When it matters, he can not deliver!

[Florida Blue]

For fucks sake..any fucking article form that paper that DOESN'T FIT WITH ONES AGENDA is bullshit is it !!! It is common fuckign knowledge that Mourhino is not happy where he is and it is also common knowledge that he misses managing in England.

I fucking hate it when someone knocks a tabloid over a story that they dont like so diss it as nonsense....there are many storied in SPain itself that claim Mourinho wants out.

I don't doubt for 1 minute that Jose is unhappy where he is or that he would consider coming back to England.

I think we both know that the clubs he is being linked with are pure guess work and speculation.

Not sure what you mean about dismissing articles that don't fit my agenda, I have never made any secret of the fact that the Sun isn't worth wiping my arse on and I never believe a word they say. I thought most people felt the same.

The sun like most papers exaggerate any article for sensationalism as is par the course for any fucking paper.....but its not just the Sun that came with this story....Spain is rife with suspicions that he will leave and even MOURINHO has been quoted as saying he wants to come back to the prem !!!!...

my point being you said why would he come to us..get into the real world.......I think its wiser to find out from other sources before you make a statement like you did.

If we did get Mourinho in how long would you give him to bring success before you wanted him sacked?

I'll answer that and start it now: Jose OUT!

[Im_Spartacus]

For fucks sake..any fucking article form that paper that DOESN'T FIT WITH ONES AGENDA is bullshit is it !!! It is common fuckign knowledge that Mourhino is not happy where he is and it is also common knowledge that he misses managing in England.

I fucking hate it when someone knocks a tabloid over a story that they dont like so diss it as nonsense....there are many storied in SPain itself that claim Mourinho wants out.

I don't doubt for 1 minute that Jose is unhappy where he is or that he would consider coming back to England.

I think we both know that the clubs he is being linked with are pure guess work and speculation.

Not sure what you mean about dismissing articles that don't fit my agenda, I have never made any secret of the fact that the Sun isn't worth wiping my arse on and I never believe a word they say. I thought most people felt the same.

The sun like most papers exaggerate any article for sensationalism as is par the course for any fucking paper.....but its not just the Sun that came with this story....Spain is rife with suspicions that he will leave and even MOURINHO has been quoted as saying he wants to come back to the prem !!!!...

my point being you said why would he come to us..get into the real world.......I think its wiser to find out from other sources before you make a statement like you did.

If we did get Mourinho in how long would you give him to bring success before you wanted him sacked?

I would want Jose sacked the day he sends a team out that don't look interested. Using the same criteria Mancini wouldnt have even made it to the end of January last season.

[Im_Spartacus]

I've stated elsewhere that my preferred choice would be Reikjard.
But I'll settle for anyone who sends us out with the mental attitude that we are better than the opposition and we're going to wipe the floor with them.

I know only one manager who can install that attitude into his players, and that is Jose. Well,Taggart too, but he's out of the equation. Jose would also grant us one or two trophies the same season he comes, of that I'm absolutely sure; but his style is not the most entertaining to watch, and he would leave after max two seasons.

We should be playing better football than we currently are, and I can't understand, since Mancini had us playing good footabll in some games this season, why he hasn't kept that up. However I'm not convinced that Rijkaard is a good replacement, he won everything with a Barca team which would have won even managed by a five years old, then where is he now? Managing Fenerbahce, if I'm not mistaken. One has to wonder why nobody of the big guns who changed manager recently has approached him (I'm thinking of Juve, Milan, Liverpool).

I guess the ideal replacement from an entertainment pov would be Guardiola, but the question is, can he replicate the Barca style somewhere else with lesser players? It's a big question, tbf.

If you gave him about 6 years & completely ignored the results then yes. Otherwise no.

Its not possible to recreate what they have at Barca. Johan Cryuff has been working for over 15 years to bring through the youngsters playing the Barcelona style from 6 years old. By 18-20 years old these players know no different, they have been drilled to be aware, to pass and to move in a way that no other 18-20 year old at any other club in the world is able.

Guardiola would most likely be an average manager at any other club in the world - at Barcelona it is all setup for him to succeed.

[CityFanFromRome]

Its not possible to recreate what they have at Barca. Johan Cryuff has been working for over 15 years to bring through the youngsters playing the Barcelona style from 6 years old. By 18-20 years old these players know no different, they have been drilled to be aware, to pass and to move in a way that no other 18-20 year old at any other club in the world is able.

Guardiola would most likely be an average manager at any other club in the world - at Barcelona it is all setup for him to succeed.

