Manuel Pellegrini (cont)

[blueinsa]

@ Damo.

In the new academy facilites which have only just opened, we have created our future and given every single player that walks through its doors the opportunity to be the best and go on to represent the first team.

A very select few will do just that whilst the vast majority wont, thats the nature of the game and testement to the world class standards we as a club will demand from its players going forward.

Second best wont do, you will have to be world class but not for one second do i think we will not play anyone who is good enough.

We have some excellent potential right now and its for them to make the managers and Txiki decision. They have to be better than anything else we have and force their way in and then stay in as they would at any other club playing at the highest level.

It will happen in the coming years thanks to what we have created and its clear its what the club will be all about.

To suggest a manager is not for us based on not playing a young lad yesterday and a few other loan decisions so far is frankly bonkers imo given the work we as a club are doing.

This club is all about profile, trophies, winning, revenues and frankly playing catch up right now and to do that, we need the best 11 out every week with no room for sentiment as failure on the pitch is not an option given our successes off it.

Yesterday was the clearest example of how our club will play its football in the future. The passing and movement was incredible at times and in the acadamy, every single player regardless of age will be tutored in the same style and the cream WILL rise to the top.

We need to be patient.

 

[Rammy Blue]

@ Damo.

In the new academy facilites which have only just opened, we have created our future and given every single player that walks through its doors the opportunity to be the best and go on to represent the first team.

A very select few will do just that whilst the vast majority wont, thats the nature of the game and testement to the world class standards we as a club will demand from its players going forward.

Second best wont do, you will have to be world class but not for one second do i think we will not play anyone who is good enough.

We have some excellent potential right now and its for them to make the managers and Txiki decision. They have to be better than anything else we have and force their way in and then stay in as they would at any other club playing at the highest level.

It will happen in the coming years thanks to what we have created and its clear its what the club will be all about.

To suggest a manager is not for us based on not playing a young lad yesterday and a few other loan decisions so far is frankly bonkers imo given the work we as a club are doing.

This club is all about profile, trophies, winning, revenues and frankly playing catch up right now and to do that, we need the best 11 out every week with no room for sentiment as failure on the pitch is not an option given our successes off it.

Yesterday was the clearest example of how our club will play its football in the future. The passing and movement was incredible at times and in the acadamy, every single player regardless of age will be tutored in the same style and the cream WILL rise to the top.

We need to be patient.

Excellent post, mate.

I understand where Damocles is coming from but a lot of what is said by the top brass should always be taken with a pinch of salt. At the moment, we have to continue to push on and then hopefully in a year or two we'll be in a position with the academy to start bringing through the odd player, it doesn't happen easily.

 

[Sky Blue]

@ Damo.

In the new academy facilites which have only just opened, we have created our future and given every single player that walks through its doors the opportunity to be the best and go on to represent the first team.

A very select few will do just that whilst the vast majority wont, thats the nature of the game and testement to the world class standards we as a club will demand from its players going forward.

Second best wont do, you will have to be world class but not for one second do i think we will not play anyone who is good enough.

We have some excellent potential right now and its for them to make the managers and Txiki decision. They have to be better than anything else we have and force their way in and then stay in as they would at any other club playing at the highest level.

It will happen in the coming years thanks to what we have created and its clear its what the club will be all about.

To suggest a manager is not for us based on not playing a young lad yesterday and a few other loan decisions so far is frankly bonkers imo given the work we as a club are doing.

This club is all about profile, trophies, winning, revenues and frankly playing catch up right now and to do that, we need the best 11 out every week with no room for sentiment as failure on the pitch is not an option given our successes off it.

Yesterday was the clearest example of how our club will play its football in the future. The passing and movement was incredible at times and in the acadamy, every single player regardless of age will be tutored in the same style and the cream WILL rise to the top.

We need to be patient.

Good post, pal....

 

[Damocles]

To be fair mate, this is the type of thing that's frustrating because you're saying things that I've already clearly argued answered in the post that you've just read

They have to be better than anything else we have and force their way in and then stay in as they would at any other club playing at the highest level.

