Mancini

[adorado30]

Good question. And no idea on Europe. Although with Inter he did get out of the group each time ( I think without checking) so he does know how to at least qualify from the Group stages. Outside of the he did reach a Europa League SF but for a top coach significant European success is noticeably absent.

Perhaps the players don't believe in themselves enough as a group on the European stage and Mancini cannot convince them that they are and Europe is one area where a change in manager is required if only to break the cycle - but I'm just guessing as I don't know the answer.

I do think that if Avram Grant can get to a bloody CL final then how hard can it be. And then you look at Wenger who with 15 odd goes at it only has 1 losing final to his name so who knows. When you have Di Matteo more successful in the CL than Wenger all bets are off.

To answer my own question (if i may)

To be successful in Europe you need to be tactically astute and have everyone pulling in the same direction, which is why Mancini's style would never be a success (hope i'm proved wrong if he stays) and please quote me on this if it ever happens, but i'm confident it wont.

You need to be able to change a formation mid-game which is more effective if things aren't going to plan, play what's in front of you, horses for courses etc etc, but i think he's too stubborn and set in his ways to do it, the game against Ajax away was the last straw for me as i watched it from a great height unfold before my very eyes, even the players were looking at each other wondering what the fuck is going on.

All the above is only my humble opinion of course

M11 3FF don't take this as me having a go because I'm not but if you think or for that matter anybody else thinks they know why Mancini has failed in Europe then wouldn't it be fair to say that an experienced manager like himself should know or at the very least those around him like Platt, Kidd etc would know (especially Kidd having been at United) and would have a quiet word with Roberto.

When one considers Di Matteo has won a Champions League and if it was that easy then I would seriously ask why has he therefore not been picked up by one of Europe's elite club's. In my opinion it's simply nothing more than a cup competition where a silly mistake can have you knocked out. I think the first season nobody expected too much and this season we had a tough group. Yes we should have done better at least against Ajax but as in all cup comps one silly mistake and your out. I'm not sure there is a secret formula when you consider Grant and Di Matteo I prefer to see it as a combination of right manager, right players, right group, right draw and a hell of a degree of luck. The so called greatest manager this country has ever seen has only won it twice and the first time was with two goals in the dieing minutes when Bayern had decided to sit back in the belief it was all won. That was fucking luck whether or not you make your own.I can't even remember there second one because I've blotted it from my memory.

We could also say that Mancini has won the league by "luck" then as well, as we scored 2 goals in the dying minutes ?

 

[Rammy Blue]

Don't talk wet, nothing pedantic whatsoever about my response. Your original post was wrong, pure and simple.

I don't think Vince should have played 90 mins for Belgium however it was clearly stated that Belgium and City were in daily contact about his fitness. Maybe Bob should have made direct contact with Vince?

From Mancini's statements it was quite obvious that he had spoken with VK prior to him departing. What did he say, something like 'Vinnie knows his behaviour was not good'. He also said (paraphrasing) 'I said to him, stay here for more treatment as you could be taking a risk; these next few months a very important'.

So, as you see, Mancini did speak to Vinnie but did not have a problem with him going for tests. The Belgium and club doctors agreed he wasn't ready for the first game and agreed that he was ready for the second but at the same time, that game would've been at risk. Is that what we wanted, for Vinnie to take a risk prior to our run in?

I have no problem with Vinnie wanting to play for his country and I happen to believe it turned out to be good for us as he got 90 mins in a far slower setting. At the same time I hate to see the likes of Ferguson pulling his players for the slightest thing. However, this wasn't the slightest thing and from a managers point of view you'd be fuming that all the good work the team have put in to get him back to fitness could be undone whilst not playing for the club who have brought him so far. A serious risk.

As for wrong, if your manager gives you the gypsies, what do you do? I know that in my business the rule of thumb is that the manager speaks for the organisation and if I go against that line they'll be consequences.

You say wrong, I say pedantic.

Kompany didn't do anything wrong...yet you said he broke club rules

And you are being arsey about being pulled up?

You for real?

I know mate, really couldn't be arsed replying to him again. Boring when someone can't just hold their hands up and admit being wrong.

 

[Bluemoon115]

Had Kompany played for Belgium on the back of a run of games for us I doubt anybody would care - the fact is that the circumstances in which he joined up were far from ideal and in this case Mancini was within his rights to sound off about it.

What was Kompany supposed to do? Refuse to travel? Refuse to play?

With them being competitive international games, that would have broken actual FIFA rules, not Mancini's imaginary rules.

Oh, and when given the chance, there's no way Mancini would have not played for Italy in this situation.

My point was Mancini was worried about him picking up an injury and was within his rights to feel that way. I never said anything about Kompanys role in this, you brought that up in your rush to be offended.

Well no, you didn't, but Mancini "sounded off" by blaming the player. I actually agree that it was madness to play him for 90 mins, but the blame lies with the Belgian staff. My point was that Kompany himself could have done nothing different, as that would have broken FIFA rules.

So again, if you agree with what Mancini said when he "sounded off", what would you have had Kompany do differently?

 

[The Future's Blue]

Don't talk wet, nothing pedantic whatsoever about my response. Your original post was wrong, pure and simple.

