in a tactical set-up which makes sense.
DSonBlue
Well-Known Member
Re: Mancini out
First, the players haven't all been here 18 months.
Second, and this is aimed at DD as well, think what it is exactly you're bitching about:
- the fact that this year in the league, we've only lost to Villa (robbed, we battered them and a defenders arse cheek saved them if I remember rightly), Utd (we were better and most people on here praised the team if I rr), Chelsea (we didn't play well after we went a goal down, otherwise big deal it's Chelsea, who we beat at ours) and now Liverpool (days before the biggest semi in recent memory (let's face it, it was on the players minds)...
- the fact that up until just before xmas, we were 2nd in the league?
- or the fact that you're disappointed with tonight's performance and result? (fair enough there were mistakes made in the team selection)
To turn tonight into a 'Mancini out' thread however makes you (and others) look really spineless, and a bit of a glory hunter, to be honest.
In fact it's getting really boring now, the same attention seekers saying Mancini out all the time. All you get is..
"Who will we get?" "Will Mourinho come?" "How about Hiddink?" "O'Neill?!!"
FFS.
larderland said:DD said:Spurs went from bottom to 4th in 18 months.
Fossils have formed quicker than we are gelling.
Wake up and smell the salt son. You sound like the wife who has been cheated on and knocked about a bit but who says "he's lovely really and he loves me you know".
thia nd totally this,this gelling thing is the biggest scapegoat ever,if he cant gel a team in 18 months he doesnt belong here
First, the players haven't all been here 18 months.
Second, and this is aimed at DD as well, think what it is exactly you're bitching about:
- the fact that this year in the league, we've only lost to Villa (robbed, we battered them and a defenders arse cheek saved them if I remember rightly), Utd (we were better and most people on here praised the team if I rr), Chelsea (we didn't play well after we went a goal down, otherwise big deal it's Chelsea, who we beat at ours) and now Liverpool (days before the biggest semi in recent memory (let's face it, it was on the players minds)...
- the fact that up until just before xmas, we were 2nd in the league?
- or the fact that you're disappointed with tonight's performance and result? (fair enough there were mistakes made in the team selection)
To turn tonight into a 'Mancini out' thread however makes you (and others) look really spineless, and a bit of a glory hunter, to be honest.
In fact it's getting really boring now, the same attention seekers saying Mancini out all the time. All you get is..
"Who will we get?" "Will Mourinho come?" "How about Hiddink?" "O'Neill?!!"
FFS.
MyJeckyllDoesntHyde
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 13 Sep 2010
- Messages
- 265
Re: Who should City get to replace Mancini?
Would definitely have him. Dunne and Collins were immense under him and are a shadow of themselves since he left. He has gotten the absolute best out of his players wherever he's been. There's better managers out there sure but I'd have him.allyboy said:Martin O'Neill
Re: Who should City get to replace Mancini?
He will be another Hughes imo.
Will he do well in the CL though, and TBH I thought Villa were a long ball team under him.allyboy said:Martin O'Neill
He will be another Hughes imo.
Love_Each_Day
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 May 2009
- Messages
- 2,174
Re: Who should City get to replace Mancini?
I'm not saying Marin O'Neill is a bad idea but a lot of people complain about Mancini playing players out of position, O'Neill loved doing that at Villa.
What about David Moyes? ;)
I'm not saying Marin O'Neill is a bad idea but a lot of people complain about Mancini playing players out of position, O'Neill loved doing that at Villa.
What about David Moyes? ;)
Re: Who should City get to replace Mancini?
He had a really good record against the big boys as well, i remember Villa beating Arsenal 2-0 at the Emirates, beating United 1-0 at Old Trafford, beating a Mourinho Chlesea 2-1 I think.
He is deffo better than Mancini but I have my doubt in Europe.
