Mancini (The Ted Hughes and BBS thread)

[DoomMerchant]

Nice one again Ted.
I think you get close to the truth pretty often.
I would say he was negative by not putting an attacking enough line up on to attack Birmynum.
What was he frightened of? Brum score few goals from open play and yet again we line up at home with one striker and only three natural attackers (Carlito, Silva, A.J.) A slightly more attack minded selection, but nowhere near enough for a team coming to defend against us.
These dropped points may well come back to haunt Bob. His negativity in part cost us CL last season and may well do the same this time too.

right on...and i don't think some see that his negativity cost us CL last season. If he had gone out to beat that Arsenal team then he wouldn't have had all his eggs in one basket vs Spurs and it would have foreced them to play a different match as well. And that was just one week's worth of results -- the week that mattered the most -- but there are earlier examples from the spring as well which would have influenced our season had he been more positive.

[Blue Since 76]

Much as I hate lawro, he was right last night in comparing how we and the rags chased a game. They put on obertan and macheda, 2 players who wouldn't get near our first team, but they threw caution to the wind and went for it. We took off the only man who scores (Bobby's words) to put on Barry. If he'd done it for Jo, or SWP or even to put Micah or Lescott up front, I could have understood it. But Barry?

[saulman]

Yesterday we had Tevez, Silva and AJ up front. We had Milner and Yaya playing in forward positions, Milner having a shot cleared off the line and seemed to be in and around their box for large chunks of the first half.

Why are people saying this was negative? Unlucky (or maybe even incompitent) that we didn't score, maybe but hardly negative.

[Brad]

It pisses me of how we get in good shooting positions and we just suddenly switch the ball to johnson or silva at the corner flag, instead of having a go, it happened a few times yesterday and most of the time boeteng and aj gave away possesion because they were already marked.

[Nige]

Being sat there my main concern was our shit shooting or finding ourselve stuck on the 18 yard line faced with 10 red shirts. We need to move faster and get into the box with the ball on the ground or shoot from the edge of the box, on target i must add.

Mancini looked as frustrated as we all sound so I'm trying to remain hopeful that once Mario is fit we can start to play a settled front 1,2 or 3 so everyone gets to know each other's game. At the moment it's all guesswork and lucky bounces for Carlos to sniff out.

Mancini must stop the long ball up to Silva and Tevez though.

[carl_feedthegoat]

It pisses me of how we get in good shooting positions and we just suddenly switch the ball to johnson or silva at the corner flag, instead of having a go, it happened a few times yesterday and most of the time boeteng and aj gave away possesion because they were already marked.

Milner should have passed to Silva and it would have been a clear goal but he decided to shoot (cant slag hom off for going for it BUT imo he should have taken the second option)

This has happened a few times...players are still not switched on to each other and there are a few still playing for themselves out there.

Tevez is extremely greedy.

[saulman]

Tevez is extremely greedy.

Indeed. He had the perfect opportunity to put Santa in within a minute of him coming on. He chose to go it alone (again) and failed.

That said, his goal scoring record gives him the right to be greedy, IMO. On anther day he's probably have got a brace.

[Douglas Higginbottom]

"I'd say it's more of a realistic guess than belief or hope."

I'd say that sounds about right.

Nonetheless, while watching a game with zero pace, slowered tempo [see manager's notes on OS's matchday before the game] and - manily - a selfish performance from Charlie, who shooted from everywhere, never looked at other Lads' movements and threw the ball off twice untill he gets Croque in - I did have the exact same feeling You reported Yesterday:
"Is the manager loosing the dressing room's respect/believe?"
A prompt answer will come straight next weekend, and a more minded assessment might come from the outcome of the clash at Stoke, imo

but

because You:
A) are an real pundit of football
B) You proved not to be worried to change Your opinion according to the facts You see and judge in their becoming
C) You're the sole of Us who sniff and smell the Team on daily basis

WHAT ARE YOU ON ABOUT THAT ISSUE, now that the night is over?

An answer will be highly appreciated, Sir DH.

Ok so if I understand your question/thoughts properly:
1) I agree the tempo was too slow in the 1st half.We had control but without a real threat so you could argue that Birmingham were actually in control because they were happy at half time.When that happens( tempo too slow) is it the managers fault or the players? usually that depends on whether you are a fan of the manager.

