bluenose88
Member
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2009
- Messages
- 13
bollocks
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Mark Hughes' exit from Manchester City
- Thread starter vans0531
- Start date
Didsbury Dave
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 Feb 2007
- Messages
- 38,063
Our history is not relevant in this, Chris.
If we were building steadily and organically like, say Villa, then you could measure our progress that way.
We have spend hundreds of millions and have a sky high wage bill.
We have a squad strong enough, perhaps with an addition or two, to challenge for the title.
We won't settle for underachievement. Last season was the building season.
If we were building steadily and organically like, say Villa, then you could measure our progress that way.
We have spend hundreds of millions and have a sky high wage bill.
We have a squad strong enough, perhaps with an addition or two, to challenge for the title.
We won't settle for underachievement. Last season was the building season.
m27
Well-Known Member
Mr Chairman: "Mark, when we outline our targets for the season ahead to the press, are you happy that we say "Top 6" instead of "Top 4"? As you know, we've had a lot of bad press and you know how the media is going to instantly jump on that "arrogant boast" and we don't want undue pressure put on you and the players so early on in the season with all the new players who may struggle to gel.
However, if things go according to plan and we are in the Top 4 or within touching distance of the Top 4 around Christmas, we can then begin to talk about our real aim in the public domain. Ok?"
Is there not a realistic probablity a conversation along these lines occurred pre-season? Hughes is hardly going to shoot his mouth of either because he's continuously tried to scale down our aims. The thing is, it seems they forgot to brief the players!
However, if things go according to plan and we are in the Top 4 or within touching distance of the Top 4 around Christmas, we can then begin to talk about our real aim in the public domain. Ok?"
Is there not a realistic probablity a conversation along these lines occurred pre-season? Hughes is hardly going to shoot his mouth of either because he's continuously tried to scale down our aims. The thing is, it seems they forgot to brief the players!
Chris in London
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 13,328
Of course our history is relevant. It is the benchmark against we judge ourselves. More importantly, our history has made us what we are.
If you remember, we parted company with Peter Reid in the early 90s because he hadn't acheived enough in the two seasons he had been given, and though the football was dour, it was preferable to what followed. We forget this at our peril.
I would love us to achieve a trophy and a top 4 finish this season. Frankly, though I wouldn't put my mortgage on it, I think we will achieve at least one of those objectives. But even if we don't, I don't see that as a disaster, bearing in mind how many new players we have got. The team ought to be by now 90-95% complete, which is why I agree with you that if we do not start achieving regular top 4 finsihes as from season 2010-2011 and beyond, that will look like a real failure and realistically speaking we ought to be challenging for the title next season even if we don't quite get there. But for what is effectively a brand new team (which I suspect is why you say history is irrelevant) is not reasonable to expect it to click straight away. It may do - and we all hope it does - but not achieving instant success is not in my view the cause for immediate wailing and gnashing of teeth.
If you remember, we parted company with Peter Reid in the early 90s because he hadn't acheived enough in the two seasons he had been given, and though the football was dour, it was preferable to what followed. We forget this at our peril.
I would love us to achieve a trophy and a top 4 finish this season. Frankly, though I wouldn't put my mortgage on it, I think we will achieve at least one of those objectives. But even if we don't, I don't see that as a disaster, bearing in mind how many new players we have got. The team ought to be by now 90-95% complete, which is why I agree with you that if we do not start achieving regular top 4 finsihes as from season 2010-2011 and beyond, that will look like a real failure and realistically speaking we ought to be challenging for the title next season even if we don't quite get there. But for what is effectively a brand new team (which I suspect is why you say history is irrelevant) is not reasonable to expect it to click straight away. It may do - and we all hope it does - but not achieving instant success is not in my view the cause for immediate wailing and gnashing of teeth.
twinkletoes
Well-Known Member
tolmie's hairdoo said:twinkletoes said:All great detective work trying to prove your point but you aren't doing very well.