I agree; but going down this route, if we want to play like they do we should do the same and start drilling our youngsters to pass and move that way, etc. It would take us ten years at least to produce the first batch of academy players drilled this way, but eventually we would get there. The problem is, what do we do with the first team in the meantime? Because if we apply the same long term vision to it, there's always going to be someone not pleased by the results (which won't be great at first) or the way we play (which again at first will be all wrong as the team needs to learn the way everyone should move, pass, etc.).

[Im_Spartacus]

Its not possible to recreate what they have at Barca. Johan Cryuff has been working for over 15 years to bring through the youngsters playing the Barcelona style from 6 years old. By 18-20 years old these players know no different, they have been drilled to be aware, to pass and to move in a way that no other 18-20 year old at any other club in the world is able.

Guardiola would most likely be an average manager at any other club in the world - at Barcelona it is all setup for him to succeed.

I agree; but going down this route, if we want to play like they do we should do the same and start drilling our youngsters to pass and move that way, etc. It would take us ten years at least to produce the first batch of academy players drilled this way, but eventually we would get there. The problem is, what do we do with the first team in the meantime? Because if we apply the same long term vision to it, there's always going to be someone not pleased by the results (which won't be great at first) or the way we play (which again at first will be all wrong as the team needs to learn the way everyone should move, pass, etc.).

This is one subject where I have really strong opinions on how a football club should be run, and I think it is very relevant to Mancini. Around 15 years ago, Cryuff decided that Barcelona needed to be completely overhauled. His vision was that everything at the club should be geared to producing a "Barcelona " style. That meant that in the future, youth players would be able to slot straight into the first team with minimal adjustment needed, and where the role of manager is actually that of head coach, he simply picks the team and makes tweaks on match day.

The situation we have here with City looked like at first, Hughes was going to try to emulate this. He tore everything up and started again. I was a little surprised, as my understanding was that Carrington had been thoroughly overhauled under Keegan, then Pearce etc etc. But what I wasnt comfortable with was that a serving manager was doing this. I believe that for a long term vision, someone of the stature of Cryuff, who knows how football should be played, should come in and build the youth infrastructure from the ground up, and instill a style of play at ever level, which eventually will translate through to the first team. Its not about pretty football, its about continuity regardless who the manager is. The reason I wasnt comfortable with Hughes doing it, and subsequently Mancini is precisely because managers will tend to have a short tenure, then the whole lot goes back to the drawing board whcih is a fucking ridiculous situation to have.

I believe that the role of Manager of Manchester City should be focusing on one thing and one thing only, preparing his team for weekend. We gave control of far too many things to Hughes and Mancini, and as a result each subsequent manager will keep destroying what the previous one (rightly or wrongly) created.

Therefore when the next manager comes in we have a choice. As the richest club in the world with a fantastic squad, do we let the manager dictate what does and doesnt happen in the club as a whole and the youth academy, or do we tell the manager that the club have a long term view that they are sticking to, and youth development /club infrastructure will not be the managers remit in any way shape or form.

It would be difficult to impose this on a serving manager, but very simple to impose on a new one - and in Europe it is entirely normal because the head coach is there only to coach and to be responsible for the senior squad and matchday. The types of dynasty that Fergie has is not something that can be recreated, but because Fergie has control of everything, every 2 bit wanker of a manager wants the same thing, but on the balance of probability they arent going to be at the same club in 5 years let alone 25.

We have already seemingly introduced transfers by committee, which I think is a right thing to do as managers are notoriously bad at spending other peoples money, however I feel that again, undue influence has been held by Hughes and Mancini, which are evidenced by the likes of Santa Cruz under Hughes, and most of Mancini's signings. We brought in Brian Marwood to oversee things on the football side, but his role is still unclear.

What I am proposing may be what City have in mind, but things like Santa Cruz, like not having a set style of play consistently throughout the club would suggest that we are only doing in half heartedly if at all, and that the managers still have undue influence on things they shouldnt be meddling with

[Ted Hughes]

Its not possible to recreate what they have at Barca. Johan Cryuff has been working for over 15 years to bring through the youngsters playing the Barcelona style from 6 years old. By 18-20 years old these players know no different, they have been drilled to be aware, to pass and to move in a way that no other 18-20 year old at any other club in the world is able.

Guardiola would most likely be an average manager at any other club in the world - at Barcelona it is all setup for him to succeed.

I agree; but going down this route, if we want to play like they do we should do the same and start drilling our youngsters to pass and move that way, etc. It would take us ten years at least to produce the first batch of academy players drilled this way, but eventually we would get there. The problem is, what do we do with the first team in the meantime? Because if we apply the same long term vision to it, there's always going to be someone not pleased by the results (which won't be great at first) or the way we play (which again at first will be all wrong as the team needs to learn the way everyone should move, pass, etc.).

