He got one or two minor details wrong which have absolutely no bearing on the book's content whatsoever. I don't agree with all of his opinions on modern football but I found the book to be well written and well structured.VOOMER said:crystal_mais said:lancs blue said:Totally agree, Pablo. People forget that Mancini is still relatively young, Ferguson didn't win his first PL title until he was 51 and his first CL when he was 57. Yes Mourinho is a similar age to Mancini and has a better record but I remain unconvinced that he would hang around too long at any club.
Guys please stop comparing managers to Fergie - totally different era. Football was different - when he started
yes bully boy comes from a sick and twisted era, he would have been sacked at the big European clubs with only 2 champions league wins.
-- Thu Mar 14, 2013 2:07 pm --
Didsbury Dave said:You see, this is where I lose the 'he needs time to develop', 'he's still young', 'he's learning all the time' argument. For the reasons I've given above I don't think he will ever change. There's a fascinating interview with khaldoon in David conn's book where khaldoon even says that Mancini 'needs to evolve'. I think there he's hinting at his man management skills which have always been questioned.
There hasn't been Any sign at all that he's improving on that score. He's still criticising his players in public. He's still blurting stuff out in press conferences. He's still giving players the sulk when they come off having played badly. He's still bawling and screaming on the touch line when things are going wrong.
I think souness's comments 'he won't be told anything by anyone' are the reason why he is what he is and will always be that abrasive character.
I read the book to DD. I have no doubt that you and good number of the forum members could do a better job. It's horse shit, he gets many details wrong and the book is more to do with how righteous David Conn is than what our clubs about, merchant banker comes to mind.
the goats backside said:That is very true, but pot 3 the likely one. Looking at the co ratings, once the draw has been made for next season we will drop to 26th so it will be pot 3 for the next 2 seasons at least. Thankfully the year after we only lose just over 3 points off our total so as long as we do ok to well, we will start to climb more significantly from then onwards. Unless our luck in the draws changes we are in for another tough 2 years in the Champs league
Pablo1 said:tolmie's hairdoo said:Didsbury Dave said:Not a bad take.
He's stubborn and single-minded, that's probably his biggest personality trait. You've all watched the qpr game repeatedly. It's interesting what souness says after the game when asked about his time working with Mancini. I cant remember word for word but its more or less 'you couldn't tell him anything. Nothing. Even as a young lad, no matter what he was told and who by, he knew better'. That's why he gets results with clubs going through rapid change: he's not scared to cut sacred trees down, or to stare people down who have ideas he believes are above their station. We saw it with half a dozen of our players on his first twelve months, and ultimately that got results. He is full of himself and is able to say 'fuck you' to anyone who stands in his way whilst he instills a hard, don't settle for second beat, culture. He also seems to understand that the best players to include in his culture are self motivated, bright ones. Like hart, kompany, de Jong, clichy, dzeko, toure etc.
Tactically he's well researched and in tune with modern thinking. But this is where his weaknesses start, I remember during his first home game, I think it was stoke. He changed formation after 30 minutes because our midfield was getting overrun and it worked a treat. I was delighted, I thought 'we've got a real manager here'. But then within a few games he had us as a 4411 with petrov on the right and swp on the left. Inverted wingers is of course an extremely effective formation and has been fashionable for the last few years. But it only works when you have players like Ribery, Robinho, even Adam Johnson, who can come inside with the ball at their feet. Neither of those two can; their games are about going outside people. In doing this he neutered those players and neutered our cutting edge. It's a mistake he makes repeatedly; putting the horse before the cart: his obsession with making the 352 work early this season was based on his desire to use a modern system and it fell down on his seeming inability to comprehend that if your players don't fit a formation, it will fail, no matter what the textbook says.
I think this weakness, a drive to ask things of players which they can't deliver, is a big one. Of course it's a cliche to say he is not a good people person but I think it's true. Whilst you can probably trust some players to motivate themselves, and even to want to prove you wrong if you've hammered them, you cannot expect all of your squad to respond to this. Even if your buying policy reflects this style, you'll always have players who need confidence through support.
I think these strengths and weaknesses , whilst of course not giving the whole picture, go some way toward explaining his previous domestic success, his European failure and also our regression this this season. European football is just football but you are playing good teams with exceptional managers. I think Mancini isn't good enough technically to get the right results in these games.
That's why I think he's a man for a short term hit, a good manager to turn a ship around. But once it's turned I think his weaknesses come to the fore as we've seen at city and his last job. Being pig headed and aloof doesn't work long term with top level players. It alienates them and eventually they start to lose respect and just think you're not on their side.
Great post. Someone else offered an interesting opinion last week. They felt Mancini can't let go of actually playing the game still.
