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 takes responsibility for the loss to Everton
- Thread starter BosnianDiamond
- Start date
citysince88 said:He did the same thing last season when we got beat by Liverpool, you know when everybody threw a tantrum and started to cry because they thought we wouldn't make top four and what happened we finished 3rd and won the FA cup.
We deserved 5th though. Arsenal and Spurs gave us 3rd.
Carver
Well-Known Member
Gollum said in his pre-match interview words to the effect that they would set out to stifle City's attacking instinct and that it had worked in the past.
I took this to mean he'd send his lads out to kick the shit out of us as per usual, however they didn't have to.
Bobby worked out how to beat Sjoke in the cup final, he's still not worked out how to beat the strong teams like Everton & Sunderland, it's still foreign to him.
I took this to mean he'd send his lads out to kick the shit out of us as per usual, however they didn't have to.
Bobby worked out how to beat Sjoke in the cup final, he's still not worked out how to beat the strong teams like Everton & Sunderland, it's still foreign to him.
Blootoof
Well-Known Member
BlueJill said:citysince88 said:He did the same thing last season when we got beat by Liverpool, you know when everybody threw a tantrum and started to cry because they thought we wouldn't make top four and what happened we finished 3rd and won the FA cup.
We deserved 5th though. Arsenal and Spurs gave us 3rd.
We gave us 3rd.
GazM
Well-Known Member
citysince88 said:He did the same thing last season when we got beat by Liverpool, you know when everybody threw a tantrum and started to cry because they thought we wouldn't make top four and what happened we finished 3rd and won the FA cup.
^This. Served us well then didn't it :)
Good article about this on telegraph:
Manchester City manager Roberto Mancini shows subtle psychology by claiming Everton defeat was his fault
Since he arrived from Italy, Roberto Mancini has been responsible for several innovations in English football.
Admission: Roberto Mancini says he underestimated Everton Photo: AP
By Jim White7:00AM GMT 02 Feb 2012Comment
He has turned the club scarf into a fashion item, he has pioneered the introduction of mime into the technical area and he has widened the parameters of the English language with his ruthless promotion of the phrase “in this moment”.
But on Tuesday night he did something really unusual in the modern game: he took responsibility for defeat by admitting to his own ineptitude.
Speaking after a chastening result at Everton, the Manchester City manager said that he had underestimated the opposition and had consequently not prepared his team properly.
“Maybe I thought before the game maybe it was easier,” he said. “I don’t want to do the same mistake next Saturday. I’m disappointed for my mistake.”
In an era in which the cult of the coach reigns supreme, when managerial omnipotence is promoted by those involved during every press conference, when most managers like to give the impression they have eyes in the back of their head, this was something wholly different.
Why, you wondered as he talked, did he not simply do what most of his rivals would do in similar circumstances: blame the ref?
It was not the first time he has done it, either. At the climax of last season, after his City side had again been dismissed on Merseyside, he claimed a 3-0 defeat at Liverpool was entirely his responsibility.
After that intervention, City fans feared for their season. With Carlos Tévez injured during the match, with the team looking shiftless and now with the manager admitting he did not know what he was doing, they gloomily foresaw only implosion up ahead.
As it turned out, his remarks spurred the opposite reaction. City beat Manchester United five days later in the FA Cup semi-final on their way to their first trophy in a generation before embarking on a run that ensured Champions League qualification. As a motivational tactic, shielding his players from blame, his remarks worked a treat.
And if it worked once, why not try the line again? After a testing January, the truth is City looked jaded at Goodison Park, badly missing the titanic midfield influence of Yaya Touré.
It was not so much that the manager’s tactics were deficient, as the players failed to put them into action. By suggesting he was to blame, however, Mancini deflected attention from his squad’s inadequacies, scrutiny that might otherwise undermine the group morale.
Other managers have previously espoused the idea of setting a false trail to cover for their team’s deficiency. Alex Ferguson and Jose Mourinho are both masters of the diversionary tactic, deliberately making themselves the centre of a story in order to protect those who matter. But neither of them would ever do so by confessing a weakness. And it is understandable why they do not.
For Mancini to admit to complacency in his preparation is a personal risk. Thoroughness and proper organisation are a minimum requirement in the modern manager.
Even if it is untrue and merely a trick to fool the media, to suggest he was caught out by a team such as Everton, whose belligerence is renowned and whose record against City should inspire the opposite of complacency, potentially undermines his competence.
Were he to fail to deliver the trophies his employers have bankrolled, they could easily use it as evidence of his fallibility. In retrospect, it could be the dynamite that blows up in his face. Which makes you think Mancini does not expect his remarks will ever come back to haunt him.
This is a naturally cautious man. Odd as it may seem, they are instead the comments of a confident manager. He will know – and, whatever he might say, attention to detail is embedded his managerial approach – that a campaign to win the league is not straightforward.