We are (rumoured to be) building an academy that will make Barca's look like Halifax Town. I would imagine that the idea will be for the kids to all learn to pass & move etc so as you say, the main problem is what we do with the 1st team now. At last, it looks like we are going to set up a system which runs seperately from whoever the current manager is at the time so any decisions regarding the current manager will be in the interests of the short & medium term success of the first team rather than the long term success of the whole club. I'd like to think that managing City will become an easier job from a football sense in the future, as we'll have the system in place & just need someone to keep it ticking over, as Guardiola is doing at Barca.

First of all though, someone has to start us off regularly winning trophies.

P.S. Is it really that difficult to get players to pass & move if Holloway can do it from scratch at Blackpool? Is it not more about getting the correct blend of players who suit each other's play & just guiding them & organising them?

[Ted Hughes]

Its not possible to recreate what they have at Barca. Johan Cryuff has been working for over 15 years to bring through the youngsters playing the Barcelona style from 6 years old. By 18-20 years old these players know no different, they have been drilled to be aware, to pass and to move in a way that no other 18-20 year old at any other club in the world is able.

Guardiola would most likely be an average manager at any other club in the world - at Barcelona it is all setup for him to succeed.

I agree; but going down this route, if we want to play like they do we should do the same and start drilling our youngsters to pass and move that way, etc. It would take us ten years at least to produce the first batch of academy players drilled this way, but eventually we would get there. The problem is, what do we do with the first team in the meantime? Because if we apply the same long term vision to it, there's always going to be someone not pleased by the results (which won't be great at first) or the way we play (which again at first will be all wrong as the team needs to learn the way everyone should move, pass, etc.).

This is one subject where I have really strong opinions on how a football club should be run, and I think it is very relevant to Mancini. Around 15 years ago, Cryuff decided that Barcelona needed to be completely overhauled. His vision was that everything at the club should be geared to producing a "Barcelona " style. That meant that in the future, youth players would be able to slot straight into the first team with minimal adjustment needed, and where the role of manager is actually that of head coach, he simply picks the team and makes tweaks on match day.

The situation we have here with City looked like at first, Hughes was going to try to emulate this. He tore everything up and started again. I was a little surprised, as my understanding was that Carrington had been thoroughly overhauled under Keegan, then Pearce etc etc. But what I wasnt comfortable with was that a serving manager was doing this. I believe that for a long term vision, someone of the stature of Cryuff, who knows how football should be played, should come in and build the youth infrastructure from the ground up, and instill a style of play at ever level, which eventually will translate through to the first team. Its not about pretty football, its about continuity regardless who the manager is. The reason I wasnt comfortable with Hughes doing it, and subsequently Mancini is precisely because managers will tend to have a short tenure, then the whole lot goes back to the drawing board whcih is a fucking ridiculous situation to have.

I believe that the role of Manager of Manchester City should be focusing on one thing and one thing only, preparing his team for weekend. We gave control of far too many things to Hughes and Mancini, and as a result each subsequent manager will keep destroying what the previous one (rightly or wrongly) created.

Therefore when the next manager comes in we have a choice. As the richest club in the world with a fantastic squad, do we let the manager dictate what does and doesnt happen in the club as a whole and the youth academy, or do we tell the manager that the club have a long term view that they are sticking to, and youth development /club infrastructure will not be the managers remit in any way shape or form.

It would be difficult to impose this on a serving manager, but very simple to impose on a new one - and in Europe it is entirely normal because the head coach is there only to coach and to be responsible for the senior squad and matchday. The types of dynasty that Fergie has is not something that can be recreated, but because Fergie has control of everything, every 2 bit wanker of a manager wants the same thing, but on the balance of probability they arent going to be at the same club in 5 years let alone 25.

We have already seemingly introduced transfers by committee, which I think is a right thing to do as managers are notoriously bad at spending other peoples money, however I feel that again, undue influence has been held by Hughes and Mancini, which are evidenced by the likes of Santa Cruz under Hughes, and most of Mancini's signings. We brought in Brian Marwood to oversee things on the football side, but his role is still unclear.

What I am proposing may be what City have in mind, but things like Santa Cruz, like not having a set style of play consistently throughout the club would suggest that we are only doing in half heartedly if at all, and that the managers still have undue influence on things they shouldnt be meddling with

This post wasn't there when I started mine, but as I posted, I recon this is what we are doing & you're correct, it did seem as if we were starting it with Hughes, then bizarrely sacked him, so presumably it is now already operating seperately from the manager. Rumour suggests it's going to be on another level from anything anywhere.

