Negative players or negative tactics...

[Project]

excellent post.

It's amazing, and more than a little amusing, just how much slack this board is prepared to give Mancini. He has the same compliment of players Hughes had, plus Viera and AJ.

If Mancini doesn't know what his best team is (which he doesn't BTW), after nearly three months in charge, then that is pretty poor IMO.

Whether we play two or three sitting in midfield, two wingers or none, none of those things excuse our inability to impose ourselves upon matches.

He's had the same compliment of players and picked up more points per game than Hughes. That's why i'm relatively happy with Mancini. And I was in support of Hughes staying.

That both have failed to find a team that can fully impose themselves on the opposition the way the top teams do says more about the personnel we have than Mancini in particular. He saw the problem and tried to rectify it with Mariga.<br /><br />-- Mon Mar 15, 2010 11:58 am --<br /><br />

When we equalised, in injury time, did we have the manager indicating that we should shut up shop?

Did he fuck. He ran along the touchline urging the players back into position and to try and win the game.
.

I thought that was hilarious. The players shit themselves and were sprinting back once they realised.

The whole of the second half was very Mourinho esque - replacing the fullbacks with a midfielder and a striker. All out attack to get the goal. Then with 90 seconds of injury time left still shouting at the players to seal a winner.

 

[Anonymous]

I find it bizarre that people think Mancini was negative at Sunderland.

We played pretty much the whole second half with two wingers, two forwards and we pummelled the home side.

Yes, this is true. But we also played most of the first half like we didn't know how to score, or didn't have the desire to score. Same as against Chelsea. Same as against Stoke. In the premiership you cannot concede the impetus for the opening 45 minutes of a match regularly, and expect anything but mixed results. Which is what we've had.

When we equalised, in injury time, did we have the manager indicating that we should shut up shop?

Did he fuck. He ran along the touchline urging the players back into position and to try and win the game.

That's not really relevant to why we were so poor for 45 minutes though. Also doesn't explain why the manager needed to make so many changes so early in the match. It's not like he hasn't spent the week watching the players in training, and didn't know where Sunderland were weak due to injuries.

And if it wasn't for the previous manager's ludicrous signings missing chances we should havbe gone on and won it.

Some validity to that argument.

Stop pointing fingers at the current manager... he can only pick what he's been left with.

I'll point fingers at the current management when I think they've made a mistake. Mancini ain't above criticism...<br /><br />-- Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:06 pm --<br /><br />

He's had the same compliment of players and picked up more points per game than Hughes. That's why i'm relatively happy with Mancini. And I was in support of Hughes staying.

That both have failed to find a team that can fully impose themselves on the opposition the way the top teams do says more about the personnel we have than Mancini in particular. He saw the problem and tried to rectify it with Mariga.

I don't mean imposing ourselves the way Arsenal or Chelsea do, because we're clearly not that good yet. What I mean is our players imposing their qualities upon a match. Our midfield pressing the opposition high up the pitch, our full backs moving forward when we win the ball, our forward players looking to run in behind rather than constantly play with their backs to goal.

All too often we failed to retain possession against Sunderland, Chelsea, and Stoke, because we were happy to drop deep and stand off players as soon as we lost the ball.

 

[Soulboy]

I find it bizarre that people think Mancini was negative at Sunderland.

We played pretty much the whole second half with two wingers, two forwards and we pummelled the home side.

Yes, this is true. But we also played most of the first half like we didn't know how to score, or didn't have the desire to score. Same as against Chelsea. Same as against Stoke. In the premiership you cannot concede the impetus for the opening 45 minutes of a match regularly, and expect anything but mixed results. Which is what we've had.

When we equalised, in injury time, did we have the manager indicating that we should shut up shop?

Did he fuck. He ran along the touchline urging the players back into position and to try and win the game.

That's not really relevant to why we were so poor for 45 minutes though. Also doesn't explain why the manager needed to make so many changes so early in the match. It's not like he hasn't spent the week watching the players in training, and didn't know where Sunderland were weak due to injuries.

And if it wasn't for the previous manager's ludicrous signings missing chances we should havbe gone on and won it.

Some validity to that argument.

Stop pointing fingers at the current manager... he can only pick what he's been left with.

I'll point fingers at the current management when I think they've made a mistake. Mancini ain't above criticism...

You are quite entitlked to spout your opinion on here just like everyone else... if the manager deserves a roasting then I'm sure you're the man for the job.

But maybe having only been in charge 3 months is one of the reasons why I give him some "slack", and the fact he's still £200m behind the previous manager in spending cash also gives him some leeway in my mind.

Mancini took over a team that was in relegation form. Take away Hughes first six or seven games of the season, and we were heading into mid-table. Mancini has not only stopped the slide he's got us winning points to get us into the top 4... which I find an incredible achievement... in fact I think you were of the oipinion that top 6 this season for Hughes would have been an achievement...yes?

It's clear you have an agenda against Mancini and can't wait to criticise his reign. It might be due to the fact that Hughes was proven to be inadequate in spite of your long-term support for him... it might be due to the fact that he's seen through Ireland's inadequacies and won't pick him.

Whatever the reason I think you and others should at least give Mancini until the end of the season before burying him.

It's only fair, surely?

 

[Rammy Blue]

excellent post.

It's amazing, and more than a little amusing, just how much slack this board is prepared to give Mancini. He has the same compliment of players Hughes had, plus Viera and AJ.

