Time To Back The Manager...

[johnny crossan]

JC, you appear to be confusing opinion/view with agenda?

No confusion TH, the Cabal smear Mancini at every opportunity and they use the fans forums to feed the media bottom feeders, who in turn regurgitate their bile. One objective - undermine the manager and get him replaced by Mourinho. Simple and sordid as that.

You don't believe that do you ?

it's self-evident, no belief required.

 

[OB1]

He inherited 3 of the 4 best players in the world.

Not Craig Bellamy, Santa Cruz and Adebayor

So?

Would Guardiola have achieved what Mancini has at City, if he was appointed instead?

I think he would have had similar success, given the same budget. However, we aren't talking about taking over a team with Bellers etc in but one with Kun, Silva, Yaya etc and if, for whatever reason, we needed to replace Mancini, Pep and Jose would be at the top of my personal short-list.

 

[tolmie's hairdoo]

lie layered upon lie, you swallowed the baseless Cabal version whole.

JC, you appear to be confusing opinion/view with agenda?

No confusion TH, the Cabal smear Mancini at every opportunity and they use the fans forums to feed the media bottom feeders, who in turn regurgitate their bile. One objective - undermine the manager and get him replaced by Mourinho. Simple and sordid as that.

I'm not so sure it is as agenda-driven, spiteful as you say, JC.

There has been a shift on here in recent seasons of where you should stand.

But there are always shades of grey, a middle ground, a third way of thinking.

I know Didsbury Dave, Billy et al, bigger blues you couldn't wish to meet.

 

[Plain Speaking]

Mourinho has been lining up the United job for years now.

At present our rise is the biggest threat to United's future. However when FFP comes fully into effect United with their world wide reach and income will have more spending power than us.

If Mourinho says he is interested in coming here, he is likely to get the inside track on our future plans, if as expected he then goes to United our own management team we will have been undermined .

I agree with BillyShears "support the manager" and if some elements insist on make "contingency plans" IMO it should be done "in private" and not on a public forum.

 

[johnny crossan]

JC, you appear to be confusing opinion/view with agenda?

No confusion TH, the Cabal smear Mancini at every opportunity and they use the fans forums to feed the media bottom feeders, who in turn regurgitate their bile. One objective - undermine the manager and get him replaced by Mourinho. Simple and sordid as that.

I'm not so sure it is as agenda-driven, spiteful as you say, JC.
There has been a shift on here in recent seasons of where you should stand.
But there are always shades of grey, a middle ground, a third way of thinking.
I know Didsbury Dave, Billy et al, bigger blues you couldn't wish to meet.

I don't doubt they are devoted blues, but they were also painfully wrong about Mourinho coming and have been relentlessly against Mancini from that point forward. They want him out and replaced by Jose and continue to work for that aim.

 

[SWP's back]

JC, you appear to be confusing opinion/view with agenda?

No confusion TH, the Cabal smear Mancini at every opportunity and they use the fans forums to feed the media bottom feeders, who in turn regurgitate their bile. One objective - undermine the manager and get him replaced by Mourinho. Simple and sordid as that.

I'm not so sure it is as agenda-driven, spiteful as you say, JC.

There has been a shift on here in recent seasons of where you should stand.

But there are always shades of grey, a middle ground, a third way of thinking.

I know Didsbury Dave, Billy et al, bigger blues you couldn't wish to meet.

So was Swales

 

[twinkletoes]

No confusion TH, the Cabal smear Mancini at every opportunity and they use the fans forums to feed the media bottom feeders, who in turn regurgitate their bile. One objective - undermine the manager and get him replaced by Mourinho. Simple and sordid as that.

I'm not so sure it is as agenda-driven, spiteful as you say, JC.
There has been a shift on here in recent seasons of where you should stand.
But there are always shades of grey, a middle ground, a third way of thinking.
I know Didsbury Dave, Billy et al, bigger blues you couldn't wish to meet.

I don't doubt they are devoted blues, but they were also painfully wrong about Mourinho coming and have been relentlessly against Mancini from that point forward. They want him out and replaced by Jose and continue to work for that aim.

Got to go with Mr Crossan on this one. The cabal do have previous on this one

 

[Anonymous]

JC, you appear to be confusing opinion/view with agenda?

