This could be one of the truest Articles of the season......

Didsbury Dave said:
Neville Kneville said:
So the consensus then is that Adebayor IS better than Drogba, Tevez IS better than Rooney, it doesn't make any difference if your side has been together for several years & any club that spends money should be able to go straight into the top 4 without a struggle.

That seems reasonable.

Drogba, Rooney and Lampard are three of the top 10 players in the premiership. I could make an argument that Shay Given and Stephen Ireland would be in that top ten, or very close.

The top 4 clubs each have a couple of these world class players surrounded by other reliable, top class internationals. So have we. Comparing like for like in isolation doesn't work: Ngog is no Adebayor, Carrick is no IReland, Hargreaves is no De Jong, Cole is no Robinho.

Our squad is as good as most of the top 4.

You saved me the job Dave.

I can't believe people have swallowed this tripe so easily. I'm not concerned by Brennan's footballing allegiance and have not been disturbed one bit by his previous articles. This however, is sickeningly fawning of the management and unnecessarily critical of the players.
 
Didsbury Dave said:
Neville Kneville said:
So the consensus then is that Adebayor IS better than Drogba, Tevez IS better than Rooney, it doesn't make any difference if your side has been together for several years & any club that spends money should be able to go straight into the top 4 without a struggle.

That seems reasonable.

Drogba, Rooney and Lampard are three of the top 10 players in the premiership. I could make an argument that Shay Given and Stephen Ireland would be in that top ten, or very close.

The top 4 clubs each have a couple of these world class players surrounded by other reliable, top class internationals. So have we. Comparing like for like in isolation doesn't work: Ngog is no Adebayor, Carrick is no IReland, Hargreaves is no De Jong, Cole is no Robinho.

Our squad is as good as most of the top 4.

Our squad is better than most of the top 4. We do however lack the real world class matchwinners that each of the top 4 have. We also lack players who win games from set pieces, they all have several. We lack defenders who organise their team mates when the shit comes on top. Most of all we lack the understanding that comes from playing together over time. In spite of all these inadequacies, we're nowhere even close to being out of the battle & still won't be even if we lose the next few games. It's a long season & we can be right in the thick of it at the end IF we don't tear ourselves apart.
 
2 decent articles - this in the MEN and the Winter one in the Telegragh both addressing all the issues and problems - written by people with access to players, to people within football, to other professional observers etc etc
Still the Hughes Outs don't even stop to think and re-assess - straight in with insults about the authors and accusing the club of propaganda.
 
The most cringe-worthy part of that article is the 'Chelsea have lost double to amount of games that City have' bit.....FFS they have however many points more than us and are easily the best team in the country. Talk about clutching at straws.

I think people need to realise there is a difference between not being satisfied with our current run of form against opposition we should beat, and as one post said 'going on like its division 2 again.'
 
Neville Kneville said:
Didsbury Dave said:
Drogba, Rooney and Lampard are three of the top 10 players in the premiership. I could make an argument that Shay Given and Stephen Ireland would be in that top ten, or very close.

The top 4 clubs each have a couple of these world class players surrounded by other reliable, top class internationals. So have we. Comparing like for like in isolation doesn't work: Ngog is no Adebayor, Carrick is no IReland, Hargreaves is no De Jong, Cole is no Robinho.

Our squad is as good as most of the top 4.

Our squad is better than most of the top 4. We do however lack the real world class matchwinners that each of the top 4 have. We also lack players who win games from set pieces, they all have several. We lack defenders who organise their team mates when the shit comes on top. Most of all we lack the understanding that comes from playing together over time. In spite of all these inadequacies, we're nowhere even close to being out of the battle & still won't be even if we lose the next few games. It's a long season & we can be right in the thick of it at the end IF we don't tear ourselves apart.

Are we including Spurs in that Top 4? If we are, then Hughes has not got a leg to stand on.
 
GaudinoMotors said:
2 decent articles - this in the MEN and the Winter one in the Telegragh both addressing all the issues and problems - written by people with access to players, to people within football, to other professional observers etc etc
Still the Hughes Outs don't even stop to think and re-assess - straight in with insults about the authors and accusing the club of propaganda.