Then we will bring through exactly 0 youth players. Even Messi wasn't better than Ronaldinho when he started and he's the best player who has ever lived. We don't need to talk about people like Ronaldo who didn't develop until much later, let alone talents lower down the peg. Even David Silva with all of his brilliance wasn't good enough to start for Valencia, only getting game time when they got relegated and had to sell their players.

Young players are ALWAYS worse than starters. EVERY SINGLE TIME. There are no exceptions to this at top clubs. There never will be either. It's almost impossible for a young lad who has spent his time playing in the U21 league to be as good as players who spend their time working with the first team and playing CL football. Under your system, we will bring through no players at all. It isn't how Barca operate, it isn't how United operate, it isn't how Ajax operate, it isn't how Arsenal operate or anybody else who consistently brings through homegrown players. What you are suggesting has never before been achieved in football and I cannot imagine that your clever football heads will be targeting something like this for us.

To suggest a manager is not for us based on not playing a young lad yesterday and a few other loan decisions so far is frankly bonkers imo given the work we as a club are doing.

He's been here 18 months and this is one part of his job. He has a 3 year deal and we're half way into it. When should we start judging him on this if not now? The last Monday before it expires? It isn't like I'm slagging him off a week into his reign here, he has made enough decisions to give the information on how he approaches it.

This club is all about profile, trophies, winning, revenues and frankly playing catch up right now and to do that, we need the best 11 out every week with no room for sentiment as failure on the pitch is not an option given our successes off it.

Then we go back to 0 youth players as I said earlier. This is why I always use the word "courage" in relation to this type of thing. It takes courage to play youth players but it's an investment in the future of the club both on the pitch and financially; it's an indication that the role of a City manager now is bigger than just "win trophies" and that we're trying to build a club here. Clubs are not built wholly by trophies, it's why Chelsea have been successful for a decade yet are still looked at as a Russian plaything with no focus on their community or development systems. This isn't the direction that we're aiming for if the Chairman's statements are to be believed and I think his hiring decisions back that up.

This isn't sentiment, there are great financial and technical reasons why a focus on youth development is good for the club and seeing people like that bloke earlier who said essentially "fuck the youth, we have money so we should spend it on the best" is just fucking depressing in terms of their attitude towards what City seem to be trying to achieve. City are not trying to be like Chelsea and thank fuck for that. They are building something bigger and better than the rentboys could do and its time some of our fans stopped looking at the Sheikh as their own person Credit Card and start realising what it is that we're really about.

Yesterday was the clearest example of how our club will play its football in the future. The passing and movement was incredible at times and in the acadamy, every single player regardless of age will be tutored in the same style and the cream WILL rise to the top.

I watch the Academy games regularly and this isn't the football that they are learning or have been learning. They play a high pace, possession based game with quick passing and quick counters rather than the extreme passing/movement game that we saw yesterday.

Just as a quick edit, here's what Pelle said post-match:

"We knew we had to play in a different way than we normally do because we don't have strikers at this moment, but I thought we did a great job"

Bet the striker he had on the bench was really pleased with that comment

 

[OB1]

Damo,

Don't you think that if Pellegrini was not fulfilling his job description, the powers that be would have a word or two with him?

And, without wanting to go round in circles, the young players do not have to be better than the existing members of the squad to get some game at the outset of their first team careers but they do have to be deemed ready enough and to have the requisite potential. Clearly, their potential can only be truly tested by playing. People at the club, not just Pellegrini, have to make judgement on when the right time is to get young players involved in the first team. I am happy to trust that there is a suitable conversation on this matter constantly underway inside the club.

I have long thought that it would start with a very a slow drip of young players into the first team and, if we are very good at it and a bit lucky, we will see more substantial numbers coming through in 4 or 5 years time. I really think this is a long-term thing and Pellegrini during his tenure may not use many youngsters because he only stays for his initial contract term.

