Mancini

[Forzacitizens]

Really can't see the point in sacking Mancini for Pelligrini

 

[Gaylord du Bois]

Onesies are out of fashion?

Oh fuck.

I think he got a little carried away there tbh.

 

[LoveCity]

I don't think it really works like that. It's not a case of slowly working your way each year from the groups to R16 to the QF to the SF to the final and then win it. There are so many variables including opponent, the squad you have, the money you spend etc.

I've never seen so many excuses made to pardon a poor European record in my life. It's not luck and variables that make his failure so persistent, it's his tactics that are very similar here as they were at Inter for European football. If he wasn't so stubborn he would have changed for now but he's like someone who tries to bulldoze his way through a brick wall over and over again when there are doors to the left and right offering other options.

And "The money you spend"? He was at the wealthiest club in Italy at the time, now he's at the wealthiest club in the world with the third highest valued squad on Planet Earth and has failed twice in a row. He's had resources few managers dream of. What variables allowed Napoli to take 4pts from us last season with a cheaper squad? Or Ajax to tactically outclass us with a starting 11 that cost less than Scott Sinclair to assemble?

We've been unlucky with our draws so far, but three in a row won't be tolerated.

We have as much chance of being unlucky next year as this year because we are set to drop a pot again. Last year's group wasn't nearly as tough as people said. Villarreal were from a reputable league but were relegated from said league in the very season they played us (and thank god for Aguero because we didn't beat them at home until the last kick of the game). Napoli are a very good side but the reason they looked so amazing against us is because Mancini's tactical setup played right into their hands - they couldn't have asked for more tactical naivety than what we presented to them. It was like "We're playing a counter attacking side so let's set up exactly in a way that they can rape us on the counter" (which they did with Cavani's goal in the home leg). Only Bayern were formidable but they weren't nearly as good as they are this year so god help us if we run into them again playing like we do.

And the tactics this year, I was stunned by how poor they were. I forget who it was who did a tactical analysis of us in the Champions League this year, with players put in random positions and having no idea what to do. It was true amateur hour stuff that made us a big laughing stock.

But I'm confident we will get out of the groups. Then RM will be on an upward trend and worth persevering with wouldnt you think?

Here is the thing - he probably will get us out of the group stage in time, maybe even next year (but we're seemingly heading into Pot 3 thanks to our failures, we were in Pot 2 this year), but all historical evidence shows that he's unlikely to get us much further. This is the one and only reason Inter sacked him. He won the league every year there but the ambitions of a top club go beyond domestic success and to European joy. Despite the ambivalence of many City fans to European football, to the men in charge and the players European progress and yearly adventures deep into the Champions League will be top of the agenda.

I don't have the same amount of gripes with Mancini as a domestic coach, he'll keep you in European spots every year and keep you in the hunt for secondary trophies but he has been appalling in Europe and lost nearly every major battle against half-decent tactical minds.

Klopp is yet to get past the stage Mancini has got to twice.

I have a feeling you won't be saying that in a week's time but even if he doesn't he has matched Mancini's very best (which Mancini has failed to repeat since 2005/2006) at his second attempt. Klopp's European record is an uphill slope so far, Mancini's is the very opposite.

The fact that Mourinho won with Inter was a miracle and it certainly wasn't football they played.

Actually it was a tactical master class, it wasn't just luck from the gods like Chelsea's was. Mourinho knew the limits of his squad compared to Barcelona and Bayern and adjusted his tactics to grind out a win in the most painful way possible... end result was them lifting the cup. Also important was that his players looked ready to die for him if asked, it was a huge team effort with him getting more out of some of Mancini's remaining players than Mancini was able to in Europe. Mourinho has adjusted his tactics in every country at every club, he adapts like a chameleon wherever he goes. His Real Madrid side are, at their best, the best counter attacking team I've probably seen in my life. Nothing like his Inter side. He does what he has to.

Where are they now?

Inter's plight has *nothing* to do with Mourinho as people like to suggest but everything to do with Moratti tightening the purse strings and refusing to invest to replenish the squad.