If Mancini doesn't know what his best team is (which he doesn't BTW), after nearly three months in charge, then that is pretty poor IMO.

Whether we play two or three sitting in midfield, two wingers or none, none of those things excuse our inability to impose ourselves upon matches.

Not having a pop Billy but it's a little difficult to have reasoned debate with someone whose manner of posts are determined by whether Stevie plays or gets on from the bench.

Yes, the first half was poor however Bob changed things and bar an unexcusable quality of finishing we would have won by at least a couple of goals.

The comment about "Bob not knowing his best side which in your opinion is poor" is laughable at best, never mind the fact that you try to imply you are "that itk" as to know it as fact.

 

[Anonymous]

Mancini took over a team that was in relegation form. Take away Hughes first six or seven games of the season, and we were heading into mid-table. Mancini has not only stopped the slide he's got us winning points to get us into the top 4... which I find an incredible achievement... in fact I think you were of the oipinion that top 6 this season for Hughes would have been an achievement...yes?

Mancini didn't take over a team in relegation form. That's just untrue and not borne out by the facts. I agree Mancini has got us winning more points than Hughes, can't argue with that. I said that if Hughes didn't finish in the top 4 he'd have failed.

It's clear you have an agenda against Mancini and can't wait to criticise his reign. It might be due to the fact that Hughes was proven to be inadequate in spite of your long-term support for him... it might be due to the fact that he's seen through Ireland's inadequacies and won't pick him.

That's pathetic. Go look through my history of posts since Mancini took over before attributing such ridiculous sweeping generalizations to the things I post. Clearly you're another poster who would rather have a personal pop at me than discuss the opinions I hold.

Funny how I've not mentioned Ireland once in this thread, (well, maybe once at the very beginning) yet your the second poster who seems to think I'm posting with "agendas". I don't need to worry about Stevie, because his future will be just fine...<br /><br />-- Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:23 pm --<br /><br />

Not having a pop Billy but it's a little difficult to have reasoned debate with someone whose manner of posts are determined by whether Stevie plays or gets on from the bench.

Well, actually you are having a pop. Cheers for that. Duly noted.

 

[Soulboy]

I remember last season frequently stating that Hughes wasn't up to the job... you absolutely pilloried me for that view!

Then you broke the story that Ireland had fallen out with Hughes... and you completely changed your opinion and called for the manager's head!

How can I debate with someone who clearly has such a personal agenda about one of the players, and whose support for the manager is based upon whether or not he picks Stevie Ireland!

If you look at our points total over Hughes final dozen games you will see it was nigh-on relegation form. I can't be bothered checking it out.

If in twelve months time, and another £100m spent, we are still as "boring" I might be sympathetic to the view that we may need a change of manager; but as things stand at the moment I believe Mancini is doing an incredible job.

We are favourites to finish 4th. in spite of all the doom and gloom on here. You'd seriously think we were in 8th. place to read some of the comments on here.

If you want entertainment, go to the circus.

 

[Rammy Blue]

Not having a pop Billy but it's a little difficult to have reasoned debate with someone whose manner of posts are determined by whether Stevie plays or gets on from the bench.

Well, actually you are having a pop. Cheers for that. Duly noted.

truth hurts.

 

[Anonymous]

Well, actually you are having a pop. Cheers for that. Duly noted.

truth hurts.

I think I know my own opinions a little better than you do RB. I've been a City supporter for a lot longer than I've known any footballers personally, and I support our club, not one player.

As I said earlier, Stevie will be fine. Whether he plays every game between now and the end of the season, or doesn't get on the pitch for us again ever...

 

[Didsbury Dave]

I believe Mancini is doing an incredible job.

Mate, you lost it at this point for me.

By no stetch of anyone's imaginations, doubtless, including his own, is he doing an "incredible" job.

He's doing OK at best. The team are still underperforming regularly, he doesn't seem to know what his best team or system is and there appears to be unrest in the camp.

There are extenuating circumstances - he's new to this country for example - and some things are OK - we've found our best back four and look more solid.

However I don't think we've dominated a single game from start to finish since he arrived.

I can agree that he's not had long and he may get it right. But to laud him as some sort of genius is, well, incredible to me.

 

[Anonymous]

I remember last season frequently stating that Hughes wasn't up to the job... you absolutely pilloried me for that view!

Then you broke the story that Ireland had fallen out with Hughes... and you completely changed your opinion and called for the manager's head!

How can I debate with someone who clearly has such a personal agenda about one of the players, and whose support for the manager is based upon whether or not he picks Stevie Ireland!

If you look at our points total over Hughes final dozen games you will see it was nigh-on relegation form. I can't be bothered checking it out.

If in twelve months time, and another £100m spent, we are still as "boring" I might be sympathetic to the view that we may need a change of manager; but as things stand at the moment I believe Mancini is doing an incredible job.

We are favourites to finish 4th. in spite of all the doom and gloom on here. You'd seriously think we were in 8th. place to read some of the comments on here.

If you want entertainment, go to the circus.

So once again, please show me where I've said I want Mancini sacked, either now or at the end of the season? Also, please point out where it is that I've said that I want to be entertained?

I'll save you the trouble, you won't be able to find those things as I've never said them...

Do you really find it that hard to discuss the points I've raised?

All I want to know is why we struggle to impose ourselves in the first 45 minutes of matches. That's where this thread started...is it the manager, the players, or a combination of the two?