Mancini (The Ted Hughes and BBS thread)

[Wooders]

No better, no worse than Leslie imo

agree 99%

We got the occasional exciting game with the welshman though

[Chinners]

I would say that most of the players are attracted to the salaries rather than the manager. Would Ade, Robinho, Tevez and RSC signed for Mancini?

[brite blu sky]

Not sure the comparison with Les says much tbh.

Mancini is supposed to be a lucky manager, but so far we/he seems to have had a great long string of bad luck. Especially so many new players out for so long.

Cant really add anything to what i posted earlier, apart from i get a sense that we haven't seen the best from him yet and i do get what can only be described as a feeling that he is better than Hughes and will prove it. Could be wishful thinking though cun it ?

[saulman]

I would say that most of the players are attracted to the salaries rather than the manager. Would Ade, Robinho, Tevez and RSC signed for Mancini?

Yes. They would. Probably when he was at Inter too.

[Swales4ever]

Good call Jon, I think Mancio4ever is trying to do his best getting his point across with limited English. A little patience and it is not difficult to work out what he is trying to say. I think mancio4ever also has had major difficulty understanding the City and Manc sense of humour. That has led to a few misunderstandings, taking some glib remarks far too seriously and picking fights with other top posters such as Carl and BBS.
Maybe time to take a step back, call a truce and start again.

The difference with Antti is that he is part of the furniture here and understands the score. Plus, Antti deserved the grief...:-)

This need whacking with a good sized 3x2.

There is one issue only and it is about how someone who has seriously limited understanding of a language in use, but doesn't have the humility or self awareness to understand that.

I learnt a new language by going to the country and learning it from the people, clients and friends, going to bars, pool halls, weekend raves, after parties and you name it, school as well. In addition to that i had to get my business going as fast as possible. I didnt speak to any english speakers for two years to force myself to 'embed'. That said when i was learning and i go somewhere i dont know anyone, say a pool bar full of locals, i keep my trap shut and listen, learn the way people communicate, the humour and the way people really talk. If i chatted i kept is simple and the key thing here is if i wasn't sure of exactly what someone is meaning i dont go off on one trying to look like i fuclin know what im talking about when i clearly dont.

Out of interest and to back up how that pays off, locals anywhere have little patience when struggling to understand someone talking pidgeon babelfish... i still see ex-pats who got to school who cant hold a conversation with locals without boring the fuclin pants off them in 5 mins, by contrast i can go out with a group of locals all night and have them rolling around splitting their sides. Why? because i had the fuclin humility to come and learn how people actually talk and behave, from scratch.

Que coñazo coño!

Definitely You are right for once, mr. assistant sergeant: humility is not my best virtue, or if You prefer I am not worth for humility. I do apologize, widely.
Insofar awareness and understanding are concerned, You may stand forever correct: once You'll match my level You'll probably won't feel the need to use the words "cunt" "fuck" and "arse" in quite every statement You make - either in English or in Castillian.
Definitely there is only one means to wind me up and that is to call me ignorant.
For sake of good order:
I grow up in a family which fed me up with reverence for the British colture and lifestyle.
I spent 3 out 5 summers of my secondary school qualification course working as waiter in London (1978-1981) in order to improve my knowledge of Your language.
I attended LLM in Maritime Law at King's College, London (1989) - Tbh being myself a progressive bloke I didnt socialized that much there, so it wasnt usefull for language improvement, out of technicalities.
I had a further period as trainee in London for about 1 year (1990), also spending some vacation in Cornwall and Scotland.
Since then, I've been working with London based Firms for 20 years, having quite daily contacts over the phone.
This is only to say there are few people in England who seem to understand enough my "seriously limited understanding of the language in use".
Due to very committing family engagements I had been forced to withdraw most of my visit to UK during the last years, so that I've progressively lost any fluency in speaking and understanding non-legal/insurance language, even more when urban dictionary is concerned.

Now I did noted Your mind seems to had been developed according to a learning process widely influenced by a sort of hazing attitude: that's probably is why you appear to be keen to military chaps. I have plenty of respect for any kind of human being, including macho men, but really do hope you would pardon me if I'll do continue to run a more egualitarian/paritetic learning process. It always suited myself more than your "head down/shut up and listen" way of becoming.

Now I don't want to become your friend, but I'll be glad if You and the sergeant will allow me to chat with some of your mates.

hasta la vista.

