What's the difference between Mancini and Ferguson?

[tonycoleman]

No seriously......,

The purpose of this thread is not to come out with all the tired old worn cliches,... Baconface, Slur Alex, Whisky nose etc.....



Is it years of experience?

Luck?

The "hairdryer" and fear factor?

Respect?

Instilling in the players play to the final whistle and not lose concentration?

Tactics?

I am sure if Fergie was in charge of our lot, within three months they would be playing like a well drilled TEAM, and ANYONE who wasn't pulling their weight would be out of the door sharpish.

Making average players play great.

And making great players play brilliantly.

And consistently.

It's called man-management, and it is the one thing that defines the good managers from the great managers.

Baconface does whatever he has to do to get a result... while Mancini has a view of the game that he will not deviate from. And it's that inflexibility and obstinacy that can be either brilliant or a disaster.

Some times that approach works... particularly with "smaller" teams (Clough springs to mind) but cannot be as easily replicated at the "bigger" clubs when players react against it.

And this argument is solely concerned with his time at City. What he did previously is of little concern here.

-- Tue Apr 12, 2011 8:54 pm --

He was nearly sacked!

Who was?

There is absolutely no evidence of him nearly getting the sack at the swamp...

its well known mark robins saved his job

can i just say Theres been a Murrderr - Taggart style

 

[i kne albert davy]

Red nose had 5 seasons to turn united into a decent team, Mancini has 1/2 seasons and a hell of a lot more money.

Nonsense, Fergie was signing the likes of Pallister for £2.3million (at the time the most expensive English central defender, Steve Bruce for nearly £1million and Neil Webb for £1.5million - he was spending money alright and it took Fergie FIVE years for the first piece of silverware.

In his third season he took them from 2nd to mid table. Undoubtedly had this message board (for the rags) been in existence the clamour for him to be sacked would have been palpable

The difference is that he now has full control and the security of his knowing his position is rock solid - that means that players know there will only be one winner at the rags and that is Fergie because his position is rock solid.

Fortunately for the powers that be at OT they had the foresight to recognise they had a good man and to give him the TIME to shape the club and make a massive cultural shift which is what is needed at our club.

The likes of Milner (who's not playing regularly) will play to the gallery to feed any anti-Mancini sentiment and that all serves to undermine the power the manager can wield.

Sadly our fans are not willing to afford any of our managers the time that is needed.

The three most successful clubs in recent years Liverpoo; (in their heyday), the rags and Arsenal have all had one thing and that is stability in management. We need to learn lessons from history.

If only we'd kept faith with Frank Clark we'd rule the football world now.

 

[Numptyed]

about 25 trophys and 1000 bottles of scotch.

 

[avoidconfusion]

In a nutshell?

Ferguson is a good manager. Mancini isn't.

 

[Amargo]

is it that fergiescum is an obnoxious old alky rag tramp wanker?

So eloquently young man....

Fool

 

[Soulboy]

Making average players play great.

And making great players play brilliantly.

And consistently.

It's called man-management, and it is the one thing that defines the good managers from the great managers.

Baconface does whatever he has to do to get a result... while Mancini has a view of the game that he will not deviate from. And it's that inflexibility and obstinacy that can be either brilliant or a disaster.

Some times that approach works... particularly with "smaller" teams (Clough springs to mind) but cannot be as easily replicated at the "bigger" clubs when players react against it.

And this argument is solely concerned with his time at City. What he did previously is of little concern here.

-- Tue Apr 12, 2011 8:54 pm --



Who was?

There is absolutely no evidence of him nearly getting the sack at the swamp...

its well known mark robins saved his job

can i just say Theres been a Murrderr - Taggart style

"Well known"... what does that mean?

Something the press wrote about?

Or did the board actually come out and say that?

Every interview Martin Edwards has given confirms the fact that they were never considering sacking Ferguson had he lost at Forest.

Do you actually have other evidence to prove your point that it was "well known"? OIr are you relying on unsubstantiated gossip?

 

[Failsworth_Blue]

Ferguson is an outstanding manager who has been around for a long time, Mancini is a good manager who still has a lot to learn

 

[moomba]

Power.

Baconface, Slur Alex, Whisky nose etc..... has ultimate power there, like it or not 99% of his team are at what they consider is the best club they could be at. And if they cross him, they will be out. In effect they have to fight to stay at the club every day. And when he tells you to do something, or play a certain way, they will do it.

A percentage of ours are too comfortable, they see the club as a stepping stone and wouldn't be too bothered if they don't spend the rest of their careers here. That will change. Some of our players think they are more powerful than the manager (and the manager before, and the manager before), that will also change.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

One's a drunken cheating odious repellent purple nosed bully and the other one is Italian.

 

[mike channon´s windmill]

its well known mark robins saved his job

can i just say Theres been a Murrderr - Taggart style

"Well known"... what does that mean?

Something the press wrote about?

Or did the board actually come out and say that?

Every interview Martin Edwards has given confirms the fact that they were never considering sacking Ferguson had he lost at Forest.

Do you actually have other evidence to prove your point that it was "well known"? OIr are you relying on unsubstantiated gossip?

Of course the bent buthchers son would say that after success arrived. Lets say the perceived wisdom was that considering Fat Ron had actually won something in less time AND got sacked , Whiskey nose would have had a worse record after 4 years in charge. Edwards is a fookin serial liar btw. You´re right in a way that no-one knows the exact truth but come on I remember the papers were full of it at the time