Bye bye Roberto Mancini ?
Comments
-
Exactly. No point in keeping someone who isn't the best for a long time just because things worked out well with Ferguson. He shouldn't have needed to strengthen in the summer with the money he had already been given. Being played off the pitch by Wigan is criminal.ShootersHillGuru said:Never mind the 60 million pound centre forward or the 30 million pound goalkeeper. The most important person at any club is the team manager. If he gets it right everything else falls into line. Mancini was given every tool possible in order for him to do a job for which he was earning a kings ransom and he couldn't deliver. He had to go.
0 -
To be fair, Wigan played Spurs off the pitch for the most part a few weeks back. Wigan are capable of playing very good football, its their back four that lets them down time and time again.Friend Or Defoe said:
Exactly. No point in keeping someone who isn't the best for a long time just because things worked out well with Ferguson. He shouldn't have needed to strengthen in the summer with the money he had already been given. Being played off the pitch by Wigan is criminal.ShootersHillGuru said:Never mind the 60 million pound centre forward or the 30 million pound goalkeeper. The most important person at any club is the team manager. If he gets it right everything else falls into line. Mancini was given every tool possible in order for him to do a job for which he was earning a kings ransom and he couldn't deliver. He had to go.
0 -
'Kin hell, poor bloke hasn't gone anywhere yet.0
-
Pelligrini is Chilean .. anyone but an Englishman it seems. I await the appointment of the first Tibetan to manage a Premier club. (Anyway Pelligrini hasn't yet got the job. I think Mourinho for cittteeeee is a distinct possibility)0
-
Is the correct answer! Wigan scored twice at home against Spuds and Swansea and took just one point from the six available - that's why they are going down.JohnBoyUK said:
To be fair, Wigan played Spurs off the pitch for the most part a few weeks back. Wigan are capable of playing very good football, its their back four that lets them down time and time again.Friend Or Defoe said:
Exactly. No point in keeping someone who isn't the best for a long time just because things worked out well with Ferguson. He shouldn't have needed to strengthen in the summer with the money he had already been given. Being played off the pitch by Wigan is criminal.ShootersHillGuru said:Never mind the 60 million pound centre forward or the 30 million pound goalkeeper. The most important person at any club is the team manager. If he gets it right everything else falls into line. Mancini was given every tool possible in order for him to do a job for which he was earning a kings ransom and he couldn't deliver. He had to go.
Stoke might be shite to watch - actually, they are shite to watch - but they have conceded 44 goals in 37 games, Wigan have conceded 67 in 36!
That's why Stoke are staying up and and Wigan are not.0 -
Man City were rubbish on Saturday - looked so unmotivated.0
-
It was the body language of kompany when he went 3 at the back and the noises from inside city in the press whenever they play 3 at the back and lose0
-
I'm not a fan of Mancini - I find him to be a big ball of negativity. He answers every quesiton with 'no...' regardless of whether he agrees or not!
If and when he goes, it'll push Sir Chris up to 17th in the list of longest serving managers in league football!0 -
I think Mancini is being a little harsh judged on here. Money doesn't win you trophies, there is a lot more that goes into it and if you think that given X amount wins you everything you're wrong. Impossible to judge regarding transfer policy because who knows at clubs like City and Chelsea whether it's the coaching staff or upstairs that decides on players.
CL is just ridiculous. How can you slate a team so much when they go out in a group of teams who are all domestic champions, the two who went through from the strongest leagues in the world. It's not like they're not in form in the CL either, the two who've gone through are semi finalists and finalists.
Back 3 I think he was trying to integrate slowly and get the players to adapt. This system works in Italy with both Juve and Napoli liking it, 3-5-2 and 3-4-2-1 respectively. Problem for City is the lack of competent CBs, meaning Clichy had to play there when they did try it out.
Maybe in the long term changing will be good but there needs to be some time to adapt. The progress City have made has been good under Mancini though, bar this year. Still feel it's incredibly harsh, this United team are very good and stayed relatively injury free. Buck has to stop with the players though IMO. Aguero been injured too much and even after a run of games couldn't get going, Hart/Tevez/Silva been poor by their standards, especially Hart who's been terrible.0 -
I think it's nice that if he does go they will appoint a manager with a similar name, so the fans don't have to change their song. Pellegrini, ohh, Pellegrini he comes from the capital of chile , he manages man city.0
-
Sponsored links:
-
I think you have a very quaint view. You say money doesn't win you trophies. I assume you are talking about the really big trophies that have been won since god was a lad by the very richest and most influential clubs in the world. Occasionally the monopoly is broken but that is usually down to an exceptional talent as manager eg. Mourinho at Porto a few years back and look what happened to him. Where did he end up ? At the very richest clubs in the world.Jaddick said:I think Mancini is being a little harsh judged on here. Money doesn't win you trophies, there is a lot more that goes into it and if you think that given X amount wins you everything you're wrong. Impossible to judge regarding transfer policy because who knows at clubs like City and Chelsea whether it's the coaching staff or upstairs that decides on players.