Few teams ever seal the title without trauma. Managing dips in form, injury, suspension and absences at the Africa Cup of Nations are part of the job.
What he does not want is for his team spirit to be damaged by excessive condemnation of a defeat which, in the long view, might be irrelevant. He knows that Touré’s return is really all that is required to return the team to the kind of form they demonstrated at the start of the season.
Mario Balotelli coming back from suspension with a point to prove will help, too. If an apparently casually introduced confession of personal shortcoming can tide things over for a week or two, it is worth the risk. Especially if you consider the risk is minimal.
Across the hedge at his Carrington training base, Mancini knows there lurks a rival who long ago mastered the psychological requirements of modern management. Mancini’s little performance at Goodison suggests the newcomer has the armoury at his disposal to test even the master. Far from being a confession of weakness, Mancini spoke on Tuesday from a position of increasing personal strength.
Speed inquest highlights the dangers of new media
Inconclusive as his inquest might have been, we can be sure about one aspect of Gary Speed’s death: none of the rumours about him that spun round the internet immediately after he took his life had any basis in fact.
In a week in which enthusiasts such as Joey Barton and Stan Collymore have evangelised new media’s superiority over old, that was a sobering reminder of the web’s sometimes reckless relationship with the truth.
Back in November, the lack of clear explanation as to why a man with so much to look forward to committed suicide created an information vacuum into which was poured endless, groundless, vicious gossip, all repeated as fact without the sort of effort to test its veracity that would be insisted on at even the most scurrilous of traditional media outlets.
That was summed up in a tweet that Speed’s brother-in-law, Anthony Haylock, forwarded after the inquest in Warrington on Monday.
“So, Gary Speed wasn’t gay, wasn’t having an affair and wasn’t facing tabloid exposure,” it said. “Nice work, Twitter.”
Mind you, that the original tweet was sent by Piers Morgan, a man who made a lucrative career as a purveyor of tabloid blather, suggests that even in this instance the moral high ground is not easily identified.<br /><br />-- Thu Feb 02, 2012 4:42 pm --<br /><br />
No. We deserved third because Arsenal and Spurs slipped up and we were on brilliant form to take advantage of it.
Manchester City manager Roberto Mancini shows subtle psychology by claiming Everton defeat was his fault
Since he arrived from Italy, Roberto Mancini has been responsible for several innovations in English football.
Admission: Roberto Mancini says he underestimated Everton Photo: AP
By Jim White7:00AM GMT 02 Feb 2012Comment
He has turned the club scarf into a fashion item, he has pioneered the introduction of mime into the technical area and he has widened the parameters of the English language with his ruthless promotion of the phrase “in this moment”.
But on Tuesday night he did something really unusual in the modern game: he took responsibility for defeat by admitting to his own ineptitude.
Speaking after a chastening result at Everton, the Manchester City manager said that he had underestimated the opposition and had consequently not prepared his team properly.
“Maybe I thought before the game maybe it was easier,” he said. “I don’t want to do the same mistake next Saturday. I’m disappointed for my mistake.”
In an era in which the cult of the coach reigns supreme, when managerial omnipotence is promoted by those involved during every press conference, when most managers like to give the impression they have eyes in the back of their head, this was something wholly different.
Why, you wondered as he talked, did he not simply do what most of his rivals would do in similar circumstances: blame the ref?
It was not the first time he has done it, either. At the climax of last season, after his City side had again been dismissed on Merseyside, he claimed a 3-0 defeat at Liverpool was entirely his responsibility.
After that intervention, City fans feared for their season. With Carlos Tévez injured during the match, with the team looking shiftless and now with the manager admitting he did not know what he was doing, they gloomily foresaw only implosion up ahead.
As it turned out, his remarks spurred the opposite reaction. City beat Manchester United five days later in the FA Cup semi-final on their way to their first trophy in a generation before embarking on a run that ensured Champions League qualification. As a motivational tactic, shielding his players from blame, his remarks worked a treat.
And if it worked once, why not try the line again? After a testing January, the truth is City looked jaded at Goodison Park, badly missing the titanic midfield influence of Yaya Touré.
It was not so much that the manager’s tactics were deficient, as the players failed to put them into action. By suggesting he was to blame, however, Mancini deflected attention from his squad’s inadequacies, scrutiny that might otherwise undermine the group morale.
Other managers have previously espoused the idea of setting a false trail to cover for their team’s deficiency. Alex Ferguson and Jose Mourinho are both masters of the diversionary tactic, deliberately making themselves the centre of a story in order to protect those who matter. But neither of them would ever do so by confessing a weakness. And it is understandable why they do not.
For Mancini to admit to complacency in his preparation is a personal risk. Thoroughness and proper organisation are a minimum requirement in the modern manager.
Even if it is untrue and merely a trick to fool the media, to suggest he was caught out by a team such as Everton, whose belligerence is renowned and whose record against City should inspire the opposite of complacency, potentially undermines his competence.
