Wayne Bridge

[kaz7]

It worked out in his sacking.... no love for Mancini should cloud that if what bridge is saying is true, is bang out of order. You can separate the men from the boys without being a wanker. In that video with Micah, De Jong and Lescott, De Jong wasn’t speaking overly highly of Mancini either.

Tubes is a tube.

Well the only players who seem to have a problem with him were the troublesome ones or the ones that didn't get picked,most of them appreciated where he got them to,the players were soft and they didn't believe in themselves,they needed a leader,because bobby was a type a personality he wasn't going to last to long but boy he made his time count

 

[Silva Citizen]

After watching Tony Vaughan in that position believe me Bridge was world class. Compared to what we have today he was bang average. At the end of the day tho he was an honest player who at least appeared to try when he was on the pitch

 

[r.soleofsalford]

Bridge was a truly terrible player for us.

 

[cleavers]

Interesting interview with Wayne Bridge on the golf course with Tubes of soccer am,
for those not into golf skip to 19 minute 20 seconds where they talk about his time at City and the issues with Bobby.
Gives an idea of why some players hated him.

Its just as well he didn't hear what a lot of the fans called him.

 

[lmhblue1]

Can't think of many of our past players who have genuinely spoken well of Mancini in all honesty. Only Micah and Mario seem to have had an actual good relationship with him. Others who were top performers probably didn't have much of a problem, but that doesn't mean they particularly liked him. Lescott seems cold toward him. De Jong said he hated how much preferential treatment Mario got and how unfair it felt. Joe said something on his podcast like 'When he was good, he was good, but....' which implied that when he was bad he was really bad.

 

[Abattoir Blue]

Bridge's main problem at City was the expectation. We'd never had a good left back since Andy Hinchcliffe and here we were signing a current England international who played for a recent championship winning side.

When it became clear (for a variety of reasons) that he was a modest upgrade on Garrido rather than a new Roberto Carlos many fans were p*ssed off.

My take is:
1) he always put the effort in
2) he was better than Garrido
3) he didn't decide his price tag or wages
4) the transfer made logical sense at the time, even if it didn't really work out

Fair play to him.

 

[Abattoir Blue]

Can't think of many of our past players who have genuinely spoken well of Mancini in all honesty. Only Micah and Mario seem to have had an actual good relationship with him. Others who were top performers probably didn't have much of a problem, but that doesn't mean they particularly liked him. Lescott seems cold toward him. De Jong said he hated how much preferential treatment Mario got and how unfair it felt. Joe said something on his podcast like 'When he was good, he was good, but....' which implied that when he was bad he was really bad.

In the QPR game you can see him screaming 'f*ck you, f*ck you, f*ck you' to the whole team after the 2nd goes in.

Don't get me wrong, Bobby did a great job. Defence & organisation was unrecognizable from when he took over. We played very good football at times. Won trophies! And made some very astute signings (with the transfer team). His legacy is assured.

But (in retrospect) his personality always meant it was going to a short spell at City, mutiny would be inevitable.

 

[deano ou812]

Meh bridge was alright,my most memorable match was the bridge/terry handshake at Stamford bridge when tevez squared up to terry who shit himself and Craig Bellamy’s interview afterwards were he ripped into terry ...

 

[TheBlueDune]

When you hear all the stories it’s a miracle we won what we did with his treatment of players. Love Mancini for what he won. Twat of a bloke though

Still say the players downed tools in the Wigan cup final because of Mancini. No matter what they thought of him still can't forgive them for that.

 

[Corky]

Bridge's main problem at City was the expectation. We'd never had a good left back since Andy Hinchcliffw and here we were signing a current England international who played for a recent championship winning side.

When it became clear (for a variety of reasons) that he was a modest upgrade on Garrido rather than a new Roberto Carlos many fans were p*ssed off.

My take is:
1) he always put the effort in
2) he was better than Garrido
3) he didn't decide his price tag or wages
4) the transfer made logical sense at the time, even if it didn't really work out

Fair play to him.

Joe Royle said we didn't have a proper left back since Terry Phelan when he signed Lee Briscoe on loan. I think we had a few good ones like Jensen who did not last long but he went to a better team, the old guys Tarnat and Pearce, and fan fave Tiatto.

Ball was massively popular when he signed, but a team that goes from Phelan to David Brightwell then a succession of other centre backs was always going to be grateful.

Mancini had a habit of taking Bridge off for a midfielder/forward and then pushing Barry back in his place for a few games, I think that was the beginning of the end.