2) When games get tight and difficult like that it seems that player's reactions are often to try to do too much on their own. Running with the ball when there is a good passing alternative and taking on shots when they really are not on.If players do react in this way it is quite possible it's because they are frustrated by the way the team has been set out to play.That's bad in many ways but most worrying if it is a veiled attempt to say to the manager you are getting it wrong. I would not say that is why Tevez seems to take the wrong option too often because I think he is just naturally a greedy type of player. BUT I may be wrong and maybe he has got a little fed up at the lack of movement alongside and in front of him.

3) What I see in training is just a brief glimpse of what happens away from matchday on the pitch.There are no signs there of any problems with the manager that I have EVER seen but if I think back to the last 3 weeks there has actually been very little training and especially so with Carlos who has been injured and only just managing to play the last 2 games.

Having said all that I still maintain that a massive part of any success or failure will be down to how well Mancini retains the dressing room. We have been told by the press that there are issues and City have stated publically that words have been spoken between the manager and players ( as well as players and players).What we don't know is whether the problems , if they exist,are minor or deep rooted.And I am not just referring to those players upset at not being selected.

We are now getting into the period where the team has to stand up and be counted.I would like to hear Mancini talking less as I feel he is sounding a little rattled at the moment by the constant criticism from the press and now from the fans.It does him no credit to start sounding irritated by it all.

Ask me again after 5 more games.

[Bridge'srightfoot]

What I don't understand is the misconception that a lot of people have, that if you play attractive football you have to sacrifice points :S
Really baffles me. Arsenal went unebaten for a season playing fantastic football. Chelsea score loads of goals. Heck even United of old played some very entertaining football.

I go to games to be entertained, whether win, lose or draw. If it was only about the result I may aswell just not go and look out for the results.

Good football also gets the crowd going.

[Beeks]

Here's a decent perspective post derby 'pre Birmingham

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/articl ... tests.html

[Beefymcfc]

Here's a decent perspective post derby 'pre Birmingham

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/articl ... tests.html

That's just twaddle mate. You know and I know that the media will start to change tact so that if Mancio goes they can jump on the 'City Shocker' bandwagon again.

[Ted Hughes]

What I don't understand is the misconception that a lot of people have, that if you play attractive football you have to sacrifice points :S
Really baffles me. Arsenal went unebaten for a season playing fantastic football. Chelsea score loads of goals. Heck even United of old played some very entertaining football.

I go to games to be entertained, whether win, lose or draw. If it was only about the result I may aswell just not go and look out for the results.

Good football also gets the crowd going.

There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that negative football leads to better results than positive football. It's harder to put attacking football together in the 1st place & you get spanked occasionally but it's what wins most trophies in the end. Even the lower table teams are 'having a go' in most games now & it's largely working for them. As I said earlier, I think sometimes Bob is really trying to attack but he's just not doing it very well. It's his job to sort it out though or he may start to be viewed as a tactical dinosaur rather than a tactical innovator. It seems to me as if the tactical emphasis of football is changing again & we need to be at the front of that, not lagging behind.

[Bridge'srightfoot]

What I don't understand is the misconception that a lot of people have, that if you play attractive football you have to sacrifice points :S
Really baffles me. Arsenal went unebaten for a season playing fantastic football. Chelsea score loads of goals. Heck even United of old played some very entertaining football.

I go to games to be entertained, whether win, lose or draw. If it was only about the result I may aswell just not go and look out for the results.

Good football also gets the crowd going.

There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that negative football leads to better results than positive football. It's harder to put attacking football together in the 1st place & you get spanked occasionally but it's what wins most trophies in the end. Even the lower table teams are 'having a go' in most games now & it's largely working for them. As I said earlier, I think sometimes Bob is really trying to attack but he's just not doing it very well. It's his job to sort it out though or he may start to be viewed as a tactical dinosaur rather than a tactical innovator. It seems to me as if the tactical emphasis of football is changing again & we need to be at the front of that, not lagging behind.

Agreed. Look at Sunderland today. They played Chelsea away from home. They had every excuse to set up defensively and go for a point, yet they played two striker and really went for the game. They could have been thrashed but tehy took a risk and it paid off. They played really good football aswell. Also unlike our victory at the bridge in whch we played on the counter, Sunderland were on the front foot all game and thoroughly deserved the victory.


Now if a side like Sunderland attacks Chelsea away from home, why can't we attack United at home?

[DoomMerchant]

Now if a side like Sunderland attacks Chelsea away from home, why can't we attack United at home?

Because Sunderland have a fuclin better manager than we do. that is all.

cheers

[gillie]

Now if a side like Sunderland attacks Chelsea away from home, why can't we attack United at home?

