Stop moaning and get behind Mancini

[Prestwich_Blue]

But hang on - we keep getting sold the line that he's a born winner, who has won loads of trophies at the top-level as a player and manager. So why does he need to "learn" the Premier League? It's the same as Serie A - 11 men, a football and the one who scores the most goals wins.

The problem is he's not trying to learn the Premier League but is trying to play a style that simply won't work. If he's shown any signs of learning to adapt, we'd have seen it by now.

Wait, so young players have to learn their trade, and learn from their mistakes, but young managers don't?

Isn't that a bit stupid?

No - young managers have to learn their trade but he's a triple Serie A winner we keep being told. And if he's still learning his trade then perhaps he should consider the vacancy at Coventry City.

 

[Blue Tooth]

Current Form:Home PL (Last 6 games)


Utd W W W W W W (18 pts)
City W W W W D W (16 pts)
Arsenal D W W W W D (14 pts)
Liverpool W D W W D W (14 pts)
Chelsea W D W L W W (13 pts)
Spurs D W W D W D (12 pts)

Current Form: Away PL ( Last 6 games)

Chelsea L L W W D W ( 10 pts)
Arsenal L D W W D D (9 pts)
Liverpool L L W W L W (9 pts)
Spurs L D W W L D ( 8 pts)
Utd D W L W L L (7 pts)
City W D L L D L L (5 pts)


Not too shabby really...Plenty of points to play for.
Let's get behind the blues.

Putting a win in that doesn't exist is shabby! ;-)

2away points from the last 15 isn't shabby, it is plain unacceptable in the style in which those games were approached.

Win...what win ? ;)..and the points total is correct...point being I don't think things are quite as bad as some folk are making out.

 

[Damocles]

No - young managers have to learn their trade but he's a triple Serie A winner we keep being told. And if he's still learning his trade then perhaps he should consider the vacancy at Coventry City.

Errrr... he IS a triple Serie A winner. That's like saying, "well, his name is Roberto, as we keep been told".

You think that even people like Ferguson have stopped learning? They haven't. ALL managers need to consistently learn new things and adapt.

Have you never heard of someone been called "young and successful"? Mourinho is also a young manager. So's Guardiola.

In fact, this argument is so ridiculous, that I'm just going to back out now, knowing your history of wumming; I can't believe that that is anything other than a post designed to wind people up.

 

[Anonymous]

Damocles - I'm not ignoring the points you're making, far from it. I just think ultimately you're advocating stability rather than particularly endorsing Mancini to go out and win the league next season. I understand the logic behind stability, and the last thing I want is another summer of total upheaval - but equally as results and performances have deteriorated Roberto's not shown he's got the wherewithal to either arrest the slide, or get results in the big games.

This is a genuine question - do you see this season's aim of finishing 4th as a 'bare minimum' or the genuine target with anything else being a bonus?

 

[Damocles]

Damocles - I'm not ignoring the points you're making, far from it. I just think ultimately you're advocating stability rather than particularly endorsing Mancini to go out and win the league next season. I understand the logic behind stability, and the last thing I want is another summer of total upheaval - but equally as results and performances have deteriorated Roberto's not shown he's got the wherewithal to either arrest the slide, or get results in the big games.

This is a genuine question - do you see this season's aim of finishing 4th as a 'bare minimum' or the genuine target with anything else being a bonus?

I'm advocating a period of judgement of at least two full seasons. This isn't just about stability, it's because if even someone like Wenger says it takes a good year or so before you have a real effect on the team, why do others feel that someone can be judged 6 months into their reign?

Your definition of "results" seems to be a win. I would argue that draws at Arsenal and Spurs are good results, and we Chelsea barely looked like scoring until they got through on a individually-mistaken set piece. We were beaten at United by a moment of genius. Personally, I see the logic in it, 1 point is better than 0 points in the length of the season, and the idea that you can go to these clubs and outplay them on their own turf is a folly. It happens every now and again, but mostly, you setup to nick a win. People do this when coming to us as well, and it is frustrating, yet effective.

I see fourth as the bare minimum required to keep Mancini's job. We're in fourth. I don't see the confusion in the job issue.

