two deals in process

[nmc]

Perhaps Mancini has divided his transfers targets into two - those where we have a real long term need (full back) and those where we have a short term need - central midfield. I guess in terms of his bonding with the squad he needs to be honest and justify why he is bringing in x or y. If he brings in Viera he can justify this to Ireland if he brings in Frank Lampard Ireland knows he has no future at the club.

Me like anyone else wants to sign lots of players but for the Manager (especially someone new in) its a difficult balancing act bringing in new players and keeping the rest of the squad happy (and motivated).

What greater motivation is there than competition for places?

Wholly agree but it is not always that simple. Look at Joe Hart from the moment Given arrived he was never going to play unless Given got injured or suffered a huge loss of form. We have managed this well by shipping Joe out on loan - but it demonstrates that whilst on the whole healthy competition is good it is not always the case.

 

[Project]

But long term we are looking to be in the Champions League, with potentially an extra 18 games to deal with. I think players accept squad rotation these days as a necessity.


Look at the amount of players United and Arsenal have... Uniteds central midfield alone contains Fletcher, Carrick, Anderson, Scholes, Hargreaves, Gibson, even Giggs.

 

[avoidconfusion]

But the problem right now is that we have almost our entire back four injured or unavailable (Toure, ACN) for at least the next 4 weeks.

 

[nmc]

But the problem right now is that we have almost our entire back four injured or unavailable (Toure, ACN) for at least the next 4 weeks.

Quite right but what does Mancini do - bring one great player to cover and provide long term competition or bring three or four in that might unbalance the whole squad once the African Cup of Nations is over. I guess the answer is a balance of impromements on what we have and a few stop gaps who can do a short term job for us.

 

[alera]

We need another cenre half, left back and right back end of story.

We only have Bridge at left back and hes injured, and if you class richards and nedum as centre half cover we only have one right back in Zabs, if richards for right back cover we would need another top central defender anyway. I also think medium to long term Nedum and Richards could end up being moved on, I like them and want them to get a chance and improve to be the players we need but the owners want everything done yesterday and they are not top 4 players at the moment IMO.

The situation on the ground is we only have one fully firt first choice defender at the moment (Zabs) Kompany is good at CH but is really a midfield player with the injuries and players we have missing we need some bodies fast really.

 

[levets]

Tolmies Hairdo.......

Had a nudge about Shawcross in and Benji out.... Can you expand further...?

 

[nmc]

Nothing against Shawcross but if we want this kind of no nonsense cenre back - why did we sell Dunnie?

 

[Trigger]

Nothing against Shawcross but if we want this kind of no nonsense cenre back - why did we sell Dunnie?

age? possibly!

and it was Hughes who got rid of Dunne.

 

[macmanson]

Nothing against Shawcross but if we want this kind of no nonsense cenre back - why did we sell Dunnie?

age? possibly!

and it was Hughes who got rid of Dunne.

I liked Hughes, but like most thought he was tactically naive at times given the players at his disposal. But these posts slagging him off are simply annoying/misinformed. It wasn't Hughes who got rid of Dunne. The decisions around which players were moved in or out were made by Hughes, Cook and Al Mubarak as a unit. That being said, it's kind of obvious who drove the notion of getting rid of Dunne. Cook was quoted as saying "China and India are gagging for football content to watch and we’re going to tell them that City is their content. We need a superstar to get through that door. Richard Dunne doesn’t roll off the tongue in Beijing. Ronaldinho brings access to major sponsors and financial reward”

Even Dunne himself stated that he believed he was run out of City by Cook. Hughes only comments about the issue were simply that Dunne wasn't forced out but chose to leave. It's not a fair criticism of Hughes to say he was responsible for Richard Dunne leaving.

 

[not my fault!]

age? possibly!

and it was Hughes who got rid of Dunne.

I liked Hughes, but like most thought he was tactically naive at times given the players at his disposal. But these posts slagging him off are simply annoying/misinformed. It wasn't Hughes who got rid of Dunne. The decisions around which players were moved in or out were made by Hughes, Cook and Al Mubarak as a unit. That being said, it's kind of obvious who drove the notion of getting rid of Dunne. Cook was quoted as saying "China and India are gagging for football content to watch and we’re going to tell them that City is their content. We need a superstar to get through that door. Richard Dunne doesn’t roll off the tongue in Beijing. Ronaldinho brings access to major sponsors and financial reward”

Even Dunne himself stated that he believed he was run out of City by Cook. Hughes only comments about the issue were simply that Dunne wasn't forced out but chose to leave. It's not a fair criticism of Hughes to say he was responsible for Richard Dunne leaving.

Fair first post (Welcome) but can I ask what was/is your role at the club ;0)