[john68]

I certainly don't want my kids looking in at the CoMS remembrance garden and saying "Hey Dad, hard luck, you missed this".

It'd give you a place to plant your bulbs though.

Excellent Slim.....PMSL....Poor Carl still has a little to learn to become the site's top Cunt...:-)

[carl_feedthegoat]

For fucks sake..any fucking article form that paper that DOESN'T FIT WITH ONES AGENDA is bullshit is it !!! It is common fuckign knowledge that Mourhino is not happy where he is and it is also common knowledge that he misses managing in England.

I fucking hate it when someone knocks a tabloid over a story that they dont like so diss it as nonsense....there are many storied in SPain itself that claim Mourinho wants out.

I don't doubt for 1 minute that Jose is unhappy where he is or that he would consider coming back to England.

I think we both know that the clubs he is being linked with are pure guess work and speculation.

Not sure what you mean about dismissing articles that don't fit my agenda, I have never made any secret of the fact that the Sun isn't worth wiping my arse on and I never believe a word they say. I thought most people felt the same.

The sun like most papers exaggerate any article for sensationalism as is par the course for any fucking paper.....but its not just the Sun that came with this story....Spain is rife with suspicions that he will leave and even MOURINHO has been quoted as saying he wants to come back to the prem !!!!...

my point being you said why would he come to us..get into the real world.......I think its wiser to find out from other sources before you make a statement like you did.

If we did get Mourinho in how long would you give him to bring success before you wanted him sacked?

The same amount of time Boring Mancini has had.

[carl_feedthegoat]

I certainly don't want my kids looking in at the CoMS remembrance garden and saying "Hey Dad, hard luck, you missed this".

It'd give you a place to plant your bulbs though.

Excellent Slim.....PMSL....Poor Carl still has a little to learn to become the site's top Cunt...:-)

I am actually nice to you pops.....I could do a fucking U turn if you like?

[Original Dub]

Would that make you a long term moaner, rather than a knee jerker?
Just asking so you are put in the correct pigeon hole.

Haha! Good one.

You want the truth?
In 47/48 years of supporting City I have never before called for a manager's head. Not even Ball or Pearce. But this fella has tested my patience and he has no excuse.

BTW...just for info purposes. Having got rid of Mancini, who would you replace him with and how long would you give him before chucking him out too?

and at what point would you consider that changing our manager during the last 35 years, sometime, several in one season was a bad idea and may have actually contributed to our long term failure.
Those are quite genuine questions.

I've stated elsewhere that my preferred choice would be Reikjard.
But I'll settle for anyone who sends us out with the mental attitude that we are better than the opposition and we're going to wipe the floor with them.

It's now two and a half years since ADUG started pumping BIG money into this club. I don't know about you but I expected their investment to produce, in time, a team playing winning champagne football. At present what we're getting is a flat tin of Tizer.

Hold on a cotton picking minute there chief. I'm not his biggest fan, but that post is fucking ridiculous.

We've been knocked out of the Carling Cup. So far, that's all we've failed in this season.

WTF??!

[john68]

Spartacus,
I agree totally with the sentiments of that post. That is just how a football club should be run.

But haven't we already begun doing this? Statements by the club when Marwood was employed seemed to make it quite clear that his role was to oversee football policy at the club, to bring stability and specifically to stop the club changing direction each time a manager moved on.
The policy at the time at City was made plain...To spend heavily to get the club up to the top standard and then having already invested heavily in the Academy, rely on that to a significant degree, to produce the next generation.

The recent announced City investments (training ground, school etc) were all part of that policy being made a reality.

That is why, I wonder just what the power balance between Marwood/Mancini really is. I think it is far more than just a transfer committee. It is my belief that behind the scenes, it is Marwood who calls the shots and though he has influence, Mancini is merely employed as the chief coach. Marwood's role must be defined within the club but publically, he remains a shadowy figure.

[Ted Hughes]

Spartacus,
I agree totally with the sentiments of that post. That is just how a football club should be run.

But haven't we already begun doing this? Statements by the club when Marwood was employed seemed to make it quite clear that his role was to oversee football policy at the club, to bring stability and specifically to stop the club changing direction each time a manager moved on.
The policy at the time at City was made plain...To spend heavily to get the club up to the top standard and then having already invested heavily in the Academy, rely on that to a significant degree, to produce the next generation.

The recent announced City investments (training ground, school etc) were all part of that policy being made a reality.