We aren't yet good enough to go and win the league, and United, Arsenal and Spurs are all better teams than us. Chelsea were last season; but look what happened when they tried to add a bunch of youth players a bit into the season. Also look at how well their £50m striker is doing.

Trying to add a bunch of new personnel to a club at once creates a whole laundry list of problems; some of which, can be overcome by having your "core players" in the dressing room/on the pitch showing how it is done. We don't have any core players. We have players who have been here for 2 and a half years, under 2 different managers and 2 different mentalities. There is no such thing as "the City way" because we fucking sack everybody at the first hurdle. If Messi came in tomorrow, who would put their arm round him and help him transition? This has to come from players AND management, and because of our high player turnover, we don't have the ability to do this, thus offset the problems of an accelerated buying policy.

The only thing Mancini and the players need, is time. That's it. We know he's a good manager because he's previously won things. We know that they are good players because we have seen them be good in the past. All that needs to happen, is that we need to fucking leave them alone to get on with their job for a little while, and we'll be absolutely fine.

This whole Mancini issue is like ordering a well done steak and then forcing the chef to give it you after a minute, and complaining that it is rare. We have the ingredients; perhaps, at the crunch point of the season, we could actually support the club instead of this constant second guessing.

Remember when Mancini said that we as a club don't have a winning mentality? I've read loads on here today saying that we will lose the FA Cup semi, finish 5th or 6th, and that we should sack our manager. Can you actually believe that? We get to the crunch time where we should all be pulling together as a club, and we have some actually saying sack the manager! This myth of City fans as the most loyal in the world has been completely smashed since the money came in, where now people equate increased investment with instant success. Investment wins fuck all. Sustained investment wins everything. Two seasons isn't sustained investment.

We are currently in bad form because we've had a mini injury crisis and we don't yet possess the character as a squad to overcome it. Character building as a team unit takes time.

So, in answer to your main point, I'm advocating keeping the previously proven manager, keeping the previously proven players and giving them half a chance to get something special together.

You're into music aren't you? How long does it take for a group of strangers to really become a proper "band" as far as the flow and understanding of each other's musical styles goes? How long does it take to have the ability to bounce off of each other, musically and lyrically?
Now (presuming that you have 5 members of a band), times that number 5 for a 25 man squad. Imagine that 1 year after the formation, you were sacked because they didn't "get each other properly yet". The Beatles took 5 years to hit their best. Imagine if they sacked Epstein after year one.

Posters forget that we are talking about real people here; they are high performance athletes but also a group of young lads together.

You should read this:

<a class="postlink" href="http://norvig.com/21-days.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://norvig.com/21-days.html</a>

It's concerning a theory put forward by Gladwell about how people develop technical disciplines.

 

[Anonymous]

Damocles - I'm not ignoring the points you're making, far from it. I just think ultimately you're advocating stability rather than particularly endorsing Mancini to go out and win the league next season. I understand the logic behind stability, and the last thing I want is another summer of total upheaval - but equally as results and performances have deteriorated Roberto's not shown he's got the wherewithal to either arrest the slide, or get results in the big games.

This is a genuine question - do you see this season's aim of finishing 4th as a 'bare minimum' or the genuine target with anything else being a bonus?

I'm advocating a period of judgement of at least two full seasons. This isn't just about stability, it's because if even someone like Wenger says it takes a good year or so before you have a real effect on the team, why do others feel that someone can be judged 6 months into their reign?

Your definition of "results" seems to be a win. I would argue that draws at Arsenal and Spurs are good results, and we Chelsea barely looked like scoring until they got through on a individually-mistaken set piece. We were beaten at United by a moment of genius. Personally, I see the logic in it, 1 point is better than 0 points in the length of the season, and the idea that you can go to these clubs and outplay them on their own turf is a folly. It happens every now and again, but mostly, you setup to nick a win. People do this when coming to us as well, and it is frustrating, yet effective.

I see fourth as the bare minimum required to keep Mancini's job. We're in fourth. I don't see the confusion in the job issue.

We aren't yet good enough to go and win the league, and United, Arsenal and Spurs are all better teams than us. Chelsea were last season; but look what happened when they tried to add a bunch of youth players a bit into the season. Also look at how well their £50m striker is doing.