[Chinners]

Ha ha

[john68]

Mancio4ever,....(and others involved)

From where i sit, "taking a step back" means just that. Allowing the fire to burn out and cool down. It isn't a time to chuck a bit more wood on, just to prove a point and fan the flames.
This is a City social netwrking site, provided by the owners for our enjoyment. That should be respected. I expect that there will always be fall outs, but FFS, when it's run its course...leave it where it was.

[Socrates]

Mancio4ever is the genuine article and a terrific bloke if you take the trouble to get to know him. Must admit when he first posted I thought it was Patrick having some fun with a translating website but not at all. This website looks dimly on people of character these days, sadly. If you don't think with the group then you aren't made to feel very welcome. Just look at the treatment NQDp has had for sticking to his guns against the crowd and it tells you a lot about the way things have gone. There is a reason so many good posters have disappeared or post less and less. A bit more tolerance for other people's view points from some people would go a very long way.

When you were in "charge" on here you were fucking worse than Pol Pot in my opinion. ..anyone that disagreed with you and got slightly personal (and dont ask for examples as Im not going to trawl through the archive) were on the road to a ban....so fuck off with your whining.

You gave your fair share of shit to anyone that disagreed with you.

And another thing...if some cunt called you a racist then you would ban them.......but according to you this guys a fucking "good guy".

Fucking hipocrit.

Don't use big words you can't spell Carl. You forget that my solo run in charge was on the old old old board when it wasn't even possible to ban anyone. If picking a fight with me was enough to get people banned once that became possible then why were you never banned? I did ban people for being racist and for overly abusive behaviour to other posters but never for calling me names. The other lads did ban a couple of people for extremely abusive attacks on me but I stayed out of those decisions. My skin was always much thicker than that as those I've argued with will attest.

[BobKowalski]

I would say that most of the players are attracted to the salaries rather than the manager. Would Ade, Robinho, Tevez and RSC signed for Mancini?

Yes. They would. Probably when he was at Inter too.

Probably not. Can't see Mancini being interested in Ade, Robinho or RSC. First two don't have the right 'mentality' and RSC is too unreliable injury wise making whatever attributes he may have irrelevant.

Mancini is a better manager than Hughes in my opinion. He is (and I do find this ironic) a lot harder on the players than Hughes in terms of training, tactical discipline, team shape etc. I find it ironic because when Hughes first arrived it was all about Hughes instilling a tougher regime with the term 'football factory' bandied about and the banning of mobile phones and getting the players to focus on the job etc etc. When Mancini first arrived there was a video of a supporters branch meet with SWP and Garrido in attendance and the first question was did the players feel there was a slackening of intensity in training with the arrival of 'effete, scarf wearing, soft as fook' Mancini. In retrospect given the way teams under Hughes collapsed like a soufflé when attacked and the complaints that training is too hard under Mancini and 'can't we have that nice man Hughes back please' makes this video one of my comedy moments of the year. Interestingly the media still portray Hughes and his teams as 'being hard battling never give up' merchants which to be honest were qualities entirely absent when we beat them 4-1 but hey lets not let facts get in the way of perceptions.

In terms of man management then you can argue Hughes is better. Mancini has the warmth of a glacier and seemingly has no interest in being anyone's best buddy which has left some of our more sensitive souls a bit upset (step forward Ned) although some like Micah seem to do better under this approach so you pays your money and takes your choice I guess.

What is beyond dispute is that Mancini as a coach is light years ahead of Bowen. He is in a different universe to Hughes because Hughes doesn't coach so I will compare to Bowen and anyone who thinks Bowen is a better coach than Mancini is either a) an idiot or b) Mark Bowen.

Player acquisition is done differently under Mancini with some players like Milner more of a Marwood buy and some like Silva and Mario Mancini buys. Hughes bar Robinho wanted and got sole control of purchases. It was in my opinion this demand do things the 'British' way that lead to his dismissal. That and buying RSC. Hughes strategy was proven PL talent to ensure he could hit the ground running and secure his job. Not a bad strategy with some of those players Kompany, Dejong, Barry and Tevez becoming key components of the team under Mancini. Kompany considering what we paid an excellent buy although it took Mancini to slot in him at CB and maximise his value to the team.

Mancini or the team doing the buying have taken a more long term approach with non PL players and younger players which means a greater settling in period. Its a riskier strategy even if the quality of the individuals has been substantially upgraded. Mancini is though more of a gambler than Hughes (irony of ironies given everyone slates Mancini for the polar opposite) when it comes to player selection. Given would have got the nod over Hart under Hughes and Boyata would not have featured at all. Mancini is prepared to risk untried talent in big matches if they have in his opinion the necessary ability and temperament. Sometimes it pays off and sometimes it doesn't thereby adding to the pressure on Mancini in the short term. This short term pressure Mancini is prepared to take as he believes it is for the long term good and it is this willingness to look at the long term along with his coaching abilities that make him a superior manager to Hughes.

