Mario Balotelli

[Anonymous]

It's not his lack of goals that frustrated me, it was his inability to impose his physicality on defenders often enough. Defenders should have been petrified of marking him, instead he spent far too much time on his arse rather than on his feet bullying them. I am factoring the lack of protection he got from refs into this equation btw.

I have very fond memories of his time with us and have no doubt he will become a truly great striker, but there's no reason he couldn't have done that in his time at City as he has all the ingredients.

That hunger to stay on your feet and work both with the ball and without in terms of moving defenders around is something which young strikers IMO generally struggle to do. I've read Chelsea and Belgian national team supporters talk about Lukaku and say similar things. It's about mentality and belief. With Mario we saw it in flashes, but then in some respects we only saw him in flashes.

Personally I think the single biggest mistake made by the club during Mancini's tenure was acquiescing to his demands to sign Dzeko. It should've been Mario or Edin, not both. I personally think things would've been different had that happened.

 

[FantasyIreland]

Personally I think the single biggest mistake made by the club during Mancini's tenure was acquiescing to his demands to sign Dzeko. It should've been Mario or Edin, not both. I personally think things would've been different had that happened.

I agree,he had too much luxury at his disposal.

Subsequently both players suffered when one may have thrived.

 

[The Fat el Hombre]

Was he playing 'well' or was he playing 'ok'?

Most games he was playing well

Using the likes of Hansen to illustrate any point is farcical and discredits your argument hugely.

You don't understand the point I was making about 'the hansens' (not alan hansen) so don't dismiss it as farcical

He 'wasn't getting goals' you say - yes and for a 'striker' with a lot of talent - that's pretty shit.

A striker going through a run of form where he doesn't score certainly isn't good, but it happens regardless of whether a player can be arsed or not or how well he's playing. Football isn't as simplistic as scoring goals = playing well and not scoring goals = playing badly, particularly when looking at short term form

Being used as a substitute or rotated doesn't seem to have a negative impact on Chicarito, who may I remind you is also 'young' and my I remind you further cost about £6m, about a quarter of what Balotelli cost.

What has either point there got to do with anything at all? I'll make it relevant if you like - despite you claiming that Hernandez is young he's a full 3 years older than Balotelli, and he's also unfit to lace Balo's boots

 

[Patientman63]

And as a result of Mancini's stubborn refusal to play either as a full on CF, neither have prospered

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

It's not his lack of goals that frustrated me, it was his inability to impose his physicality on defenders often enough. Defenders should have been petrified of marking him, instead he spent far too much time on his arse rather than on his feet bullying them. I am factoring the lack of protection he got from refs into this equation btw.

I have very fond memories of his time with us and have no doubt he will become a truly great striker, but there's no reason he couldn't have done that in his time at City as he has all the ingredients.

That hunger to stay on your feet and work both with the ball and without in terms of moving defenders around is something which young strikers IMO generally struggle to do. I've read Chelsea and Belgian national team supporters talk about Lukaku and say similar things. It's about mentality and belief. With Mario we saw it in flashes, but then in some respects we only saw him in flashes.

Personally I think the single biggest mistake made by the club during Mancini's tenure was acquiescing to his demands to sign Dzeko. It should've been Mario or Edin, not both. I personally think things would've been different had that happened.

I think that is fair comment about young strikers, Billy, but for me it was as much about his seeming inability to get up of the floor after he couldn't (for whatever reason) stay on his feet. It undermined his presence with those who marked him imo.

Sometimes it was, especially when he just used to lie there motionless (and I struggle to use this word in a footballing context, but nothing else will suffice) embarrassing.

I also think you're broadly right about Dzeko although Mario was arguably too unreliable (injuries, suspensions) to take that risk imo.

 

[Skashion]

It's not his lack of goals that frustrated me, it was his inability to impose his physicality on defenders often enough. Defenders should have been petrified of marking him, instead he spent far too much time on his arse rather than on his feet bullying them. I am factoring the lack of protection he got from refs into this equation btw.