 

[moomba]

I've never seen so many excuses made to pardon a poor European record in my life. It's not luck and variables that make his failure so persistent, it's his tactics that are very similar here as they were at Inter for European football. If he wasn't so stubborn he would have changed for now but he's like someone who tries to bulldoze his way through a brick wall over and over again when there are doors to the left and right offering other options.

It wasn't an excuse, just a statement that trends in champions league football don't really work. And I wouldn't over-egg his champions league record either. Before this season (which was an undoubted black mark) he had a win percentage of over 50%. Not too many people manage that (Klopp, Wenger, Pellegrini and De Boer of those names that are currently below that win percent). Mourinho has 54% and he (rightly) is considered one of the best in the comp. He only managed 48% with Chelsea who he picked up in a much better position than we were when RM took over.

And "The money you spend"? He was at the wealthiest club in Italy at the time, now he's at the wealthiest club in the world with the third highest valued squad on Planet Earth and has failed twice in a row. He's had resources few managers dream of. What variables allowed Napoli to take 4pts from us last season with a cheaper squad? Or Ajax to tactically outclass us with a starting 11 that cost less than Scott Sinclair to assemble?

It is just one variable to take into account.

We have as much chance of being unlucky next year as this year because we are set to drop a pot again. Last year's group wasn't nearly as tough as people said. Villarreal were from a reputable league but were relegated from said league in the very season they played us (and thank god for Aguero because we didn't beat them at home until the last kick of the game). Napoli are a very good side but the reason they looked so amazing against us is because Mancini's tactical setup played right into their hands - they couldn't have asked for more tactical naivety than what we presented to them. It was like "We're playing a counter attacking side so let's set up exactly in a way that they can rape us on the counter" (which they did with Cavani's goal in the home leg). Only Bayern were formidable but they weren't nearly as good as they are this year so god help us if we run into them again playing like we do.

Two years ago we got the toughest draw of anyone in pot 3. This year we got the toughest draw of anyone in pot 2. If we get an equally tough draw next season I will be very surprised. But as mentioned I don't think a tough draw will really matter if we fail to get out of the group again.

And the tactics this year, I was stunned by how poor they were. I forget who it was who did a tactical analysis of us in the Champions League this year, with players put in random positions and having no idea what to do. It was true amateur hour stuff that made us a big laughing stock.

There were plenty of things that went wrong in the 6 games this year. Not all of them were down to the manager although I have seen analysis that can't see beyond the managers failings. Maybe you've read the same analysis.

Here is the thing - he probably will get us out of the group stage in time, maybe even next year (but we're seemingly heading into Pot 3 thanks to our failures, we were in Pot 2 this year), but all historical evidence shows that he's unlikely to get us much further. This is the one and only reason Inter sacked him. He won the league every year there but the ambitions of a top club go beyond domestic success and to European joy. Despite the ambivalence of many City fans to European football, to the men in charge and the players European progress and yearly adventures deep into the Champions League will be top of the agenda.

Historical evidence doesn't determine the results of matches. He will be given a chance for us to succeed in Europe. Ultimately if we don't he won't keep his job.

I have a feeling you won't be saying that in a week's time but even if he doesn't he has matched Mancini's very best (which Mancini has failed to repeat since 2005/2006) at his second attempt. Klopp's European record is an uphill slope so far, Mancini's is the very opposite.

As mentioned I don't hold a lot of stock in slopes when it comes to cup football. If Dortmund do worse in next years comp, Kopp will be on a downward slope. It means jack shit.

 

[Danamy]

So we have now entered the 'when not if' territory about Mancini then have we?

And its not Pep or Jose but thats OK because a change is as good as a rest, as the saying goes.

And of course the rumours of player unrest and 'him or me' statements being made are trotted out whilst we also see Silva and Yaya sign new contracts even though Mancini is still in post.

Perhaps these world class players have only signed new contracts because they know that Mancini wont be here next year?

That brings to mind Hazard's choice when he signed for 'the European champions' even though they had no confirmed manager. That worked out well didn't it.

