blueinsa said:
tolmie's hairdoo said:
When the players knew Mancini was out, they were able to ease off.
Now some of our players know their time is up, they again lack the required level of intensity and motivation.
The by-product of that is the manager suffers the fall-out.
We are seeing the tail-wind of a variety of transfer regimes, from Hughes right through to Txiki/Pellegrini.
It's a patchwork quilt of those who shined, those who whined, those who thrived, and those who should never have been.
Pellegrini is the biggest and most unfortunate recipient of all that.
The only cure can be a clear decisiveness.
An acknowledge of the faults of everyone, and yet an emotional detachment, regardless of what has gone before, in terms of moving forward as a team for the next few years.
That goes for Yaya, Silva, Kompany, whoever.
It's a judgement call that can only be made by the 'informed'
I'm uncomfortable that one man in Txiki, football man or not, seemingly being the absolute overlord over whether a City team is successful or not.
He either trusts Pellegrini with the keys to the vault, or a dismissal HAS TO BE MADE.
Its an interesting role the DoF, especially if they have complete control of who gets signed and who doesn't. You could argue if he is doing that then he should go all the way and back himself as manager of the side as well and save a wage and as a manager, it must be difficult having to work with players you just dont want or need in your opinion.
This summer is huge because our approach to the first team on how its run and recruitment needs to be looked at in depth with a view to it standing the test of time going forward.
Massive, in fact ;)
I was uncomfortable when Hughes was allowed to spend £200m plus in one year (the type of funds we need now to refresh the cycle IMO)
I was uncomfortable with Mancini, who always wanted more money and the blindingly obvious mantra that if you buy big and best, you bask in the reflected glory of trophies and managerial genius.
I understood the move towards a DoF, ensuring continuity, regardless of manager, a strategic planning behind the most important keystrokes.
Yet, what if the greatest of ironies is that for all of Txiki's undoubted experience, contacts books, previous successes, the man above the manager is actually the wrong man also?
I'm not saying that he is, although we will only really see this summer if his foresight actually stretched beyond the financial constraints of this season and a title-winning team of 12 months ago.
Sacking the manager would provide evidence that like anyone else, he is not infallible, and although accountable, he has the grace and favour of his role, which undoubtably affords him longer than the man who actually stands in front of the TV cameras and stands on the touchline each week.
City are done no favours in the interim, and the whole thing seems a hiding to nothing for all concerned?