As to Ambrose yesterday, some people thought he should come on; others think that we should not have risked him because he is our only fit striker. Some also think that Pellegrini has done the right thing by taking a softly, softly approach. Game 1, just have him around the squad and involved with the people, let him do a bit of acclimatising. You pays your money, you takes your choice on these things but one thing I am certain of is that Ambrose was there yesterday not as part of a personal development plan for him or as part of the club's strategy but because we we desperate for a fit striker. The lad should be delighted that the club showed enough faith in him at this point to put him on the bench because I am damn certain that it means Pellegrini was prepared to use him and did not put him there simply to fill a seat. If he keeps getting on the bench over the festive season and we have further opportunities to blood him in a convincing win or need to change things tactically to get a goal and he still does not get any game time, that would be a far more appropriate time to have this debate, IMO.

 

[carlos tevez is a blue]

Damo,

You are an intelligent poster but there is some real crap in that moan.

Pellegrini is exactly the guy we need in charge at the moment and I am sure he will bring young players through if they are good enough.

He has gone underground and I know why.

He will apologise soon enough.

I nipped to Tesco, what the fuck are you on about?

What did you buy?

 

[Damocles]

Damo,

Don't you think that if Pellegrini was not fulfilling his job description, the powers that be would have a word or two with him?

Don't you think that every single potential criticism of every manager ever can be excused using this statement? Outside of the ones where their Chairman goes on record and tells them off which is obviously a very small amount. I don't know how to argue this because it's a hypothetical that neither of us could possibly know.

And, without wanting to go round in circles, the young players do not have to be better than the existing members of the squad to get some game at the outset of their first team careers but they do have to be deemed ready enough and to have the requisite potential. Clearly, their potential can only be truly tested by playing. People at the club, not just Pellegrini, have to make judgement on when the right time is to get young players involved in the first team. I am happy to trust that there is a suitable conversation on this matter constantly underway inside the club.

The problem with this is that you are talking in broad strokes when I'm trying to talk about specifics. There COULD have been those conversations, there COULD have been a conversation between Txiki and Pelle, there COULD have been a massive huge row with plates thrown and teary eyed fits of rage. We don't know because we don't work behind the scenes at City so the only thing we can really go off is what we see on the pitch and the statements made to the press.

I think we're at different default positions here. My default position with a manager is a blank slate and them showing me over the course of various decisions and games, over a stretch of time, what they are all about and the type of manager that they are. I find it hard to just presume that everything must be fine in an area where I don't see it in concrete terms, mainly because I don't se it in concrete terms.

If we're talking hypothetically then we can make an analogy. It was my understanding from the talk that Soriano gave in the UAE, and the various statements made to the press by the Chairman, CEO and Manager that Pellegrini will be judged on several criteria. This isn't even a controversial topic on here, everybody had a good laugh and used the new joke of "a holistic approach". Let's say that Pellegrini's job will be judged on the criteria of the style of play, the success of play and the progression of youth. I'm suggesting that his performance in the third of those isn't really where it needs to be and used various decisions he made over the course of his management here as an idea of this. Most people on this thread generally argue about the first two and we all put differing importances on each of them. Interestingly when Chelsea "won the title" a few weeks back and it looked like it was Thursday nights on ITV4 for us, I suggested that if this season were used to start establishing some of our young stars in the team then I'd even take a 3rd spot at that no problem. I'm not one of these who thinks we should win the title every year or sack the manager - I think that is jackass dumb for want of a better term.

So anyway, lets make an analogy that Pellegrini was failing in one of the other two important parts of his job - the style of play. It's a fair comparison, it's not as important as results and some would argue not as important as youth development but its definitely something we want to do. If we were winning 1-0 every week by playing long ball football to Dzeko then parking the bus in two banks of 4, home and away, do you believe that we could excuse this with a statement of "well I trust that they are working on it and the good football will come when the time is right"? I'm not sure that would be so readily accepted as it is for his management of youth.