I do agree that it was clear how good he is as Villa have been shite since he left and I don't think that is down to Milner leaving.MyJeckyllDoesntHyde said:Would definitely have him. Dunne and Collins were immense under him and are a shadow of themselves since he left. He has gotten the absolute best out of his players wherever he's been. There's better managers out there sure but I'd have him.allyboy said:Martin O'Neill
He had a really good record against the big boys as well, i remember Villa beating Arsenal 2-0 at the Emirates, beating United 1-0 at Old Trafford, beating a Mourinho Chlesea 2-1 I think.
He is deffo better than Mancini but I have my doubt in Europe.
Re: Who should City get to replace Mancini?
think he's better than Hughes, morte tactically aware. I ws quite impressed with what he did at Villasammyvine said:Will he do well in the CL though, and TBH I thought Villa were a long ball team under him.allyboy said:Martin O'Neill
He will be another Hughes imo.
Re: Who should City get to replace Mancini?
Moyles will be another Hughes. Not sure if he can deal with the pressure at City. TBF, he has done well at Everton especially with the finances that they have.
If we do not get Mourinho, I would go for Hiddink or Spalletti.<br /><br />-- Tue Apr 12, 2011 2:11 am --<br /><br />
I think he is as well, but not sure how he would cope in the CL.
Plus you just feel he will have a moment where he will lose a lot of games, then his job will be on the line.
There are not many great managers available tbh.
Rijkaard was good at Barca but he would be another risk.
Love_Each_Day said:I'm not saying Marin O'Neill is a bad idea but a lot of people complain about Mancini playing players out of position, O'Neill loved doing that at Villa.
What about David Moyes? ;)
Moyles will be another Hughes. Not sure if he can deal with the pressure at City. TBF, he has done well at Everton especially with the finances that they have.
If we do not get Mourinho, I would go for Hiddink or Spalletti.<br /><br />-- Tue Apr 12, 2011 2:11 am --<br /><br />
allyboy said:think he's better than Hughes, morte tactically aware. I ws quite impressed with what he did at Villasammyvine said:Will he do well in the CL though, and TBH I thought Villa were a long ball team under him.
He will be another Hughes imo.
I think he is as well, but not sure how he would cope in the CL.
Plus you just feel he will have a moment where he will lose a lot of games, then his job will be on the line.
There are not many great managers available tbh.
Rijkaard was good at Barca but he would be another risk.
BertTrautmann'sParachute
Well-Known Member
Re: Mancini out
Fucking hell, they're all out tonight...buckshot said:I'd also prefer they get somebody who will allow Ade and Bellamy to come back. Ade obviously has the talent and Bellamy's desire would be welcome on any team.
Greg Cunningham
New Member
- Joined
- 15 May 2010
- Messages
- 1
Re: Who should City get to replace Mancini?
Porto's Andre Villas-Boas
Porto's Andre Villas-Boas
Santiago Street
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 1,733
Re: Who should City get to replace Mancini?
How many of these moaning kneejerk reaction types were only last week creaming over that picture showing the players' reaction to Vieira's goal and agreeing that it showed the critics how wonderful our team spirit was and how morale was better than ever.
So one week later after a defeat with several mitigating factors how is it that Mancini has suddenly lost the dressing room and the players don't wanna play for him ?
He's doing a good job you fools.
We're in the semi final of the cup and 4th in the league, 6 points off 2nd place with an easier run in than the Arsenal.
He's got things wrong - Kolarov, Boateng, Dzeko and Balotelli have been disappointments but many foreign signings take a season to bed in before showing their true form.
It's easy to be wise after the event but Dzeko was one of the most sought after strikers in Europe and Kolarov was wanted by Mourinho for Madrid so how can Mancini be criticized if these two don't make it. I bet every one of you miserablists was happy when we signed Dzeko.
We're a better team than this time last year and we're heading in the right direction. He made a good decision choosing Hart as number one and keeping him in even when he's dropped a clanger. He's improved the defence beyond recognition. He's brought the best out of Tevez.
If we beat the rags you people should hang your heads in shame and be prepared to swallow a large slice of humble pie before you blithely join in with all the celebratory banter next Sunday.
