Negative players or negative tactics...

[BobKowalski]

If Mourinho does pitch up at City next season its going to be priceless on here as you all figure out different ways to moan...not that moaning will do any good because when you ave appointed argueably the best manager in the world where the hell do you go from there?

Mancini is not the best manager in the world but hes proving to be a bloody good one so far. I love all the switching around and the Josesque subbing of the FB's for attacking options. I love the fact he is making the players think about the game and his mantra of concentrate, concentrate and concentrate. I love the fact he doesn't moan and didn't even go there when they offered him the conditions as an excuse. I think give the man a full season and we would be top 4 with an outside chance of pushing for the title. I also think we have an unrealistic view of 'poorer' sides and that whilst we should be beating 'poorer' sides I don't see many top teams 'destroying' poorer sides with non-stop attacking football from the 1st min to the 90th. There are legitimate concerns about our slow starts or lack of personnel in the midfield but a lot of comments from posters are at best point scoring and at worse just mind numbing shite.

I love Mourinho and if he wants to manage us next season then happy days. Equally I think Mancini can also do the business - although Mourinho would be far more entertaining with his antics.

Saying that I also think Mancini will be here next season. I think that for the simple reason he says he will be. He doesn't say the owners have assured me etc etc he just says he will be and for some reason I believe him.

Mind you if he loses the next 4 or 5 games he is toast before we even get to the summer. But we won't. And he will.

 

[ono]

I thought RSC was fine yesterday. Did his job very well imo.

He did pull their defence apart quite a bit, helped create some openings, but he's simply not very good, certainly not good enough for where City want to be playing, and as value for money a very poor signing.

I think it would be better to judge him when he's had a run of games to be honest. Tevez didn't look very good when he wasn't fit.

 

[True_Blue69]

Havent read the whole 18 pages but one thing I will say, we probably had more clean cut chances in that 2nd half than we have had in any other half this season. With better finishing we could have been talking about a 4 or 5-1 victory.

 

[cleavers]

He did pull their defence apart quite a bit, helped create some openings, but he's simply not very good, certainly not good enough for where City want to be playing, and as value for money a very poor signing.

I think it would be better to judge him when he's had a run of games to be honest. Tevez didn't look very good when he wasn't fit.

The trouble is, I don't think he'll ever be fit. He was and is a very poor signing, a mid table player at best when fit, anyway that's getting off topic.

 

[moomba]

Of course it works like that. We have a completely different squad to last season and with the depth we have we should be looking to destroy the poorer teams.

I actually meant (and edited my post) last year. Same players failed to get results with the tactics you're proposing.

I'd rather see a 1-0 or 2-0 than either, that's my point.

So would I, but there's no guarantee of a win whatever tactics you play. So you look at the results we're getting. See that they're better than the clubs nearest to us in ability and league table and you have to presume that maybe our tactics aren't the disaster some are making out.

 

[Joycee Banercheck]

Their keeper had a stormer.
We started poorly - they wanted it more than us.
Second half was a lot better.
Should have started the first half like we started the second half really.
How anyone can blame a pitch is a joke. They play footballl for a living. You'd think players could play on a bit of a cut up pitch.

 

[Anonymous]

Interesting discussion about not imposing ourselves on other teams, especially first half.

While we persist with Barry in midfield I don't think we'll ever impose ourselves on anyone for any length of time. After a promising start at City, he's flattered to deceive, he does cover a lot of ground, can't fault him there, but I can't work out what his job is. Is he supposed to be a defensive midfielder, the link man between defence and attack, a box to box player, or an attack minded midfielder ? For me he just gives the ball away to often, and his control isn't what it should be. Ironically he seems to play much better for England. He should be the player that helps us impose ourselves on teams, but he's not, and I don't think either of his City managers have worked out how or where to play him to get the best out of him.

Billy a question, which Stoke game are you referring to in particular ? The home cup game ? I thought we did dominate for the first 15-20 minutes, then lost our way. The away cup game ? I didn't go, but from what I could work out from the reports and commentary, we were the better team by quite a distance until Adebayor got sent off. The away league game, I agree we were poor all round.

Yesterday I would put down to the players, and in a number of games this year I'd say the same (under both managers). The players sometimes seem to turn up thinking they've won already, yesterday was a case in point, we started like we were 2-0 up, cruising, and when Sunderland had the cheek to chase every lost cause, a number of ours seemed to want to hide.