That is why, I wonder just what the power balance between Marwood/Mancini really is. I think it is far more than just a transfer committee. It is my belief that behind the scenes, it is Marwood who calls the shots and though he has influence, Mancini is merely employed as the chief coach. Marwood's role must be defined within the club but publically, he remains a shadowy figure.

On many things, but we know where the real power lies & if it was your money, you'd only been at City 3 years, so had nothing to do with any of the past shenanigans, you'd watched the last 3 games on TV, you've spent half a billion quid with much much more earmarked, you found out that Mourinho was interested, what would you do, in all honesty?

[Im_Spartacus]

Spartacus,
I agree totally with the sentiments of that post. That is just how a football club should be run.

But haven't we already begun doing this? Statements by the club when Marwood was employed seemed to make it quite clear that his role was to oversee football policy at the club, to bring stability and specifically to stop the club changing direction each time a manager moved on.
The policy at the time at City was made plain...To spend heavily to get the club up to the top standard and then having already invested heavily in the Academy, rely on that to a significant degree, to produce the next generation.

The recent announced City investments (training ground, school etc) were all part of that policy being made a reality.

That is why, I wonder just what the power balance between Marwood/Mancini really is. I think it is far more than just a transfer committee. It is my belief that behind the scenes, it is Marwood who calls the shots and though he has influence, Mancini is merely employed as the chief coach. Marwood's role must be defined within the club but publically, he remains a shadowy figure.

City are making all the right noises about the development of the club infrastructure, but I worry sometimes about the manager's influence within the club and that seemingly there have been hissy fits (more under Hughes than Mancini admittedly), where the manager doesnt get his own way.

If you truly believe that Mancini is just the head coach at City, then what would be the big deal in sacking him if Mourinho was available? If we already have this "head coach" position, then getting rid of Mancini would not cause one iota of disruption other than the players learning his way. As someone has said, we upgrade a player if a better one becomes available, so why would we not upgrade the manager.

If this head coach position is the reality at City, then it sort of renders useless all arguments about stability and giving a manager time in view of Real Madrid/AC Milans success despite having had more managers than even City. Yes, if its a full rebuilding job where the squad needs completely overhauling, a manager needs a few years to get those changes done and bed in - but if Mancini is JUST the head coach, paid to win football matches with the resources he has at his disposal, then there should be no lost sleep about replacing him.

In fact we could make a 25 million profit on sacking Mancini by fucking Balotelli off to Milan and have Adebayor (possibly bellers too) back and in the team.

[King Kev]

For fucks sake..any fucking article form that paper that DOESN'T FIT WITH ONES AGENDA is bullshit is it !!! It is common fuckign knowledge that Mourhino is not happy where he is and it is also common knowledge that he misses managing in England.

I fucking hate it when someone knocks a tabloid over a story that they dont like so diss it as nonsense....there are many storied in SPain itself that claim Mourinho wants out.

I don't doubt for 1 minute that Jose is unhappy where he is or that he would consider coming back to England.

I think we both know that the clubs he is being linked with are pure guess work and speculation.

Not sure what you mean about dismissing articles that don't fit my agenda, I have never made any secret of the fact that the Sun isn't worth wiping my arse on and I never believe a word they say. I thought most people felt the same.

The sun like most papers exaggerate any article for sensationalism as is par the course for any fucking paper.....but its not just the Sun that came with this story....Spain is rife with suspicions that he will leave and even MOURINHO has been quoted as saying he wants to come back to the prem !!!!...

my point being you said why would he come to us..get into the real world.......I think its wiser to find out from other sources before you make a statement like you did.

If we did get Mourinho in how long would you give him to bring success before you wanted him sacked?

The same amount of time Boring Mancini has had.

So less than 2 seasons.

Ok, we sack Morinho, then what?

[carl_feedthegoat]

We bring Kevin Keegan back.

[Ted Hughes]

Put Hughes back in & pretend we're the kind of club that doesn't sack managers without good reason.

[dazby]

Thanks for the delivery today Mancio.

[Ruthless]

He's delivered an FA cup semi....who knows about thurs night in the Europa n possibly a champions league place, delivered more than any other manager in recent memory, yeah pretty negative but in the main seems to be effective, still needs to add some creative flare in midfield tho. Yaya isn't the man for this

[Douglas Higginbottom]

He's delivered an FA cup semi....who knows about thurs night in the Europa n possibly a champions league place, delivered more than any other manager in recent memory, yeah pretty negative but in the main seems to be effective, still needs to add some creative flare in midfield tho. Yaya isn't the man for this

We did a cup semi last season and 5th place. We need to get a better result in one of them this year.