How many of these moaning kneejerk reaction types were only last week creaming over that picture showing the players' reaction to Vieira's goal and agreeing that it showed the critics how wonderful our team spirit was and how morale was better than ever.
So one week later after a defeat with several mitigating factors how is it that Mancini has suddenly lost the dressing room and the players don't wanna play for him ?
He's doing a good job you fools.
We're in the semi final of the cup and 4th in the league, 6 points off 2nd place with an easier run in than the Arsenal.
He's got things wrong - Kolarov, Boateng, Dzeko and Balotelli have been disappointments but many foreign signings take a season to bed in before showing their true form.
It's easy to be wise after the event but Dzeko was one of the most sought after strikers in Europe and Kolarov was wanted by Mourinho for Madrid so how can Mancini be criticized if these two don't make it. I bet every one of you miserablists was happy when we signed Dzeko.
We're a better team than this time last year and we're heading in the right direction. He made a good decision choosing Hart as number one and keeping him in even when he's dropped a clanger. He's improved the defence beyond recognition. He's brought the best out of Tevez.
If we beat the rags you people should hang your heads in shame and be prepared to swallow a large slice of humble pie before you blithely join in with all the celebratory banter next Sunday.
Paulmcfc2703
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 5 Aug 2008
- Messages
- 9,275
Re: Mancini out
Mancini has shown he thinks a trophy is more important than finishing in the top four with his team selection tonight.
If we play this defensive bullshit against them on Saturday like we have done for every tough game we will lose and Mancini will lose alot of his backers.
Mancini has shown he thinks a trophy is more important than finishing in the top four with his team selection tonight.
If we play this defensive bullshit against them on Saturday like we have done for every tough game we will lose and Mancini will lose alot of his backers.
brian the blue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 19 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 1,612
Re: Mancini out
But who's coming in to replace him then?
I don't think we have a chance of getting Mourinho... Now i'm stuck as to who'd be a good replacement.
But who's coming in to replace him then?
I don't think we have a chance of getting Mourinho... Now i'm stuck as to who'd be a good replacement.
Re: Who should City get to replace Mancini?
I'd prefer Mancini to succeed and take us forward but he seems to be his own worst enemy at times. If he has to go, it needs to be someone with a good footballing mind. My order of preference would be...
1. Jose Mourinho - I don't think he is as perfect as some make out, the first El Classico this season proving that, but he is the best manager in the world alongside Baconface (as much as it pains me to admit). He would improve us and is the only manager we could get I feel confident in saying that about. Players would live and die for this man as they have in every team, and if they didn't conform, he'd put them in the reserves no matter how much they're on. But the risk is Mourinho is he can get bored quickly and move on to his next "project".
2. André Villas Boas - Ooh, this would be a huge risk that could pay off or not, but there is something about this man that gives you the same impression as his teacher, Jose Mourinho. Just like Mourinho, he has turned Porto into a machine both in the league and Europa League (where they just destroyed Spartak Moscow). However, Mourinho did the same but with the Champions League instead of Europa, meaning he was more proven before getting the Chelsea job. Boas is 33, younger than at least one of our players (Vieira), but has the suaveness of Mourinho that would fit the club's new image. Has a great tactical mind and knows how to make his team work as one. He'd probably bring Hulk with him.
3. Pep Guardiola - He's managing the best club team in history right now. I don't care how good the players are, you still have to be able to make them play that well and he has improved on the excellent Barca team that Rijkaard had and drilled into them an even stronger mentality than before. He also had the b@lls to ditch the likes of Ronaldinho and Deco, allowing Messi and other younger players to flourish. The big question mark about Guardiola is if he's one of those one team managers, would he be able to have the same impact somewhere else... he'd have us playing nice football, that's for sure.