Richards a couple of times just kicked the ball anywhere because he didn't fancy the pressure he was being put under. Lescott for 15-20 minutes was hopeless, Kompany wasn't much better, Bridge was poor, and was replaced. Our defence (one of the good points under Mancini) probably had its worst 20 minutes of the season, and we were lucky we weren't further behind by the time they got their act together.

Midfield was also very poor, Barry just doesn't cut it for me. De Jong was winning tackles, but then giving the ball away cheaply, and Zabaleta is a right back out of position.

Up front SWP was woeful not for the first time, and while Bellamy was trying, he's just not on form at the moment. Tevez worked very hard, but he can't do it alone.

I don't think anyone can criticise Mancini for his starting team yesterday, after all it was pretty well the side that put 4 past Chelsea, but, and I said it on the day, we only really played in that game for 25 minutes, and for a lot of the game we were poor.

My conclusion is its the players we have, they don't and won't ever make a team, and both managers have struggled to impose themselves on the players . We all sit there and look at this squad, the best we have ever had, and we rightly expect better from it, but its a country mile away from a team.

If Mancini stays, and I think he will, then he's going to need to ship out a number of players.

I'd keep

Given, Kompany, Lescott, Tevez, Bellamy, De Jong, Adabayor, and Johnson for first team regulars, though getting Adebayor and Tevez to work is a puzzle that may be beyond any manager.

I'd keep Vieira, Zabaleta, Ireland, and Onouha, as back up, and hope that the two we've brought through can improve.

I'd bring back Hart, Weiss, and Robinho to compete for first team.

I'd dump Taylor, Silvinho, Toure, Santa Cruz, Barry, Petrov, Richards, Garrido, and Bridge.

That's a huge clear out, and its going to cost a fortune to rebuild the squad, but for me there are too many in that list that just don't cut it, and no manager will find it easy.

I think there's an argument that as individuals we do not have a single player other than Tevez who has performed consistently above expectations. Now it might be that that's because our expectations going into the season were too high, however it can also be said that good management is about getting the "team" to play better than the sum of its parts - which has clearly not been the case with us this season...

 

[Anonymous]

I think there's an argument that as individuals we do not have a single player other than Tevez who has performed consistently above expectations. Now it might be that that's because our expectations going into the season were too high, however it can also be said that good management is about getting the "team" to play better than the sum of its parts - which has clearly not been the case with us this season...

We've probably got the 4th or 5th best squad in the league, and we're currently in that position too, so I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

I think there's an argument that as individuals we do not have a single player other than Tevez who has performed consistently above expectations. Now it might be that that's because our expectations going into the season were too high, however it can also be said that good management is about getting the "team" to play better than the sum of its parts - which has clearly not been the case with us this season...

We've probably got the 4th or 5th best squad in the league, and we're currently in that position too, so I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion.

I don't agree with that at all.

I think you could make an argument that we have as good a squad as anyone in the premier league. Chelsea possibly have more all-round ability and United have Rooney. All have their strengths and weaknesses of course. A double over Chelsea, victories over Man United and Arsenal speak volumes.

I think we're underachieveing. I think we have a better squad than Villa, spurs and Liverpool without a doubt.

 

[cleavers]

I think there's an argument that as individuals we do not have a single player other than Tevez who has performed consistently above expectations. Now it might be that that's because our expectations going into the season were too high, however it can also be said that good management is about getting the "team" to play better than the sum of its parts - which has clearly not been the case with us this season...

I agree, I just don't think the players we have will ever be able to make a team, there is no balance between defence and attack, and often no link, so we either defend well and don't look very exciting, or we go gung ho and concede to many. Hence why both managers have struggled to find the balance. I guess my point is that its not Mancini (or MH's) tactics, its just the players don't fit togther. When they do click we look good (second half yesterday), but all too often this doesn't happen.

Many were heralding the Chelsea victory as some kind of break through, but that first half was one of our worst displays this season (until yesterday).

The manager should be able to motivate the team to play, of course, but neither manager this season has managed to do it consistently, and no amount of Mourinho will either in my opinion.

Sadly as is usual at City, more change required.