I have very fond memories of his time with us and have no doubt he will become a truly great striker, but there's no reason he couldn't have done that in his time at City as he has all the ingredients.

City weren't suited to his best attributes so there is good reason why he didn't achieve what he threatens to but he did well here. I understand your frustration at spending too much time on his arse. It's fair comment but I certainly think defenders did fear him. Not his physicality but his pace and his ability to find space and lose his marker. Without him we've been far more predictable. Tevez gets dragged back into the midfield, we get compacted, the ball is slow to move up the pitch, and it has been so easy to park the bus and keep shape as a result. I never ever saw less than two defenders staying up the pitch when Mario played. They feared his threat, it gave us more space to work in and defences tended to get dragged out of shape more frequently. No-one fears Tevez's pace and ability to time runs. It's easier to defend against.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

It's not his lack of goals that frustrated me, it was his inability to impose his physicality on defenders often enough. Defenders should have been petrified of marking him, instead he spent far too much time on his arse rather than on his feet bullying them. I am factoring the lack of protection he got from refs into this equation btw.

I have very fond memories of his time with us and have no doubt he will become a truly great striker, but there's no reason he couldn't have done that in his time at City as he has all the ingredients.

City weren't suited to his best attributes so there is good reason why he didn't achieve what he threatens to but he did well here. I understand your frustration at spending too much time on his arse. It's fair comment but I certainly think defenders did fear him. Not his physicality but his pace and his ability to find space and lose his marker. Without him we've been far more predictable. Tevez gets dragged back into the midfield, we get compacted, the ball is slow to move up the pitch, and it has been so easy to park the bus and keep shape as a result. I never ever saw less than two defenders staying up the pitch when Mario played. They feared his threat, it gave us more space to work in and defences tended to get dragged out of shape more frequently. No-one fears Tevez's pace and ability to time runs. It's easier to defend against.

I must be in a strangely conciliatory mood today as I agree with most of what you post there. I just think he could have delivered more, and he didn't learn to play to his strengths quickly enough, but he's young and I have no complaints about his time at City.

As I've said before his single assist in 2001/12 and a celebration that will echo through the ages are enough, and there was a lot, lot more than that.

They will still be showing this image in a hundred years. How can you not love Mario?

 

[Skashion]

I must be in a strangely conciliatory mood today as I agree with most of what you post there. I just think he could have delivered more, and he didn't learn to play to his strengths quickly enough, but he's young and I have no complaints about his time at City.

As I've said before his single assist in 2001/12 and a celebration that will echo through the ages are enough, and there was a lot, lot more than that.

They will still be showing this image in a hundred years. How can you not love Mario?

Even two friends as learned as we can agree from time to time.

 

[OB1]

It's not his lack of goals that frustrated me, it was his inability to impose his physicality on defenders often enough. Defenders should have been petrified of marking him, instead he spent far too much time on his arse rather than on his feet bullying them. I am factoring the lack of protection he got from refs into this equation btw.

I have very fond memories of his time with us and have no doubt he will become a truly great striker, but there's no reason he couldn't have done that in his time at City as he has all the ingredients.

That hunger to stay on your feet and work both with the ball and without in terms of moving defenders around is something which young strikers IMO generally struggle to do. I've read Chelsea and Belgian national team supporters talk about Lukaku and say similar things. It's about mentality and belief. With Mario we saw it in flashes, but then in some respects we only saw him in flashes.

Personally I think the single biggest mistake made by the club during Mancini's tenure was acquiescing to his demands to sign Dzeko. It should've been Mario or Edin, not both. I personally think things would've been different had that happened.

Mario needed to be the number 1 man in the middle.

Hard to know if he would ever have been sufficiently settled and happy in England to deliver his best. Last season he seemed only intent on going back to Italy.

He is not the easiest character to deal with but I think he was mishandled.

 

[FantasyIreland]

He is not the easiest character to deal with but I think he was mishandled.

You must then be laying a portion of blame for Mario's less than succesful stay at Mancini's door?

If so,what should he have done different?