Show me one article that says that Mark Hughes, not the players, not the journalists, has been given a target of a top four finish this season.
Do you seriously think that Mark Hughes has not outlined his targets to the players he brought in.
They are basically sold on the premise of top four and beyond, unless you are now suggesting that the manager's aims and that of his playing squad are different.
Now that would be VERY BAD.
Are you a member?
<a class="postlink" href="http://ja-jp.facebook.com/group.php?gid=22244567024" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://ja-jp.facebook.com/group.php?gid=22244567024</a>
m27
Well-Known Member
Chris in London said:Of course our history is relevant. It is the benchmark against we judge ourselves. More importantly, our history has made us what we are.
If you remember, we parted company with Peter Reid in the early 90s because he hadn't acheived enough in the two seasons he had been given, and though the football was dour, it was preferable to what followed. We forget this at our peril.
I would love us to achieve a trophy and a top 4 finish this season. Frankly, though I wouldn't put my mortgage on it, I think we will achieve at least one of those objectives. But even if we don't, I don't see that as a disaster, bearing in mind how many new players we have got. The team ought to be by now 90-95% complete, which is why I agree with you that if we do not start achieving regular top 4 finsihes as from season 2010-2011 and beyond, that will look like a real failure and realistically speaking we ought to be challenging for the title next season even if we don't quite get there. But for what is effectively a brand new team (which I suspect is why you say history is irrelevant) is not reasonable to expect it to click straight away. It may do - and we all hope it does - but not achieving instant success is not in my view the cause for immediate wailing and gnashing of teeth.
How can our recent history of complete and utter failure be relevant when we are trying to become one of the biggest and most successful clubs in Europe? It's a blank page from this season on in my opinion.
twinkletoes
Well-Known Member
Spoiled Child Syndrome.
Although it is not an official diagnosis in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the spoiled child syndrome was identified and described by Bruce McIntosh in 1989.[3] The syndrome is characterized by "excessive, self-centered, and immature behavior". It includes lack of consideration for other people, recurrent temper tantrums, an inability to handle the delay of gratification, demands for having one's own way, obstructiveness, and manipulation.[4] McIntosh attributed the syndrome to "the failure of parents to enforce consistent, age-appropriate limits", but others, such as Aylward, note that temperament is probably a contributory factor.[1]
Although it is not an official diagnosis in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the spoiled child syndrome was identified and described by Bruce McIntosh in 1989.[3] The syndrome is characterized by "excessive, self-centered, and immature behavior". It includes lack of consideration for other people, recurrent temper tantrums, an inability to handle the delay of gratification, demands for having one's own way, obstructiveness, and manipulation.[4] McIntosh attributed the syndrome to "the failure of parents to enforce consistent, age-appropriate limits", but others, such as Aylward, note that temperament is probably a contributory factor.[1]
The Fixer
Well-Known Member
Rammy Blue said:twinkletoes said:All great detective work trying to prove your point but you aren't doing very well.
Show me one article that says that Mark Hughes, not the players, not the journalists, has been given a target of a top four finish this season.
yeah whatever.
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.sport.co.uk/news/Football/31487/Boss_confirms_Top_four_finish_is_the_aim.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.sport.co.uk/news/Football/31 ... e_aim.aspx</a>
twinkletoes
Well-Known Member
The Fixer said:Rammy Blue said:yeah whatever.
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.sport.co.uk/news/Football/31487/Boss_confirms_Top_four_finish_is_the_aim.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.sport.co.uk/news/Football/31 ... e_aim.aspx</a>
Should have gone to specsavers.
Ricster
Well-Known Member
twinkletoes said:The Fixer said:<a class="postlink" href="http://www.sport.co.uk/news/Football/31487/Boss_confirms_Top_four_finish_is_the_aim.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.sport.co.uk/news/Football/31 ... e_aim.aspx</a>
Should have gone to specsavers.
Who?