It clouds his judgement in the respect of his emotions. He sees footballers making errors and all he can equate it to is how he would have done it so much better.
You see him out there still playing in the training sessions, you very rarely have that with any managers these days, let alone, supposed top ones?
I think in his own head, having been such a great technical player, himself, he struggles to reconcile things which came so easy to him.
That manifests itself with his rush to judgement a little too quickly IMO.
Those frustrations mount simply because what he could do with his own feet, and what he now tries to implement from his own head, towards his teams, he can't achieve to the fullest?
I think there's a lot of truth in that Tolmie - which is why I think he needs more time.
This is a side of him thats likely to subside over the coming seasons as Mancini matures and finds a balance.
For me he's shown already that the potential to be a top manager is in there - I just hope that we're the job that fulfils that potential.
crystal_mais said:lancs blue said:crystal_mais said:Guys please stop comparing managers to Fergie - totally different era. Football was different - when he started
So you're one of those "football only started in 1992" people are you?
Well considering I am 40 years old and been supporting City for 34 years. Football did not start in 92 no, but this brand of monopoly corporate football did.
you made some points that Mancini is young and compared him to Fergie. I've made an aged based response to your statement. Did Fergie win the first ever PL? What were the competitions prior to that he managed in? How successful was he? What was his success at Aberdeen? Would you class that as successful?
Fergies career didn't start at the age of 51
gordondaviesmoustache said:Will posters please desist from calling him 'Fergie'. It's far too an avuncular term of address for my liking.
There are plenty of alternatives to choose from.
That's much more like it!crystal_mais said:gordondaviesmoustache said:Will posters please desist from calling him 'Fergie'. It's far too an avuncular term of address for my liking.
There are plenty of alternatives to choose from.
**** fucking whiskey swilling arrogant red nosed twat (CFWSARNT)
tolmie's hairdoo said:Pablo1 said:tolmie's hairdoo said:Great post. Someone else offered an interesting opinion last week. They felt Mancini can't let go of actually playing the game still.
It clouds his judgement in the respect of his emotions. He sees footballers making errors and all he can equate it to is how he would have done it so much better.
You see him out there still playing in the training sessions, you very rarely have that with any managers these days, let alone, supposed top ones?
I think in his own head, having been such a great technical player, himself, he struggles to reconcile things which came so easy to him.
That manifests itself with his rush to judgement a little too quickly IMO.
Those frustrations mount simply because what he could do with his own feet, and what he now tries to implement from his own head, towards his teams, he can't achieve to the fullest?
I think there's a lot of truth in that Tolmie - which is why I think he needs more time.
This is a side of him thats likely to subside over the coming seasons as Mancini matures and finds a balance.
For me he's shown already that the potential to be a top manager is in there - I just hope that we're the job that fulfils that potential.
Simply my point as to why I don't think he should be granted more time!
I would assume Mancini could never bend on this one, since the age of 15, people have been telling him he was the best.
Funnily enough, I think it is also the reason why he had so much empathy for Balotelli.
It's a mindset built up for nigh on 35 years. Don't think City are in a position to allow Mancini to discover a different way of altering his methods over a longer period of time.
He was the perfect fit in hindsight in terms of when he first took over, his uncompromising attitude to radical change.
I strongly suspect he doesn't feel he needs to change a single damn thing, in terms of his own approach and that will continue to be his Achilles heel and undoing.
crystal_mais said:lancs blue said:crystal_mais said:Guys please stop comparing managers to Fergie - totally different era. Football was different - when he started
So you're one of those "football only started in 1992" people are you?
Well considering I am 40 years old and been supporting City for 34 years. Football did not start in 92 no, but this brand of monopoly corporate football did.
you made some points that Mancini is young and compared him to Fergie. I've made an aged based response to your statement. Did Fergie win the first ever PL? What were the competitions prior to that he managed in? How successful was he? What was his success at Aberdeen? Would you class that as successful?
Fergies career didn't start at the age of 51
lancs blue said:crystal_mais said:lancs blue said:So you're one of those "football only started in 1992" people are you?
Well considering I am 40 years old and been supporting City for 34 years. Football did not start in 92 no, but this brand of monopoly corporate football did.
you made some points that Mancini is young and compared him to Fergie. I've made an aged based response to your statement. Did Fergie win the first ever PL? What were the competitions prior to that he managed in? How successful was he? What was his success at Aberdeen? Would you class that as successful?
Fergies career didn't start at the age of 51
Let me rephrase it then, Ferguson took nearly 7 years to win his first English league title and nearly 13 years to win a European Cup/Champions League. For all that time he was managing the wealthiest club in England and one of the wealthiest in Europe and their spending was on a par with that wealth. For me that makes it a valid comparison with what you describe as "monopoly corporate football".