Forget the professional observers fella, or the views of Hacks, or 'other' people in football, all that matters is the views of thousands of Blue's and at the moment, the view of Hughes tenure and the job he is doing is not a good one!

One day they will back him, the next demand his head, then they will heap praise on our owners patience, then when he does go, they will delight in slating our owners for knowing nothing about football!
 
Neville Kneville said:
Didsbury Dave said:
Drogba, Rooney and Lampard are three of the top 10 players in the premiership. I could make an argument that Shay Given and Stephen Ireland would be in that top ten, or very close.

The top 4 clubs each have a couple of these world class players surrounded by other reliable, top class internationals. So have we. Comparing like for like in isolation doesn't work: Ngog is no Adebayor, Carrick is no IReland, Hargreaves is no De Jong, Cole is no Robinho.

Our squad is as good as most of the top 4.

Our squad is better than most of the top 4. We do however lack the real world class matchwinners that each of the top 4 have. We also lack players who win games from set pieces, they all have several. We lack defenders who organise their team mates when the shit comes on top. Most of all we lack the understanding that comes from playing together over time. In spite of all these inadequacies, we're nowhere even close to being out of the battle & still won't be even if we lose the next few games. It's a long season & we can be right in the thick of it at the end IF we don't tear ourselves apart.

So surely it was in Hughes' interest to assemble a squad that ticks these boxes then?
 
mike24 said:
The most cringe-worthy part of that article is the 'Chelsea have lost double to amount of games that City have' bit.....FFS they have however many points more than us and are easily the best team in the country. Talk about clutching at straws.

I think people need to realise there is a difference between not being satisfied with our current run of form against opposition we should beat, and as one post said 'going on like its division 2 again.'

Yeah it was me who said that. Other than the Hull game, perhaps the Burnley one too, why 'should' we be beating teams? Is it cos of the money we've spent? I don't think we should expect rock all to be honest, as those players need to get onto each others games and that will take time. I look at it like this. We lost to Villa, Wigan and Fulham last season, but we took points this season, progression. Burnely are going to get erratic results like that, as they are doing a Hull from last season, and fair play to them too. Hull is the only one I would say we had a right to win, because last season we shit all over them and so based on that, and with the players we have, we should have beaten them. Yes, many will say about how shit it was losing a 2-0 lead to Fulham and to go behind so shit to Burnley, but like I say last season we lost to Fulham, this season we didn't, and slow as it maybe, that is still factually noted as progression, as it is 1 point more than we got out of that game last season. Next season, with the players 1 full year into each others games, we should be beating Fulham, Hull, Burnley et al, at home. That is why I think Hughes needs this season, and half of next, at least, to get the ball rolling.
 
EddH said:
It is full of painful truthes, and non rational thinking, all this from the M.E.N. ???

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co...ty/s/1184518_snipers_are_quick_on_the_trigger
MARK Hughes is rapidly discovering the madness of life at the sharp end of the Premier League.

He must be the first City manager in history to reach December with one defeat in all competitions - and still be backed for the sack in some quarters!

In fact, Hughes is the ONLY manager in City's history to reach December with one defeat, even if that impressive statistic has been buried beneath the avalanche of frustration brought on by seven successive draws.

It is with some irony that Arsenal and Chelsea should be the next two visitors to Eastlands, for games which some snipers would have you believe are make-or-break for the Blues boss.

Arsene Wenger's bright young things are being trumpeted as evidence of the purity of the Gunners' ethos, a tribute to their dedication to youth.

And yet a quick glance at the weekend starting line-ups reveals that in the team destroyed by Chelsea on Sunday, Arsenal did not have one player who had joined them before his 16th birthday. City had three in their XI against Hull.

That kind of bare stat did not stop Arsenal chief executive Ivan Gazidis making an abortive ascent of the moral high ground, taking pot-shots at the new money of City and Chelsea along the way.

"We believe that success which is built is more significant, more meaningful and ultimately, more important than success which is bought," said the Gunners supremo.

If they had had any money left after buying a spanking new stadium, presumably Arsenal would have given it to the poor and needy, otherwise known as Liverpool.