CL is just ridiculous. How can you slate a team so much when they go out in a group of teams who are all domestic champions, the two who went through from the strongest leagues in the world. It's not like they're not in form in the CL either, the two who've gone through are semi finalists and finalists.
Back 3 I think he was trying to integrate slowly and get the players to adapt. This system works in Italy with both Juve and Napoli liking it, 3-5-2 and 3-4-2-1 respectively. Problem for City is the lack of competent CBs, meaning Clichy had to play there when they did try it out.
Maybe in the long term changing will be good but there needs to be some time to adapt. The progress City have made has been good under Mancini though, bar this year. Still feel it's incredibly harsh, this United team are very good and stayed relatively injury free. Buck has to stop with the players though IMO. Aguero been injured too much and even after a run of games couldn't get going, Hart/Tevez/Silva been poor by their standards, especially Hart who's been terrible.
0 -
I don't think he's too great at man management...Fergie is, CP is etc, etc.0
-
Mundell Fleming said:
Good article in the Times this morning on the decision to axe Mancini - in The Game supplement. It's the right move for City. Perhaps Mancini will learn something from the experience, but I doubt it somehow.
If Mancini were losing his job as a result of a knee jerk reaction by short-termist owners simply reflecting the failure to land a trophy this season then I would agree with you entirely.Ormiston Addick said:Yeah, great move, dump Mancini for another Italian who has never been involved in the English game, really visionary stuff.
English football at its worst and Lord Fergie must be laughing his Scottish bollocks off as he rides into the Sunset.
Man City and Chelsea can have all the money in the world but they have no class and never will under their current owners.
However, I really don't believe this is the case and the article in today's Times, which I refer to above, provides an interesting perspective. It suggests that City's owners have agonised for some time over whether to retain Mancini, citing his confrontational style as a major concern amongst other things not directly related to short-term results on the pitch.
There is no evidence I can see, at least so far, that City's owners lack "class" and comparisons with the dysfunctional regime at Chelsea are at best very premature.0 -
Er, from what I remember a certain Mr. Brian Clough, Mr. George Graham, Mr. Jose Mourinho and Mr. Alex Ferguson all had 'confrontational styles' and all had extraordinary long-term success because by managing in that style they were able to establish that THEY were the boss and not the players.Mundell Fleming said:Mundell Fleming said:Good article in the Times this morning on the decision to axe Mancini - in The Game supplement. It's the right move for City. Perhaps Mancini will learn something from the experience, but I doubt it somehow.
If Mancini were losing his job as a result of a knee jerk reaction by short-termist owners simply reflecting the failure to land a trophy this season then I would agree with you entirely.Ormiston Addick said:Yeah, great move, dump Mancini for another Italian who has never been involved in the English game, really visionary stuff.
English football at its worst and Lord Fergie must be laughing his Scottish bollocks off as he rides into the Sunset.
Man City and Chelsea can have all the money in the world but they have no class and never will under their current owners.
However, I really don't believe this is the case and the article in today's Times, which I refer to above, provides an interesting perspective. It suggests that City's owners have agonised for some time over whether to retain Mancini, citing his confrontational style as a major concern amongst other things not directly related to short-term results on the pitch.
There is no evidence I can see, at least so far, that City's owners lack "class" and comparisons with the dysfunctional regime at Chelsea are at best very premature.
By dumping Mancini the City management have given the nod to the players that if they don't like the manager or aren't getting on with him then just wait a while and he'll be sacked anyway.