No confusion TH, the Cabal smear Mancini at every opportunity and they use the fans forums to feed the media bottom feeders, who in turn regurgitate their bile. One objective - undermine the manager and get him replaced by Mourinho. Simple and sordid as that.

I'm not so sure it is as agenda-driven, spiteful as you say, JC.

There has been a shift on here in recent seasons of where you should stand.

But there are always shades of grey, a middle ground, a third way of thinking.

I know Didsbury Dave, Billy et al, bigger blues you couldn't wish to meet.

You have to be all new levels of paranoid to believe the shit he's spouting.

Anyway, this thread wasn't supposed to be about Mourinho v Mancini or anything like that. I'd prefer it went back to the reason I started it than descend into a forum for the personal grievances of a few.

Seems the Tevez saga may finally be coming to an end. The figures being reported about Tevez > PSG are ridiculous, but it's safe to say that if we can make it happen, it should certainly give the club some piece of mind if their big worry in giving Mancini money to spend is the FFP regulations.<br /><br />-- Fri Jan 20, 2012 4:21 pm --<br /><br />

So was Swales

Right on cue.

 

[BobKowalski]

No need, and should cool their adour.

It's Groundhog Day around this time for past three season.

Bobby has delivered and I expect him to do so again.

Mourinho does what is best for him and reads the landscape better than anyone.

Our owners, however, should not be underestimated when it comes to being ruthless.

Ask Mark Hughes.

Well not that ruthless then. Ruthless would have seen Hughes sacked in the summer of '10. Very ruthless would have seen him sacked in December '09.

Mancini will be here as long as he delivers silverware and doesn't fall out with the powers that be. Playing good attractive football does him no harm either. That said I get no impression that Mansour is Abramovich where sacking the manager is the default option when displeased plus if we are interested in adhering to FFP then you need to look at coaches who are willing and prepared to bring academy prospects through to the first team which to date Mourinho has shown little inclination to do. Guardiola (for example) would be an interesting option bearing FFP in mind.

What is also clear and I assume is clear to the owners is that in addition to success on the pitch is the desirability of building a brand of football that is synonymous with City and builds a worldwide fanbase. Mancini has made a start with this and long may it continue because in the long run how you win is just as important to the identity of the club as winning itself and by identity I mean 'brand' and the ability to maximise revenues from merchandise/TV rights etc.

Mancini is here to establish solid foundations and a winning mentality. That he is demonstrably doing. How long he is here for is only important in the sense that the foundations are properly laid. Beyond that and as long as we have been sensible and established a culture and philosophy of football that not only brings success but is gorgeous to watch with an emphasis on bringing through academy players then debating how long Mancini is here for is irrelevant.

That said if we are to debate it, as we seemingly must, then it would be nice to discuss the merits or otherwise of other coaches other than Jose. Assuming we actually know any other coaches other than Mourinho that is.

Good post.

In terms of ruthlessness, it was more in regards the cack-handed way they eventually dispensed with Hughes' services.

Ruthless, all the same, in light of a QF Carling Cup victory over Arsenal and inspired win over Chelsea.

A debate on Guardiola's attributes outside of Barcelona would be a decent yarn.

It would be interesting to expand on the Mourinho/Mancini debate if only because City has evolved in the 2 years under Mancini and will continue to do so meaning that Jose may or may not be the right man for the job when Mancini finally leaves. It would also be refreshing to discuss what we would like to see City become, its style of play, philosophy and what other coaches are out there that would best suit.

The way we got rid of Hughes was cack handed because we dithered and we were not ruthless enough. The Arsenal and Chelsea results were irrelevant. Cook may have been slated for his trajectory explanation but he had a point and one off results should not mask a coache's deficiencies just as one off results or short term failure (ie Mancini failing to get CL qualification) should end in the sack. If you believe you have employed the right man then you allow for short term failure as long as you can see demonstrable improvements and ultimately tangible rewards in a 2 to 3 year span.

Jose waiting to take over from Mancini is old news. City has moved on. Jose is currently doing his best Captain Ahab impression. Circumstances have changed and will keep changing so let the debate reflect this.

 

[twinkletoes]

Guardiola is ten times the manager (and player) that Mourinho could ever be.

Guardiola represents everything good about football and honour whereas Mourinho is the antithesis of that.

The same goes for Messi and Ronaldo.