Trying to add a bunch of new personnel to a club at once creates a whole laundry list of problems; some of which, can be overcome by having your "core players" in the dressing room/on the pitch showing how it is done. We don't have any core players. We have players who have been here for 2 and a half years, under 2 different managers and 2 different mentalities. There is no such thing as "the City way" because we fucking sack everybody at the first hurdle. If Messi came in tomorrow, who would put their arm round him and help him transition? This has to come from players AND management, and because of our high player turnover, we don't have the ability to do this, thus offset the problems of an accelerated buying policy.

The only thing Mancini and the players need, is time. That's it. We know he's a good manager because he's previously won things. We know that they are good players because we have seen them be good in the past. All that needs to happen, is that we need to fucking leave them alone to get on with their job for a little while, and we'll be absolutely fine.

This whole Mancini issue is like ordering a well done steak and then forcing the chef to give it you after a minute, and complaining that it is rare. We have the ingredients; perhaps, at the crunch point of the season, we could actually support the club instead of this constant second guessing.

Remember when Mancini said that we as a club don't have a winning mentality? I've read loads on here today saying that we will lose the FA Cup semi, finish 5th or 6th, and that we should sack our manager. Can you actually believe that? We get to the crunch time where we should all be pulling together as a club, and we have some actually saying sack the manager! This myth of City fans as the most loyal in the world has been completely smashed since the money came in, where now people equate increased investment with instant success. Investment wins fuck all. Sustained investment wins everything. Two seasons isn't sustained investment.

We are currently in bad form because we've had a mini injury crisis and we don't yet possess the character as a squad to overcome it. Character building as a team unit takes time.

So, in answer to your main point, I'm advocating keeping the previously proven manager, keeping the previously proven players and giving them half a chance to get something special together.

You're into music aren't you? How long does it take for a group of strangers to really become a proper "band" as far as the flow and understanding of each other's musical styles goes? How long does it take to have the ability to bounce off of each other, musically and lyrically?
Now (presuming that you have 5 members of a band), times that number 5 for a 25 man squad. Imagine that 1 year after the formation, you were sacked because they didn't "get each other properly yet". The Beatles took 5 years to hit their best. Imagine if they sacked Epstein after year one.

Posters forget that we are talking about real people here; they are high performance athletes but also a group of young lads together.

You should read this:

<a class="postlink" href="http://norvig.com/21-days.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://norvig.com/21-days.html</a>

It's concerning a theory put forward by Gladwell about how people develop technical disciplines.

Mate, honestly, I believe ultimately Mancini isn't good enough and not the right guy for City. So ultimately, even if I agree with everything else you've posted - I still think Mancini should be sent packing this summer.

Will be interesting to see what the owners make of this season.

I want to ask you an honest question - are you aware of the antipathy towards Mancini from the playing squad?

 

[Damocles]

Mate, honestly, I believe ultimately Mancini isn't good enough and not the right guy for City. So ultimately, even if I agree with everything else you've posted - I still think Mancini should be sent packing this summer.

Based on what? He has a superb record elsewhere, so you must be making your judgements on his time at City, which was the point of the above post.

Will be interesting to see what the owners make of this season.

I want to ask you an honest question - are you aware of the antipathy towards Mancini from the playing squad?

I'm aware that the only player who I know, who Mancini has completely fucked off, said recently that the squad would "break their legs if he told them to". But that's one guy's opinion out of 25, and I don't profess to know the other 24.

 

[Anonymous]

Based on what? He has a superb record elsewhere, so you must be making your judgements on his time at City, which was the point of the above post.

Your assessment of his time at City hinges basically on that you think he needs more time to get more out of the players. With respect, I don't think time will make him change the way we play - and ultimately the way he wants us to play won't win us the league unless we sign another six world class players this summer.

 

[Damocles]

Based on what? He has a superb record elsewhere, so you must be making your judgements on his time at City, which was the point of the above post.

Your assessment of his time at City hinges basically on that you think he needs more time to get more out of the players. With respect, I don't think time will make him change the way we play - and ultimately the way he wants us to play won't win us the league unless we sign another six world class players this summer.

All managers change their style of play with time, however, I'd particularly be interested to hear why you believe that this style cannot currently win the league.

 

[im_still_here]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rKm5O3u-uY[/youtube]