[Swales4ever]

John,
You know how much respect I pay to You.
When You ring the bell I am all about to sit down and shut up.
Just have a look on this page above, I do the right assessment on who is chucking a bit more wood on...
You are too much of a first class person to be so "generalist"

Just as it had happened since Your yesterday call to wisdom, I'd revert
from
Mancio4ever,....(and others involved)
to
BBS/Carl and added by late Chinners (and their target involved)

I will oblige miself to Your advise, though, and shallrefuse to be drawn to mediocrity any further.
Hope You will apreciate, cause it's a big effort!

Cheers, my respected Mate.

[saulman]

I would say that most of the players are attracted to the salaries rather than the manager. Would Ade, Robinho, Tevez and RSC signed for Mancini?

Yes. They would. Probably when he was at Inter too.

Probably not. Can't see Mancini being interested in Ade, Robinho or RSC. First two don't have the right 'mentality' and RSC is too unreliable injury wise making whatever attributes he may have irrelevant.

Mancini is a better manager than Hughes in my opinion. He is (and I do find this ironic) a lot harder on the players than Hughes in terms of training, tactical discipline, team shape etc. I find it ironic because when Hughes first arrived it was all about Hughes instilling a tougher regime with the term 'football factory' bandied about and the banning of mobile phones and getting the players to focus on the job etc etc. When Mancini first arrived there was a video of a supporters branch meet with SWP and Garrido in attendance and the first question was did the players feel there was a slackening of intensity in training with the arrival of 'effete, scarf wearing, soft as fook' Mancini. In retrospect given the way teams under Hughes collapsed like a soufflé when attacked and the complaints that training is too hard under Mancini and 'can't we have that nice man Hughes back please' makes this video one of my comedy moments of the year. Interestingly the media still portray Hughes and his teams as 'being hard battling never give up' merchants which to be honest were qualities entirely absent when we beat them 4-1 but hey lets not let facts get in the way of perceptions.

In terms of man management then you can argue Hughes is better. Mancini has the warmth of a glacier and seemingly has no interest in being anyone's best buddy which has left some of our more sensitive souls a bit upset (step forward Ned) although some like Micah seem to do better under this approach so you pays your money and takes your choice I guess.

What is beyond dispute is that Mancini as a coach is light years ahead of Bowen. He is in a different universe to Hughes because Hughes doesn't coach so I will compare to Bowen and anyone who thinks Bowen is a better coach than Mancini is either a) an idiot or b) Mark Bowen.

Player acquisition is done differently under Mancini with some players like Milner more of a Marwood buy and some like Silva and Mario Mancini buys. Hughes bar Robinho wanted and got sole control of purchases. It was in my opinion this demand do things the 'British' way that lead to his dismissal. That and buying RSC. Hughes strategy was proven PL talent to ensure he could hit the ground running and secure his job. Not a bad strategy with some of those players Kompany, Dejong, Barry and Tevez becoming key components of the team under Mancini. Kompany considering what we paid an excellent buy although it took Mancini to slot in him at CB and maximise his value to the team.

Mancini or the team doing the buying have taken a more long term approach with non PL players and younger players which means a greater settling in period. Its a riskier strategy even if the quality of the individuals has been substantially upgraded. Mancini is though more of a gambler than Hughes (irony of ironies given everyone slates Mancini for the polar opposite) when it comes to player selection. Given would have got the nod over Hart under Hughes and Boyata would not have featured at all. Mancini is prepared to risk untried talent in big matches if they have in his opinion the necessary ability and temperament. Sometimes it pays off and sometimes it doesn't thereby adding to the pressure on Mancini in the short term. This short term pressure Mancini is prepared to take as he believes it is for the long term good and it is this willingness to look at the long term along with his coaching abilities that make him a superior manager to Hughes.

Apart from you missing my point about those players playing for Mancini.......that was a fantastic post.

Well said. Well put.

[Chinners]

John,
You know how much respect I pay to You.
When You ring the bell I am all about to sit down and shut up.
Just have a look on this page above, I do the right assessment on who is chucking a bit more wood on...
You are too much of a first class person to be so "generalist"

Just as it had happened since Your yesterday call to wisdom, I'd revert
from
Mancio4ever,....(and others involved)
to
BBS/Carl and added by late Chinners (and their target involved)

I will oblige miself to Your advise, though, and shallrefuse to be drawn to mediocrity any further.
Hope You will apreciate, cause it's a big effort!

