Serious question about Mancini - serious answers only please

[fbloke]

I am confident enough in the man and his methods to say that he will be given two years as a minimum, with one proviso and that that is of European qualification.

I am not talking about CL but this season top 6 is the minimum.

I do expect CL qualification though.

Perhaps many hanker for a change but IMO it wont happen in part because where is the alternative? But also because Mancini has the skills but perhaps he needs to understand/change the mindset at City and in the Prem?

 

[Anonymous]

Despite the fact I (and a lot of other City fans) have no confidence in Mancini, I have said he needs two seasons before we can really be sure he's not the right manager.

We hear the refrain "The team is gelling" from people defending him (and I accept there may be something in that) but if we carry on playing games like todays, when are people going to accept his time is up?

1) Xmas?
2) End of the season?
3) Next Xmas?
4) End of next season?

I want a serious discussion please.

You want a serious discussion, but don't really offer a serious starting point. I suspect most serious fans will judge him on results rather than your own specific timescales.

It's a shame, you're one of the better, more articulate posters on here but you're in danger of losing your credibility with your overtly anti-Mancini rants.

I wouldn't mind, but when we win it's despite Mancini, and when we lose it's purely his fault.

Personally I'm undecided on the manager, but I'd prefer to see a balanced argument rather than ridiculous hyperbole.

That cuts both ways. I'm yet to see a balanced argument on this board not get flamed by a bunch of fuckwits who can't see beyond "get behind the manager FFS"...

 

[m27]

As you might know, I'm a Mancini 'fan', so this might be of interest.

I was there today, and he got it so wrong it was laughable. However, I know you, Billy, Dids Dave and loads others have thought he gets it 'wrong' on a regular basis but I can normally defend him. One example being the Newcastle game, I saw AJ being whipped into a frenzy on the sidelines only to be unleashed to win the game for us. I saw it as perfect management. Others thought AJ should have been on the pitch from the start and we would have won a lot easier. They might have been right but in the end, Mancini's way got us three points.

Today was the first time I didn't know what he was trying to do. I've played football all my life and you are told time and time again that you have to "Win the battles and earn the right to play" and Mancini's always seemed to fit with this philosophy up to today. Today he lost the plot and any more days like that will get me seriously questioning him.

It's my gut feeling he saw today as another Burnley away and the way we started it could have been all over in 15 minutes. Problem was, we didn't score and then we were awful.

He has to have until the end of the season unless the club, or you lot, see Rijkaard as an option.

or woooney joins and saves us all ... lol

Care to elaborate?

 

[Ric]

You want a serious discussion, but don't really offer a serious starting point. I suspect most serious fans will judge him on results rather than your own specific timescales.

It's a shame, you're one of the better, more articulate posters on here but you're in danger of losing your credibility with your overtly anti-Mancini rants.

I wouldn't mind, but when we win it's despite Mancini, and when we lose it's purely his fault.

Personally I'm undecided on the manager, but I'd prefer to see a balanced argument rather than ridiculous hyperbole.

That cuts both ways. I'm yet to see a balanced argument on this board not get flamed by a bunch of fuckwits who can't see beyond "get behind the manager FFS"...

That's depressingly true. It seems like reasoned debate on either side isn't going to happen, and the same old suspects are always involved.

 

[m27]

End of next season. Mancini needs time to organize the players according to his liking and style of play and for that he will need to get rid of the players that aren't willing to work under him and bring ones in that are , so for that he will need the January transfer window as well as the Summer window.If by the end of next season we arent in the top 3 , only then will i ask serious questions regarding Mancini.

As for today's performance , Mancini has nothing to do with it .The reason we lost was simple , after the first 20 minutes the players stopped playing due to whatever reason.As was said in the post match interview , Mancini doesn't know the reason why the players stopped being arsed after the first 20 minutes and he himself was very dissapointed and shocked about it.

"Mancini had nothing to do with it"

Why do we pay him then? Maybe an on-line poll to pick the team every week would work? What do you reckon?

 

[blumoonrisen]

Mansour is expecting top 4 this season..

 

[80s Shorts]

I am confident enough in the man and his methods to say that he will be given two years as a minimum, with one proviso and that that is of European qualification.

I am not talking about CL but this season top 6 is the minimum.

I do expect CL qualification though.

Perhaps many hanker for a change but IMO it wont happen in part because where is the alternative? But also because Mancini has the skills but perhaps he needs to understand/change the mindset at City and in the Prem?

Im sat on the fence re Mancini at the moment but dont you think the owners will see CL qualification as a minimum requirement, what with the higher profile and the FFP rules upon us.

 

[Ragnarok]

End of next season. Mancini needs time to organize the players according to his liking and style of play and for that he will need to get rid of the players that aren't willing to work under him and bring ones in that are , so for that he will need the January transfer window as well as the Summer window.If by the end of next season we arent in the top 3 , only then will i ask serious questions regarding Mancini.

As for today's performance , Mancini has nothing to do with it .The reason we lost was simple , after the first 20 minutes the players stopped playing due to whatever reason.As was said in the post match interview , Mancini doesn't know the reason why the players stopped being arsed after the first 20 minutes and he himself was very dissapointed and shocked about it.

"Mancini had nothing to do with it"

Why do we pay him then? Maybe an on-line poll to pick the team every week would work? What do you reckon?

Mancini set up todays team in the way he thought by which we would win with the players available to us. Now , if the players stopped being arsed after 15-20 minutes , how is that Mancini's fault? Only Silva and to an extent Adebayor actually did something today after that the first 15 minutes.

 

[fbloke]

That cuts both ways. I'm yet to see a balanced argument on this board not get flamed by a bunch of fuckwits who can't see beyond "get behind the manager FFS"...

That's depressingly true. It seems like reasoned debate on either side isn't going to happen, and the same old suspects are always involved.

For the same reason that tabloids sell more copies than broadsheets the threads that get reads and replies are predicated on outlandish and often ill conceived polemics.

I have seen many decent threads stall and then sink because they were non-inflammatory.

(and I blame the mods ;-) )

 

[80s Shorts]

That's depressingly true. It seems like reasoned debate on either side isn't going to happen, and the same old suspects are always involved.

For the same reason that tabloids sell more copies than broadsheets the threads that get reads and replies are predicated on outlandish and often ill conceived polemics.

I have seen many decent threads stall and then sink because they were non-inflammatory.

(and I blame the mods ;-) )

that Las Vegas bollocks being one of them eh ;-)