We are being told by the high and mighty at certain Sunday newspapers that, if City don't dismiss Arsenal and then achieve a good result against Chelsea, Hughes' job is on the line.

Wenger saw his team dismantled by Chelsea on Sunday. And yet the prospect of them also losing to City tomorrow night does not provoke any kind of howls for the studious Frenchman to be tipped from his seat.

Even though the fragile Gunners have also been turned over by United, City and Sunderland this season.

Yet Hughes' side, being dismissed as under-achievers in some quarters, are just three points behind them, having already beaten them, and beaten them well.

That brings us to Chelsea, who skipper John Terry says feel "unbeatable." Any City fan in possession of an anorak could point out that the "unbeatables" have lost precisely twice as many games as the Blues this season.

To describe Hughes' fate as hinging on a clash with Chelsea - possibly the best all-round team on the planet right now - is ludicrous.

This is a team who have already beaten Arsenal, Liverpool and United, three clubs which have the benefit of several years of the experience which survival at the top of the Premier League brings, and of the cash which the Champions League brings.

The task facing Hughes and City this season is not to be wiping the floor with Chelsea, but to scramble and fight their way into a position from which they truly can compete with the top teams

If Hughes can finish fourth this season, he should be Manager of the Year by a country mile. But look at the £200m he has spent, comes the cry.

Money alone solves nothing. If you splash out on an old ramshackle farmhouse, it still takes time, patience and prolonged attention to detail, as well as hard cash, before it becomes a home.

And when you buy that farmhouse, you don't have the problem that the best fixtures and fittings are unavailable because they prefer the swanky mansions, just down the road.

To expect Hughes to storm the Premier League top four, armed only with wads of dough, is preposterous.

The City manager has spent well, but the top, top players who win you a Champions League place and then keep it, have still eluded the Blues.

It is a vicious circle. Until you are in the Champions League, you cannot hope to attract the Kakas, the John Terrys, the Steven Gerrards, the Xabi Alonsos.

People have made the mistake this season of treating City as a peer of United, Chelsea, Liverpool and Arsenal, by dint of wealth alone.

That mistake was intensified by the Blues' good start to the season, when Blackburn, Wolves, Portsmouth and Arsenal were all beaten, and the expectation hit volcanic levels.

City have attracted very good players, but the lack of Champions League football has meant they have been unable to lure the best, even though the knowledge of their wealth and ambition has meant they have paid top dollar for the players they have bought.

It should be noted that Wayne Bridge and Shaun Wright-Phillips - two excellent players and England internationals - are at City because they were surplus to requirements at Chelsea.

Joleon Lescott could yet prove Hughes right when he said the £24m buy could become the best defender in the Premier League. Yet, at the moment, he is not a Terry, or a Nemanja Vidic.

Similarly, for all their talents and potential, Emmanuel Adebayor is not Didier Drogba, Carlos Tevez is not Wayne Rooney, and Stevie Ireland is not Frank Lampard.

Claiming that fourth spot, and/or reaching a domestic cup final would be a major achievement for Hughes, and give the club a real foundation, rather than one based on the size of their bank balance.

Now is not the time for moaning and groaning. These are two big games for the Blues, and both Hughes and his players need and deserve the support of the fans.

It is a time for calm heads and clear vision, and a sight of the bigger picture, both on and off the field.
A clear vision and sight of the bigger picture would surely mean viewing these players as intermeadiate vessels to a brighter future and maybe Hughes as the hod carrier handing over to the brick layer.
 
Pigeonho said:
Ok, i take those points, but if you had a choice, what would those 'required changes' be?


Well, realistically there is a big possibility that Hughes will be given until seasons end (although if we continue to regress i will be amazed if the owners dont take action sooner), but my worry is that if he does get till the end and City end up out of the CL spots and even worse out of the Europa spot, where the f*ck can he expect sign any players that will take us to a higher level than those he has signed already.

I like you, thought he signed vey well and was genuinly hopefull that we could poss do a top4 with those players. But if this fails, he has absolutely nowhere else to go when it come to new signings.

So ofr me, lets do sooner rather than later what is becoming increasingly inevitable and get a manger in that can also bring big name players almost regardless of the position we are in the league.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.