Because Sunderland have a fuclin better manager than we do. that is all.

cheers

Truth will out.

[Bridge'srightfoot]

Yesterday we had Tevez, Silva and AJ up front. We had Milner and Yaya playing in forward positions, Milner having a shot cleared off the line and seemed to be in and around their box for large chunks of the first half.

Why are people saying this was negative? Unlucky (or maybe even incompitent) that we didn't score, maybe but hardly negative.

We were hardly hamemring the door down though were we?

[Swales4ever]

Ok so if I understand your question/thoughts properly:
1) I agree the tempo was too slow in the 1st half.We had control but without a real threat so you could argue that Birmingham were actually in control because they were happy at half time.When that happens( tempo too slow) is it the managers fault or the players? usually that depends on whether you are a fan of the manager.

2) When games get tight and difficult like that it seems that player's reactions are often to try to do too much on their own. Running with the ball when there is a good passing alternative and taking on shots when they really are not on.If players do react in this way it is quite possible it's because they are frustrated by the way the team has been set out to play.That's bad in many ways but most worrying if it is a veiled attempt to say to the manager you are getting it wrong. I would not say that is why Tevez seems to take the wrong option too often because I think he is just naturally a greedy type of player. BUT I may be wrong and maybe he has got a little fed up at the lack of movement alongside and in front of him.

3) What I see in training is just a brief glimpse of what happens away from matchday on the pitch.There are no signs there of any problems with the manager that I have EVER seen but if I think back to the last 3 weeks there has actually been very little training and especially so with Carlos who has been injured and only just managing to play the last 2 games.

Having said all that I still maintain that a massive part of any success or failure will be down to how well Mancini retains the dressing room. We have been told by the press that there are issues and City have stated publically that words have been spoken between the manager and players ( as well as players and players).What we don't know is whether the problems , if they exist,are minor or deep rooted.And I am not just referring to those players upset at not being selected.

We are now getting into the period where the team has to stand up and be counted.I would like to hear Mancini talking less as I feel he is sounding a little rattled at the moment by the constant criticism from the press and now from the fans.It does him no credit to start sounding irritated by it all.

Ask me again after 5 more games.

Cheers DH, Sir.
Thank You so much for Your patience with my broken english and for the reassuring feedback from Your utterly valuable knowledge:
Your uncertainty in assessing "the main issue" is quite a relief, indeed.

I am right behind You that if Mancini is not able to hold the dressing rooms and to address his Lads' bellies he is simply not good enough for the job. In a nutshell that is why the board went for the change last year, definitelly not only for the bloody trajectory and/or some tactical mistakes, as I am sure Brian Marwood could have bought to Leslie a couple of books on zonal marking and ball possession, instead.

I'll will stand hungry for any update of Your Goodself , as we both understand that's the issue that will decide the sort of City season.

As for my love for the present gaffer, You do see I never hide it whatsoever, but I'm also sure You see I am adult enough to understand the important difference between just a man and a beloved institution.

Thanks again Douglas, Cheers.

[Arjan Van Schotte]

sorry, i really couldn't be arsed to trawl through all the posts so just did the least couple of pages, so apologies if i'm saying what's been said.

i honestly believe that mancini could win the PL within 3 years.

however, it's not a 3 years i want to go through. it's 'kin awful and painful and woeful (couldn't think of another "ful").

please sack him and get someone else. and before anyone says "but who?". honestly. paul jewell. paul dickov. jamie pollock. fuck it - craig bellamy. that'd be interesting.

[Dameerto]

Now if a side like Sunderland attacks Chelsea away from home, why can't we attack United at home?

Because Sunderland have a fuclin better manager than we do. that is all.

cheers

Truth will out.

Sunderland had the element of surprise though - who in their right mind thought Sunderland would go out to attack a team that hadn't conceded at home all season? (if my failing memory serves me correctly). Preparation would have been done for a team probably employing a lone striker and sticking 8 or 9 players behind the ball in defence.

[Beefymcfc]

sorry, i really couldn't be arsed to trawl through all the posts so just did the least couple of pages, so apologies if i'm saying what's been said.

i honestly believe that mancini could win the PL within 3 years.

however, it's not a 3 years i want to go through. it's 'kin awful and painful and woeful (couldn't think of another "ful").

please sack him and get someone else. and before anyone says "but who?". honestly. paul jewell. paul dickov. jamie pollock. fuck it - craig bellamy. that'd be interesting.

Quality post mate, no beating around the bush. Made me giggle.