I don't think Vince should have played 90 mins for Belgium however it was clearly stated that Belgium and City were in daily contact about his fitness. Maybe Bob should have made direct contact with Vince?

From Mancini's statements it was quite obvious that he had spoken with VK prior to him departing. What did he say, something like 'Vinnie knows his behaviour was not good'. He also said (paraphrasing) 'I said to him, stay here for more treatment as you could be taking a risk; these next few months a very important'.

So, as you see, Mancini did speak to Vinnie but did not have a problem with him going for tests. The Belgium and club doctors agreed he wasn't ready for the first game and agreed that he was ready for the second but at the same time, that game would've been at risk. Is that what we wanted, for Vinnie to take a risk prior to our run in?

I have no problem with Vinnie wanting to play for his country and I happen to believe it turned out to be good for us as he got 90 mins in a far slower setting. At the same time I hate to see the likes of Ferguson pulling his players for the slightest thing. However, this wasn't the slightest thing and from a managers point of view you'd be fuming that all the good work the team have put in to get him back to fitness could be undone whilst not playing for the club who have brought him so far. A serious risk.

As for wrong, if your manager gives you the gypsies, what do you do? I know that in my business the rule of thumb is that the manager speaks for the organisation and if I go against that line they'll be consequences.

You say wrong, I say pedantic.

Kompany didn't do anything wrong...yet you said he broke club rules

And you are being arsey about being pulled up?

You for real?

I am for real mate and I was being polite as to not pick holes. Being pedantic though, where did I say 'He broke club rules'? What I said was he went against the manager and therefore against the club. Last time I looked the manager comes first, doesn't he? Or do we now have a 25 man squad who can do whatever they want; what were your thoughts on Tevez?

So again, if you are the manager and one of your staff go against what you say, is that OK?

I know mate, really couldn't be arsed replying to him again. Boring when someone can't just hold their hands up and admit being wrong.

Where was I wrong pal. You decided to interpret the post for your own means but failed to state anything meaningful. 'You are wrong' is just not a debate.

 

[Blue2112]

To answer my own question (if i may)

To be successful in Europe you need to be tactically astute and have everyone pulling in the same direction, which is why Mancini's style would never be a success (hope i'm proved wrong if he stays) and please quote me on this if it ever happens, but i'm confident it wont.

You need to be able to change a formation mid-game which is more effective if things aren't going to plan, play what's in front of you, horses for courses etc etc, but i think he's too stubborn and set in his ways to do it, the game against Ajax away was the last straw for me as i watched it from a great height unfold before my very eyes, even the players were looking at each other wondering what the fuck is going on.

All the above is only my humble opinion of course

M11 3FF don't take this as me having a go because I'm not but if you think or for that matter anybody else thinks they know why Mancini has failed in Europe then wouldn't it be fair to say that an experienced manager like himself should know or at the very least those around him like Platt, Kidd etc would know (especially Kidd having been at United) and would have a quiet word with Roberto.

When one considers Di Matteo has won a Champions League and if it was that easy then I would seriously ask why has he therefore not been picked up by one of Europe's elite club's. In my opinion it's simply nothing more than a cup competition where a silly mistake can have you knocked out. I think the first season nobody expected too much and this season we had a tough group. Yes we should have done better at least against Ajax but as in all cup comps one silly mistake and your out. I'm not sure there is a secret formula when you consider Grant and Di Matteo I prefer to see it as a combination of right manager, right players, right group, right draw and a hell of a degree of luck. The so called greatest manager this country has ever seen has only won it twice and the first time was with two goals in the dieing minutes when Bayern had decided to sit back in the belief it was all won. That was fucking luck whether or not you make your own.I can't even remember there second one because I've blotted it from my memory.

We could also say that Mancini has won the league by "luck" then as well, as we scored 2 goals in the dying minutes ?

Yes and no because my whole point rather than picking out one particular piece of it was that its a combination of things, right players, right manager, getting important correct decisions and the correct draws/fixtures will all get you to the cusp of winning something major but every team needs some luck getting over the line at some point and if you happen not to get it in a particular game - say a cup game or that final five minutes - then you could easily go out or lose the league but it doesn't necessarily mean you were a shit manager..

 

[forevermancity]

From Mancini's statements it was quite obvious that he had spoken with VK prior to him departing. What did he say, something like 'Vinnie knows his behaviour was not good'. He also said (paraphrasing) 'I said to him, stay here for more treatment as you could be taking a risk; these next few months a very important'.

So, as you see, Mancini did speak to Vinnie but did not have a problem with him going for tests. The Belgium and club doctors agreed he wasn't ready for the first game and agreed that he was ready for the second but at the same time, that game would've been at risk. Is that what we wanted, for Vinnie to take a risk prior to our run in?

I have no problem with Vinnie wanting to play for his country and I happen to believe it turned out to be good for us as he got 90 mins in a far slower setting. At the same time I hate to see the likes of Ferguson pulling his players for the slightest thing. However, this wasn't the slightest thing and from a managers point of view you'd be fuming that all the good work the team have put in to get him back to fitness could be undone whilst not playing for the club who have brought him so far. A serious risk.