Were he to fail to deliver the trophies his employers have bankrolled, they could easily use it as evidence of his fallibility. In retrospect, it could be the dynamite that blows up in his face. Which makes you think Mancini does not expect his remarks will ever come back to haunt him.
This is a naturally cautious man. Odd as it may seem, they are instead the comments of a confident manager. He will know – and, whatever he might say, attention to detail is embedded his managerial approach – that a campaign to win the league is not straightforward.
Few teams ever seal the title without trauma. Managing dips in form, injury, suspension and absences at the Africa Cup of Nations are part of the job.
What he does not want is for his team spirit to be damaged by excessive condemnation of a defeat which, in the long view, might be irrelevant. He knows that Touré’s return is really all that is required to return the team to the kind of form they demonstrated at the start of the season.
Mario Balotelli coming back from suspension with a point to prove will help, too. If an apparently casually introduced confession of personal shortcoming can tide things over for a week or two, it is worth the risk. Especially if you consider the risk is minimal.
Across the hedge at his Carrington training base, Mancini knows there lurks a rival who long ago mastered the psychological requirements of modern management. Mancini’s little performance at Goodison suggests the newcomer has the armoury at his disposal to test even the master. Far from being a confession of weakness, Mancini spoke on Tuesday from a position of increasing personal strength.
Speed inquest highlights the dangers of new media
Inconclusive as his inquest might have been, we can be sure about one aspect of Gary Speed’s death: none of the rumours about him that spun round the internet immediately after he took his life had any basis in fact.
In a week in which enthusiasts such as Joey Barton and Stan Collymore have evangelised new media’s superiority over old, that was a sobering reminder of the web’s sometimes reckless relationship with the truth.
Back in November, the lack of clear explanation as to why a man with so much to look forward to committed suicide created an information vacuum into which was poured endless, groundless, vicious gossip, all repeated as fact without the sort of effort to test its veracity that would be insisted on at even the most scurrilous of traditional media outlets.
That was summed up in a tweet that Speed’s brother-in-law, Anthony Haylock, forwarded after the inquest in Warrington on Monday.
“So, Gary Speed wasn’t gay, wasn’t having an affair and wasn’t facing tabloid exposure,” it said. “Nice work, Twitter.”
Mind you, that the original tweet was sent by Piers Morgan, a man who made a lucrative career as a purveyor of tabloid blather, suggests that even in this instance the moral high ground is not easily identified.<br /><br />-- Thu Feb 02, 2012 4:42 pm --<br /><br />
BlueJill said:citysince88 said:He did the same thing last season when we got beat by Liverpool, you know when everybody threw a tantrum and started to cry because they thought we wouldn't make top four and what happened we finished 3rd and won the FA cup.
We deserved 5th though. Arsenal and Spurs gave us 3rd.
No. We deserved third because Arsenal and Spurs slipped up and we were on brilliant form to take advantage of it.
onceabluealways
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 2,079
The Telegraph article is excellent and not far off the mark.
Personally i can not believe a manger would go public and admit he underestimated a team that probably has a better record against us than anyone outside the top 4. If he was trying to deflect from the players there were better ways of doing it.
It also doesn't say good things about Platt and kidd if true as they are part of his team.
I believe he thinks the world is against us as a lot of fans do. We can argue that on here but he needs to put the bad descisions behind him and get back to managing
Personally i can not believe a manger would go public and admit he underestimated a team that probably has a better record against us than anyone outside the top 4. If he was trying to deflect from the players there were better ways of doing it.
It also doesn't say good things about Platt and kidd if true as they are part of his team.
I believe he thinks the world is against us as a lot of fans do. We can argue that on here but he needs to put the bad descisions behind him and get back to managing
PowderBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 Feb 2009
- Messages
- 1,740
All this psychological talk is nonsense if you ask me. The players were fooked after a very tough December and January and after the anfield game he decided to give them a rest (we know a few players went home etc) I think he was also knackered after all the shit he has had to put up with (Kompany, Balotelli, bent refs etc). Basically it was a choice between risk under preparing for Goodson and rest the players or keep whipping them on, risking breakdown and fatigue. Unfortunately it didn't work on Tuesday,but i think will reap benefits longer term
Stretford Born Blue
Well-Known Member
It's a good thing to admit when you are wrong, but not in a public arena, should keep it between him and his squad....................
And people are right, he does'nt look too inmpressed with life at the moment.?!
And people are right, he does'nt look too inmpressed with life at the moment.?!
ecviper
Well-Known Member
he has gone through the process of winning the league a few times with Inter so just wondering if anyone knows if he has done something similar while he was at Inter?
Agree with others that say it is to deflect the pressure off the players and let them get on with it.
Agree with others that say it is to deflect the pressure off the players and let them get on with it.