At the best guess it would cost City £10m to sack Mancini and then take a chance on a man who has won far less than him. That leaves me feeling less than happy about going out on a limb with someone on a list that doesnt include Klopp, Mourinho, Ancelotti or Guardiola all of whom I can see the draw of.

Is that change really worth making or should some players be asked if they are as committed to City as Silva or Yaya seem to be?

There is no doubt some have convinced themselves Mancini has gone largely because they want him gone so badly it hurts. Some people have also now convinced themselves that its OK we are not getting a top tier manager because its Txki and he spotted Pep and did I mention they want Mancini gone so badly it hurts? Txiki could unveil Mark Hughes and there would be threads about why it went wrong last time, why it wasn't Hughes fault and why this time it will work. Oh and Mancini will be gone so thats all right then.

There is one aspect that cannot be avoided and that is Mancini wants control and he has to work with Txiki who also wants control and the answer to that will determine Mancini's willingness to continue or Txiki's willingness to allow him to continue.

Now we may find out they are a match made in heaven but personally I have my doubts that they can co-exist and most top tier managers are going have the same problem so stories linking us to the likes of Pellegrini or Koeman or De Boer (who is now the second Pep apparently) do have a logic.

Mind you people doing their best to trash Mancini's record and blow life into Pellegrini's or paint De Boer as the new messiah now that the big names are off the table is funny as fuck.

So if there's logic to the managers being mentioned, what's the issue with debating them?

You've said yourself that the likelihood of Mancini or other "top tier" managers won't be able to co-exist with Txiki, so let's discuss who can?

I seriously find it hard to understand how precious some people get when discussing the issue of the managerial position, it's no different than discussing a said player that may be available to improve the squad.

Let's face it if i said we could sign Messi, someone would say he wouldn't fit in to our system etc.........

 

[BobKowalski]

So we have now entered the 'when not if' territory about Mancini then have we?

And its not Pep or Jose but thats OK because a change is as good as a rest, as the saying goes.

And of course the rumours of player unrest and 'him or me' statements being made are trotted out whilst we also see Silva and Yaya sign new contracts even though Mancini is still in post.

Perhaps these world class players have only signed new contracts because they know that Mancini wont be here next year?

That brings to mind Hazard's choice when he signed for 'the European champions' even though they had no confirmed manager. That worked out well didn't it.

At the best guess it would cost City £10m to sack Mancini and then take a chance on a man who has won far less than him. That leaves me feeling less than happy about going out on a limb with someone on a list that doesnt include Klopp, Mourinho, Ancelotti or Guardiola all of whom I can see the draw of.

Is that change really worth making or should some players be asked if they are as committed to City as Silva or Yaya seem to be?

There is no doubt some have convinced themselves Mancini has gone largely because they want him gone so badly it hurts. Some people have also now convinced themselves that its OK we are not getting a top tier manager because its Txki and he spotted Pep and did I mention they want Mancini gone so badly it hurts? Txiki could unveil Mark Hughes and there would be threads about why it went wrong last time, why it wasn't Hughes fault and why this time it will work. Oh and Mancini will be gone so thats all right then.

There is one aspect that cannot be avoided and that is Mancini wants control and he has to work with Txiki who also wants control and the answer to that will determine Mancini's willingness to continue or Txiki's willingness to allow him to continue.

Now we may find out they are a match made in heaven but personally I have my doubts that they can co-exist and most top tier managers are going have the same problem so stories linking us to the likes of Pellegrini or Koeman or De Boer (who is now the second Pep apparently) do have a logic.

Mind you people doing their best to trash Mancini's record and blow life into Pellegrini's or paint De Boer as the new messiah now that the big names are off the table is funny as fuck.

So if there's logic to the managers being mentioned, what's the issue with debating them?

You've said yourself that the likelihood of Mancini or other "top tier" managers won't be able to co-exist with Txiki, so let's discuss who can?

I seriously find it hard to understand how precious some people get when discussing the issue of the managerial position, it's no different than discussing a said player that may be available to improve the squad.

Let's face it if i said we could sign Messi, someone would say he wouldn't fit in to our system etc.........