 

[schfc6]

Damocles, I would fully understand your point if we were talking about 20-22 year old lads not getting a chance. We're not.
Our Achademy has to catch up with the quality we require. The lads at 20-21 have proven they're not of sufficient quality. Cole etc aren't up to scratch.

The lads you're talking of are very very young. They are not ready. Now if Ambrose or Pozo are still training with the first team, banging in goals for fun at development level and are 20 and we rearrange our system to avoid playing them I'd 109% agree with you.

It's ok saying 'give youth a chance' but they have to be up to scratch. Our current crop aren't. Evans, Huews, Cole et al are probably going to be football league players.

Now looking at some of the 16/17 year olds they look likely to be close to required quality.

You honestly think Ambrose will have been upset by Pellegrini's words? I personally think he'll be delighted to have made the first team squad 2 years earlier than expected.

 

[carlos tevez is a blue]

Damo,

Don't you think that if Pellegrini was not fulfilling his job description, the powers that be would have a word or two with him?

Don't you think that every single potential criticism of every manager ever can be excused using this statement? Outside of the ones where their Chairman goes on record and tells them off which is obviously a very small amount. I don't know how to argue this because it's a hypothetical that neither of us could possibly know.

And, without wanting to go round in circles, the young players do not have to be better than the existing members of the squad to get some game at the outset of their first team careers but they do have to be deemed ready enough and to have the requisite potential. Clearly, their potential can only be truly tested by playing. People at the club, not just Pellegrini, have to make judgement on when the right time is to get young players involved in the first team. I am happy to trust that there is a suitable conversation on this matter constantly underway inside the club.

The problem with this is that you are talking in broad strokes when I'm trying to talk about specifics. There COULD have been those conversations, there COULD have been a conversation between Txiki and Pelle, there COULD have been a massive huge row with plates thrown and teary eyed fits of rage. We don't know because we don't work behind the scenes at City so the only thing we can really go off is what we see on the pitch and the statements made to the press.

I think we're at different default positions here. My default position with a manager is a blank slate and them showing me over the course of various decisions and games, over a stretch of time, what they are all about and the type of manager that they are. I find it hard to just presume that everything must be fine in an area where I don't see it in concrete terms, mainly because I don't se it in concrete terms.

If we're talking hypothetically then we can make an analogy. It was my understanding from the talk that Soriano gave in the UAE, and the various statements made to the press by the Chairman, CEO and Manager that Pellegrini will be judged on several criteria. This isn't even a controversial topic on here, everybody had a good laugh and used the new joke of "a holistic approach". Let's say that Pellegrini's job will be judged on the criteria of the style of play, the success of play and the progression of youth. I'm suggesting that his performance in the third of those isn't really where it needs to be and used various decisions he made over the course of his management here as an idea of this. Most people on this thread generally argue about the first two and we all put differing importances on each of them. Interestingly when Chelsea "won the title" a few weeks back and it looked like it was Thursday nights on ITV4 for us, I suggested that if this season were used to start establishing some of our young stars in the team then I'd even take a 3rd spot at that no problem. I'm not one of these who thinks we should win the title every year or sack the manager - I think that is jackass dumb for want of a better term.

So anyway, lets make an analogy that Pellegrini was failing in one of the other two important parts of his job - the style of play. It's a fair comparison, it's not as important as results and some would argue not as important as youth development but its definitely something we want to do. If we were winning 1-0 every week by playing long ball football to Dzeko then parking the bus in two banks of 4, home and away, do you believe that we could excuse this with a statement of "well I trust that they are working on it and the good football will come when the time is right"? I'm not sure that would be so readily accepted as it is for his management of youth.

Never mind Pellers, what did you buy at Tesco?

 

[pablomurphy]

If he keeps getting on the bench over the festive season and we have further opportunities to blood him in a convincing win or need to change things tactically to get a goal and he still does not get any game time, that would be a far more appropriate time to have this debate, IMO.

If yesterday wasn't that game to blood him then it aint ever going to happen