Cheers, my respected Mate.

I have no targets, other than to get leathered in the pub when it suits ... it was a bit of banter and if anything a compliment to you about your English being better than my Italian .. still nevermind you are probably just on the wind up anyway

[Douglas Higginbottom]

I feel in a slightly argumentative mood so on the point about training harder and alledged complaints about it could somebody please explain in what way they train harder. Who says they do and who is it that complains about it?

I ask simply because I do not believe either aspect.For those that believe that they train harder now I would love to know on what evidence it is based.If the answer is a newspaper report please don't bother.

Specifically on the so called double training sessions if anyone out there thinks they happen please tell me when the last one was. There were 1 or 2 when Mancini first arrived which was more about him spending extra time with the players to get to know them as quickly as possible. Perfectly logical if you ask me but they are certainly not even close to a regular feature of training.

If you suggest that there has been some dissatisfaction at the actual training times then I would agree. I don't think the players like the ocassional afternoons sessions and they certainly don't like it when a morning time gets switched to the afternoon at short notice.

As for the sessions themselves there is no doubt they were overall stronger and tougher pre Mancini. That isn't to say which is better for the fitness levels but I would simply s ay factual from what I see.

I will think about the tactics issue.Clear weaknesses in the past and still weaknesses now.

[Swales4ever]

I stand correct Chinners and I am glad to be quick in apologizing, wholeheartedly.

It clearly appears I'm getting older more that I am aware, so it is possible I misunderstand some fine humour... :-)

Banter always welcome the wildest the better.

Cheers and excuse me.

[ant london]

Good call Jon, I think Mancio4ever is trying to do his best getting his point across with limited English

The difference with Antti is that he is part of the furniture here and understands the score. Plus, Antti deserved the grief...:-)

I dunno, I actually really like deciphering Mancio's "code" posts.....he seems like a decent guy to me too

This "feud" that has developed on this thread, well I can't help myself for finding it fucking funny. Carl's a racist, Mancio's a cunt....BBS got into it somehow and then Chinners somehow implicated. It's all a bit do lally

I like Carl, and Mancio (Roberto) and Mancio (Confucious) and BBS

I even like Antti....although I recognise that he fully deserves the shit he gets, mostly from me....haha

[london blue 2]

I prefer Bobbys hair, Leslies was too curly.

[BobKowalski]

I feel in a slightly argumentative mood so on the point about training harder and alledged complaints about it could somebody please explain in what way they train harder. Who says they do and who is it that complains about it?

I ask simply because I do not believe either aspect.For those that believe that they train harder now I would love to know on what evidence it is based.If the answer is a newspaper report please don't bother.

Specifically on the so called double training sessions if anyone out there thinks they happen please tell me when the last one was. There were 1 or 2 when Mancini first arrived which was more about him spending extra time with the players to get to know them as quickly as possible. Perfectly logical if you ask me but they are certainly not even close to a regular feature of training.

If you suggest that there has been some dissatisfaction at the actual training times then I would agree. I don't think the players like the ocassional afternoons sessions and they certainly don't like it when a morning time gets switched to the afternoon at short notice.

As for the sessions themselves there is no doubt they were overall stronger and tougher pre Mancini. That isn't to say which is better for the fitness levels but I would simply s ay factual from what I see.

I will think about the tactics issue.Clear weaknesses in the past and still weaknesses now.

Hang on whilst I get the links to the Sun and NotW.

I recall Shay talking about the lads just want to play footie without all this tactical/team shape malarkey so maybe we are blurring the lines between physical harder and mentally harder. Physically we seem to be in good shape as the game goes on and often we are stronger and better in the 2nd half than the first. You could point to lack of concentration in the last minute or so at Sunderland and Stoke as an area we need to tighten and whether that has a bearing on physical fitness levels although personally I think its a mindset that needs to be acquired and something we are still short of. Paddy and Ade referenced a tough pre-season physically and a good pre-season is often cited as being key to a good season with training geared towards maintaining optimum physical levels during the actual season.

My own take is that its just different under Mancini with a different philosophy and emphasis which takes getting used to. That it is harder than the approach taken by Hughes and his team has been commented upon by some players but whether that is in reference to the greater tactical discipline demanded by Mancini as opposed to the physical exertion required under the respective regimes I will leave others to judge.