As for wrong, if your manager gives you the gypsies, what do you do? I know that in my business the rule of thumb is that the manager speaks for the organisation and if I go against that line they'll be consequences.

You say wrong, I say pedantic.

Kompany didn't do anything wrong...yet you said he broke club rules

And you are being arsey about being pulled up?

You for real?

I am for real mate and I was being polite as to not pick holes. Being pedantic though, where did I say 'He broke club rules'? What I said was he went against the manager and therefore against the club. Last time I looked the manager comes first, doesn't he? Or do we now have a 25 man squad who can do whatever they want; what were your thoughts on Tevez?

So again, if you are the manager and one of your staff go against what you say, is that OK?

There are no club rules re this, the club are actually actively promoting our players playing for their nations

What kompany did was up to him, and Mancini didn't like it.

He needs to man up, because every day there is a story about him behaving.like a child and shedding our club in a negative light.

Fair enough having rows with children like Balo etc...but when he is arguing and falling out with a player and man like kompany...even the most ardent Mancini fan has got to question our managers attitude and man management

 

[Rammy Blue]

I know mate, really couldn't be arsed replying to him again. Boring when someone can't just hold their hands up and admit being wrong.

Where was I wrong pal. You decided to interpret the post for your own means but failed to state anything meaningful. 'You are wrong' is just not a debate.

To be honest mate, a lot of what you have posted on the situation is correct imo. Just your original post that was poorly worded.

 

[Phil1]

What was Kompany supposed to do? Refuse to travel? Refuse to play?

With them being competitive international games, that would have broken actual FIFA rules, not Mancini's imaginary rules.

Oh, and when given the chance, there's no way Mancini would have not played for Italy in this situation.

My point was Mancini was worried about him picking up an injury and was within his rights to feel that way. I never said anything about Kompanys role in this, you brought that up in your rush to be offended.

Well no, you didn't, but Mancini "sounded off" by blaming the player. I actually agree that it was madness to play him for 90 mins, but the blame lies with the Belgian staff. My point was that Kompany himself could have done nothing different, as that would have broken FIFA rules.

So again, if you agree with what Mancini said when he "sounded off", what would you have had Kompany do differently?

I don't blame Kompany for wanting to play and if he felt right and the Belgium doctors felt he was right then it's perfectly understandable he played a part in the game - but that doesn't mean I can't see it from Mancini's POV, who after having Kompany missing for a while and not playing any competitive games sees him play 90 minutes for his country, it's only natural for him to be concerned.
What I don't want to see is any further unrest between the two, at this stage of the season it's imperative that the club finish strong. If this apparent tension continues then It won't reflect well on Bobby, though at the same time if Kompany finishes with a flourish then credit where it's due.

 

[Bluemoon115]

My point was Mancini was worried about him picking up an injury and was within his rights to feel that way. I never said anything about Kompanys role in this, you brought that up in your rush to be offended.

Well no, you didn't, but Mancini "sounded off" by blaming the player. I actually agree that it was madness to play him for 90 mins, but the blame lies with the Belgian staff. My point was that Kompany himself could have done nothing different, as that would have broken FIFA rules.

So again, if you agree with what Mancini said when he "sounded off", what would you have had Kompany do differently?

I don't blame Kompany for wanting to play and if he felt right and the Belgium doctors felt he was right then it's perfectly understandable he played a part in the game - but that doesn't mean I can't see it from Mancini's POV, who after having Kompany missing for a while and not playing any competitive games sees him play 90 minutes for his country, it's only natural for him to be concerned.
What I don't want to see is any further unrest between the two, at this stage of the season it's imperative that the club finish strong. If this apparent tension continues then It won't reflect well on Bobby, though at the same time if Kompany finishes with a flourish then credit where it's due.

I agree with you in the main.

But surely you see that blaming Kompany himself is wrong, as it wasn't his decision. If he's been cleared by two sets of doctors he's going to play.

 

[Phil1]

Well no, you didn't, but Mancini "sounded off" by blaming the player. I actually agree that it was madness to play him for 90 mins, but the blame lies with the Belgian staff. My point was that Kompany himself could have done nothing different, as that would have broken FIFA rules.

So again, if you agree with what Mancini said when he "sounded off", what would you have had Kompany do differently?

I don't blame Kompany for wanting to play and if he felt right and the Belgium doctors felt he was right then it's perfectly understandable he played a part in the game - but that doesn't mean I can't see it from Mancini's POV, who after having Kompany missing for a while and not playing any competitive games sees him play 90 minutes for his country, it's only natural for him to be concerned.
What I don't want to see is any further unrest between the two, at this stage of the season it's imperative that the club finish strong. If this apparent tension continues then It won't reflect well on Bobby, though at the same time if Kompany finishes with a flourish then credit where it's due.

I agree with you in the main.

But surely you see that blaming Kompany himself is wrong, as it wasn't his decision. If he's been cleared by two sets of doctors he's going to play.

I think his frustration got the better of him, as long as there is no long term animosity (and I think there's too much of a mutual respect between the two for that to happen) then I think this episode can be put behind us and be forgotten.