There isn't an issue with debating them. We have 600 pages debating them. I like debating them. But it is funny as fuck when people started off banging the drum for Jose as the one man to take us forward and ended up doing a backwards triple somersault with pike to splash down on...Frank De Boer and his 3 years in the Dutch League.

You need a heart of stone not to find it funny.

 

[Rammy Blue]

There is no doubt some have convinced themselves Mancini has gone largely because they want him gone so badly it hurts. Some people have also now convinced themselves that its OK we are not getting a top tier manager because its Txki and he spotted Pep and did I mention they want Mancini gone so badly it hurts? Txiki could unveil Mark Hughes and there would be threads about why it went wrong last time, why it wasn't Hughes fault and why this time it will work. Oh and Mancini will be gone so thats all right then.

There is one aspect that cannot be avoided and that is Mancini wants control and he has to work with Txiki who also wants control and the answer to that will determine Mancini's willingness to continue or Txiki's willingness to allow him to continue.

Now we may find out they are a match made in heaven but personally I have my doubts that they can co-exist and most top tier managers are going have the same problem so stories linking us to the likes of Pellegrini or Koeman or De Boer (who is now the second Pep apparently) do have a logic.

Mind you people doing their best to trash Mancini's record and blow life into Pellegrini's or paint De Boer as the new messiah now that the big names are off the table is funny as fuck.

So if there's logic to the managers being mentioned, what's the issue with debating them?

You've said yourself that the likelihood of Mancini or other "top tier" managers won't be able to co-exist with Txiki, so let's discuss who can?

I seriously find it hard to understand how precious some people get when discussing the issue of the managerial position, it's no different than discussing a said player that may be available to improve the squad.

Let's face it if i said we could sign Messi, someone would say he wouldn't fit in to our system etc.........

There isn't an issue with debating them. We have 600 pages debating them. I like debating them. But it is funny as fuck when people started off banging the drum for Jose as the one man to take us forward and ended up doing a backwards triple somersault with pike to splash down on...Frank De Boer and his 3 years in the Dutch League.

You need a heart of stone not to find it funny.

Out of interest Bob, assume that Mancini gets relieved of his duties.

Who would be on your shortlist, and why?

 

[rastus]

Its is very funny

 

[Exeter Blue I am here]

I don't think it really works like that. It's not a case of slowly working your way each year from the groups to R16 to the QF to the SF to the final and then win it. There are so many variables including opponent, the squad you have, the money you spend etc.

I've never seen so many excuses made to pardon a poor European record in my life. It's not luck and variables that make his failure so persistent, it's his tactics that are very similar here as they were at Inter for European football. If he wasn't so stubborn he would have changed for now but he's like someone who tries to bulldoze his way through a brick wall over and over again when there are doors to the left and right offering other options.

And "The money you spend"? He was at the wealthiest club in Italy at the time, now he's at the wealthiest club in the world with the third highest valued squad on Planet Earth and has failed twice in a row. He's had resources few managers dream of. What variables allowed Napoli to take 4pts from us last season with a cheaper squad? Or Ajax to tactically outclass us with a starting 11 that cost less than Scott Sinclair to assemble?

We've been unlucky with our draws so far, but three in a row won't be tolerated.

We have as much chance of being unlucky next year as this year because we are set to drop a pot again. Last year's group wasn't nearly as tough as people said. Villarreal were from a reputable league but were relegated from said league in the very season they played us (and thank god for Aguero because we didn't beat them at home until the last kick of the game). Napoli are a very good side but the reason they looked so amazing against us is because Mancini's tactical setup played right into their hands - they couldn't have asked for more tactical naivety than what we presented to them. It was like "We're playing a counter attacking side so let's set up exactly in a way that they can rape us on the counter" (which they did with Cavani's goal in the home leg). Only Bayern were formidable but they weren't nearly as good as they are this year so god help us if we run into them again playing like we do.

And the tactics this year, I was stunned by how poor they were. I forget who it was who did a tactical analysis of us in the Champions League this year, with players put in random positions and having no idea what to do. It was true amateur hour stuff that made us a big laughing stock.

But I'm confident we will get out of the groups. Then RM will be on an upward trend and worth persevering with wouldnt you think?