4. Guus Hiddink - Not the most fashionable manager for our "new money" project that seems to be built around younger managers in their 40s, but one of the better tacticians out there. That said, most of his success in the 2000s has been at international level except his stint at Chelsea, where he had the best squad in the Premier League. Still, you have to be able to assemble the components and make the team work. One thing I'm wary of though is his performances as a manager seem to be faltering - he failed to take Russia to WC2010 and only has a 50/50 record as Turkey manager so far.
Others worth considering: Jürgen Klopp (unlikely to get him with Dortmund in CL next season), Luciano Spalletti (an Italian who likes to attack), Didier Deschamps, Unai Emery (maybe pushing it with him, I love what he has done at Valencia though with no money)
No to: Martin O'Neill, Frank Rijkaard, Fabio Capello, Marcello Lippi, Rafa Benitez, David Moyes, Harry Redknapp
I'd prefer Mancini to succeed and take us forward but he seems to be his own worst enemy at times. If he has to go, it needs to be someone with a good footballing mind. My order of preference would be...
1. Jose Mourinho - I don't think he is as perfect as some make out, the first El Classico this season proving that, but he is the best manager in the world alongside Baconface (as much as it pains me to admit). He would improve us and is the only manager we could get I feel confident in saying that about. Players would live and die for this man as they have in every team, and if they didn't conform, he'd put them in the reserves no matter how much they're on. But the risk is Mourinho is he can get bored quickly and move on to his next "project".
2. André Villas Boas - Ooh, this would be a huge risk that could pay off or not, but there is something about this man that gives you the same impression as his teacher, Jose Mourinho. Just like Mourinho, he has turned Porto into a machine both in the league and Europa League (where they just destroyed Spartak Moscow). However, Mourinho did the same but with the Champions League instead of Europa, meaning he was more proven before getting the Chelsea job. Boas is 33, younger than at least one of our players (Vieira), but has the suaveness of Mourinho that would fit the club's new image. Has a great tactical mind and knows how to make his team work as one. He'd probably bring Hulk with him.
3. Pep Guardiola - He's managing the best club team in history right now. I don't care how good the players are, you still have to be able to make them play that well and he has improved on the excellent Barca team that Rijkaard had and drilled into them an even stronger mentality than before. He also had the b@lls to ditch the likes of Ronaldinho and Deco, allowing Messi and other younger players to flourish. The big question mark about Guardiola is if he's one of those one team managers, would he be able to have the same impact somewhere else... he'd have us playing nice football, that's for sure.
4. Guus Hiddink - Not the most fashionable manager for our "new money" project that seems to be built around younger managers in their 40s, but one of the better tacticians out there. That said, most of his success in the 2000s has been at international level except his stint at Chelsea, where he had the best squad in the Premier League. Still, you have to be able to assemble the components and make the team work. One thing I'm wary of though is his performances as a manager seem to be faltering - he failed to take Russia to WC2010 and only has a 50/50 record as Turkey manager so far.
Others worth considering: Jürgen Klopp (unlikely to get him with Dortmund in CL next season), Luciano Spalletti (an Italian who likes to attack), Didier Deschamps, Unai Emery (maybe pushing it with him, I love what he has done at Valencia though with no money)
No to: Martin O'Neill, Frank Rijkaard, Fabio Capello, Marcello Lippi, Rafa Benitez, David Moyes, Harry Redknapp
Re: Mancini out
After a 5-0 win how does a team manage to produce such an awful performace with only 3 changes made to the side? Dzeko, Milner and Barry have their critics but in no way shape or form are they poor players. They are just badly managed, and when a manager who has spent as much time with this squad, regardless of how much money he has spent, relies so heavily on certain players he proves he is not the man to be our leader for years to come and push us to the next level. He can't get the best out of our players.
After a 5-0 win how does a team manage to produce such an awful performace with only 3 changes made to the side? Dzeko, Milner and Barry have their critics but in no way shape or form are they poor players. They are just badly managed, and when a manager who has spent as much time with this squad, regardless of how much money he has spent, relies so heavily on certain players he proves he is not the man to be our leader for years to come and push us to the next level. He can't get the best out of our players.