Manchester City need a fresh start and change of manager
Patrick Barclay
RECOMMEND?
So lacking in dash and vigour was Manchester City’s performance on Saturday that when Patrick Vieira came on, he hardly looked out of place.
The man who used to think nothing of a 50-50 ball with Roy Keane, is older (nearly 34) and more conservative these days, and his contribution was in keeping with a team display utterly inappropriate to the occasion, reminiscent of nothing more than the limp outing at White Hart Lane that got Mark Hughes the sack.
In truth, City were slightly better than when losing 3-0 to Tottenham Hotspur in December. But if they don’t take a bit more spirit and belief in each other into the return fixture with Harry Redknapp’s team on May 5, they can forget all about fourth place.
No neutral who excitedly saw Tottenham beat Arsenal on Wednesday, and then felt foolish for having beat an enthusiastic path to the City of Manchester Stadium, would want City to represent England in the Champions League anyway. Not on this form. Not when Tottenham could be there instead. The Champions League is about rising to occasions and twice in a week Redknapp’s men have done that.
RELATED LINKS
Injury rules Petrov out for the season
Scholes's late goal puts City in their place
Mancini needs to get City up for the fight
Too many of Roberto Mancini’s lot sank into their shoes and if the Italian thought it good enough — he did say City had played well, and reiterated this manifest drivel, presumably to maintain such enthusiasm as they may harbour for Saturday’s game away to Arsenal — he is the wrong man for the job of turning Manchester’s other club into one of the world’s most respected.
Let’s get some exceptions out of the way. Nigel de Jong was wonderfully defiant; Carlos Tévez did his best without close support; Vincent Kompany never hid; Shay Given remained alert in goal. As for the others, I was just glad for Robinho. Had the Brazil player not gone home to Santos, he’d have got the blame.
So what does this say about City and the revolution to be funded by Sheikh Mansour and his Abu Dhabi United Group? It’s going nowhere. The manager, for all his knowledge, seriousness of approach and high-class early experience, is not inspirational. At this level, it should not greatly matter. With this budget, you expect players who are self-starters. But City have bought too many of the other kind.
Passion was conspicuously absent from what had been billed as the most important derby since Alex Ferguson arrived in Manchester in 1986; at least from the City point of view, it proved the most forgettable. The highlights on Match of the Day were misleading because they concentrated on the last ten minutes. The rest of it could best be judged by the widespread opinion that Paul Scholes, who sat in comfort and sprayed at leisure before advancing to score the only goal, was outstanding.
My man of the match was Ferguson. After a couple of tactical off-days, he had his team not only better prepared psychologically than Mancini’s but more intelligently arranged.
Whatever work City had done on the creative side of the game was hard to discern. They played as individuals, counter-attacking in straight lines, not always giving the impression that they wanted the ball. It culminated in that 93rd minute with the slow, hesitant gesture at a break that culminated in Craig Bellamy’s pass being intercepted. United knew what to do with that ball.
City cannot afford to wait nearly a decade for their manager to grow a generation of Scholeses. The first thing I’d do when the season ends is start again. With a new manager and as many new players as he wants.