Once you start down this route there is no way back.0 -
Going once, Going Twice.....GONE! http://www.mcfc.co.uk/News/Club-news/2013/May/Club-statement-13-May-20130
-
@SkySportsNews: Manchester City sack Roberto Mancini #SSN0
-
Just went onto that page and would you believe it.StubleyAddick said:Going once, Going Twice.....GONE! http://www.mcfc.co.uk/News/Club-news/2013/May/Club-statement-13-May-2013
Wifi to be installed at the etihad. Unbelievable
0 -
to be honest if you take off Tevez and bring on Jack Rodwell in a cup final when your team needs a goal then you deserve everything you get0
-
0 -
Ok I misspoke I meant to say it's not the only thing. Obviously money is an important factor but to purely say you should win everything and it should be easy to win the PL is wrong. Mancini is a very good manager and if you put others in his position very few would likely come out with a better outcome.ShootersHillGuru said:
I think you have a very quaint view. You say money doesn't win you trophies. I assume you are talking about the really big trophies that have been won since god was a lad by the very richest and most influential clubs in the world. Occasionally the monopoly is broken but that is usually down to an exceptional talent as manager eg. Mourinho at Porto a few years back and look what happened to him. Where did he end up ? At the very richest clubs in the world.
City have made astonishing progress under him and to dismiss his managerial capabilities due to his resources is odd. He used the same system as last year for 90% of the games played but top scorer was Tevez with 13 less goals than Aguero had last season. His players didn't play and you can't solely blame it on him.
The fact United only have 1 point less now than the amount they finished on last season and City STILL won the title shows how exceptional they were (some calling this one of the best United teams ever), and to sack him exactly a year on is a pretty harsh move. Who knows though, could end up being a good move.
0 -
Sponsored links:
-
Surprised they have done it before the end of the season. Goes to show that the Cup final maybe was a bigger deal to the board than many assumed.0
-
Live by the sword, die by the sword! for the manager and the club...Ormiston Addick said:
Er, from what I remember a certain Mr. Brian Clough, Mr. George Graham, Mr. Jose Mourinho and Mr. Alex Ferguson all had 'confrontational styles' and all had extraordinary long-term success because by managing in that style they were able to establish that THEY were the boss and not the players.Mundell Fleming said:Mundell Fleming said:Good article in the Times this morning on the decision to axe Mancini - in The Game supplement. It's the right move for City. Perhaps Mancini will learn something from the experience, but I doubt it somehow.
If Mancini were losing his job as a result of a knee jerk reaction by short-termist owners simply reflecting the failure to land a trophy this season then I would agree with you entirely.Ormiston Addick said:Yeah, great move, dump Mancini for another Italian who has never been involved in the English game, really visionary stuff.
English football at its worst and Lord Fergie must be laughing his Scottish bollocks off as he rides into the Sunset.
Man City and Chelsea can have all the money in the world but they have no class and never will under their current owners.
However, I really don't believe this is the case and the article in today's Times, which I refer to above, provides an interesting perspective. It suggests that City's owners have agonised for some time over whether to retain Mancini, citing his confrontational style as a major concern amongst other things not directly related to short-term results on the pitch.
There is no evidence I can see, at least so far, that City's owners lack "class" and comparisons with the dysfunctional regime at Chelsea are at best very premature.
By dumping Mancini the City management have given the nod to the players that if they don't like the manager or aren't getting on with him then just wait a while and he'll be sacked anyway.
Once you start down this route there is no way back.
Man City jammy to win the title last season, Mancini "took over" from Hughes when they were already on track... great names / great players but as a team and a club... no thanks
They have followed Blackburn, Newcastle (missed) Chelsea in throwing money at it... I mean FFS £30M for each and every player ... and then lose to Wigan in the Cup Final and watch (not chase) as Man U casually call on a couple of 38 year olds and beat everyone 1-0
If you want to quote stability and management then look at Swansea, Everton, West Brom, Norwich... build value / have values and hopefully CAFC can play this game too!0 -
What odds Laudrup for the job?
They could do a lot worse
Think the fellas got a big future in the management game myself.0 -
http://sulia.com/channel/manchester-city-fc/f/5cbe5aaa-0ed1-4d16-9a0c-29958225da31/
Interesting profile on the Chilian0 -
£28m pay off from Man City WTF !!!!0
-
Not progressing from the Group stages in the Champions League twice is poor.0
-
if Mancini finds another club soon then he 'only' gets 1 years money.
"Mancini had four years remaining on his contract but the former Inter Milan manager’s pay-off will be limited to 12 months’ salary should he get another job immediately. Under the severance terms of the five-year contract he signed last summer, Mancini is set to receive an initial sum of £7.5m, which will be topped up for every month that he is out of work"
Looks like City have cleared the decks though. Everyone from Mancini down to the under 18 coaches have all been sacked.0 -
have they given Platt the elbow as well?
0 -
7.5m a year to not have a job does sound quite nice.
0