Here is the thing - he probably will get us out of the group stage in time, maybe even next year (but we're seemingly heading into Pot 3 thanks to our failures, we were in Pot 2 this year), but all historical evidence shows that he's unlikely to get us much further. This is the one and only reason Inter sacked him. He won the league every year there but the ambitions of a top club go beyond domestic success and to European joy. Despite the ambivalence of many City fans to European football, to the men in charge and the players European progress and yearly adventures deep into the Champions League will be top of the agenda.

I don't have the same amount of gripes with Mancini as a domestic coach, he'll keep you in European spots every year and keep you in the hunt for secondary trophies but he has been appalling in Europe and lost nearly every major battle against half-decent tactical minds.

Klopp is yet to get past the stage Mancini has got to twice.

I have a feeling you won't be saying that in a week's time but even if he doesn't he has matched Mancini's very best (which Mancini has failed to repeat since 2005/2006) at his second attempt. Klopp's European record is an uphill slope so far, Mancini's is the very opposite.

The fact that Mourinho won with Inter was a miracle and it certainly wasn't football they played.

Actually it was a tactical master class, it wasn't just luck from the gods like Chelsea's was. Mourinho knew the limits of his squad compared to Barcelona and Bayern and adjusted his tactics to grind out a win in the most painful way possible... end result was them lifting the cup. Also important was that his players looked ready to die for him if asked, it was a huge team effort with him getting more out of some of Mancini's remaining players than Mancini was able to in Europe. Mourinho has adjusted his tactics in every country at every club, he adapts like a chameleon wherever he goes. His Real Madrid side are, at their best, the best counter attacking team I've probably seen in my life. Nothing like his Inter side. He does what he has to.

Where are they now?

Inter's plight has *nothing* to do with Mourinho as people like to suggest but everything to do with Moratti tightening the purse strings and refusing to invest to replenish the squad.

You're spot on mate, but you're wasting your breath on here. Mancini's a good manager, but one with increasingly obvious limitations. Instead of acknowledgement though you will get only obfuscation and excuses, from those whose minds are closed

 

[Danamy]

There is no doubt some have convinced themselves Mancini has gone largely because they want him gone so badly it hurts. Some people have also now convinced themselves that its OK we are not getting a top tier manager because its Txki and he spotted Pep and did I mention they want Mancini gone so badly it hurts? Txiki could unveil Mark Hughes and there would be threads about why it went wrong last time, why it wasn't Hughes fault and why this time it will work. Oh and Mancini will be gone so thats all right then.

There is one aspect that cannot be avoided and that is Mancini wants control and he has to work with Txiki who also wants control and the answer to that will determine Mancini's willingness to continue or Txiki's willingness to allow him to continue.

Now we may find out they are a match made in heaven but personally I have my doubts that they can co-exist and most top tier managers are going have the same problem so stories linking us to the likes of Pellegrini or Koeman or De Boer (who is now the second Pep apparently) do have a logic.

Mind you people doing their best to trash Mancini's record and blow life into Pellegrini's or paint De Boer as the new messiah now that the big names are off the table is funny as fuck.

So if there's logic to the managers being mentioned, what's the issue with debating them?

You've said yourself that the likelihood of Mancini or other "top tier" managers won't be able to co-exist with Txiki, so let's discuss who can?

I seriously find it hard to understand how precious some people get when discussing the issue of the managerial position, it's no different than discussing a said player that may be available to improve the squad.

Let's face it if i said we could sign Messi, someone would say he wouldn't fit in to our system etc.........

There isn't an issue with debating them. We have 600 pages debating them. I like debating them. But it is funny as fuck when people started off banging the drum for Jose as the one man to take us forward and ended up doing a backwards triple somersault with pike to splash down on...Frank De Boer and his 3 years in the Dutch League.

You need a heart of stone not to find it funny.

I'll hold my hands up, you can look back and quote me, I rate Mourinho as one of the best in Europe and would've loved him to rock up here, as I want the best for City and rate him as the best.

The more you think about it and like you and others have said, he's not going to fit in our mould or our way of thinking in taking the project forward

In my opinion, neither is Mancini