Tactically its a no brainer. That is no brains where used under the Hughes regime or at least none were used during the 90 odd minutes of game time. Maybe we needed to be fitter under Hughes as we needed to chase after the ball for longer :)

On a side note the Fulham players commented earlier this season that training under Hughes is more fun than under Roy who used to drill them relentlessly. I guess Fulham are now enjoying the fruits of those 'fun' training sessions.

[Ted Hughes]

So far the difference has been that Hughes was more attacking & his side took risks Mancini has been more defensive & his side takes less risks. The teams have got roughly similar results but for the most part using different methods with different strengths & weaknesses. Hughes' team produced one or two superb defensive performances when everyone was available but often got punished for mistakes & became disorganised defensively in other games, Mancini's team has produced one or two superb attacking performances when all are available but has often struggled & been disorganised in attack. Both showed enough by their best moments to suggest they can solve the relevant problems over time if allowed to.

Hughes built from the front Mancini built from the back. The current situation is almost identical to that when Hughes was sacked but because the results have come in spurts rather than a long period of draws, the impression has been that last season was a disaster & this season is ok (unless we lose or draw the next 2 in which case this season will suddenly be a disaster) when in reality there's currently not that much difference. Both managers have done ok.

Mancin has recently had 2 of his best performances imo (inc 2nd half v Stoke) & imo things are looking pretty good, just as they were when we beat Chelsea & Arsenal last seaon (after a period of draws) & then incredibly sacked the manager after the next defeat. We can't allow similar stupidity to occur if Bob has a few more bad results. He's doing fine, as was Hughes.

[Chinners]

Good call Jon, I think Mancio4ever is trying to do his best getting his point across with limited English

The difference with Antti is that he is part of the furniture here and understands the score. Plus, Antti deserved the grief...:-)

I dunno, I actually really like deciphering Mancio's "code" posts.....he seems like a decent guy to me too

This "feud" that has developed on this thread, well I can't help myself for finding it fucking funny. Carl's a racist, Mancio's a cunt....BBS got into it somehow and then Chinners somehow implicated. It's all a bit do lally

I like Carl, and Mancio (Roberto) and Mancio (Confucious) and BBS

I even like Antti....although I recognise that he fully deserves the shit he gets, mostly from me....haha

So you don't like me? Well fuck you ... wheres that foe button ;)

[Douglas Higginbottom]

I feel in a slightly argumentative mood so on the point about training harder and alledged complaints about it could somebody please explain in what way they train harder. Who says they do and who is it that complains about it?

I ask simply because I do not believe either aspect.For those that believe that they train harder now I would love to know on what evidence it is based.If the answer is a newspaper report please don't bother.

Specifically on the so called double training sessions if anyone out there thinks they happen please tell me when the last one was. There were 1 or 2 when Mancini first arrived which was more about him spending extra time with the players to get to know them as quickly as possible. Perfectly logical if you ask me but they are certainly not even close to a regular feature of training.

If you suggest that there has been some dissatisfaction at the actual training times then I would agree. I don't think the players like the ocassional afternoons sessions and they certainly don't like it when a morning time gets switched to the afternoon at short notice.

As for the sessions themselves there is no doubt they were overall stronger and tougher pre Mancini. That isn't to say which is better for the fitness levels but I would simply s ay factual from what I see.

I will think about the tactics issue.Clear weaknesses in the past and still weaknesses now.

Hang on whilst I get the links to the Sun and NotW.

I recall Shay talking about the lads just want to play footie without all this tactical/team shape malarkey so maybe we are blurring the lines between physical harder and mentally harder. Physically we seem to be in good shape as the game goes on and often we are stronger and better in the 2nd half than the first. You could point to lack of concentration in the last minute or so at Sunderland and Stoke as an area we need to tighten and whether that has a bearing on physical fitness levels although personally I think its a mindset that needs to be acquired and something we are still short of. Paddy and Ade referenced a tough pre-season physically and a good pre-season is often cited as being key to a good season with training geared towards maintaining optimum physical levels during the actual season.

My own take is that its just different under Mancini with a different philosophy and emphasis which takes getting used to. That it is harder than the approach taken by Hughes and his team has been commented upon by some players but whether that is in reference to the greater tactical discipline demanded by Mancini as opposed to the physical exertion required under the respective regimes I will leave others to judge.

Tactically its a no brainer. That is no brains where used under the Hughes regime or at least none were used during the 90 odd minutes of game time. Maybe we needed to be fitter under Hughes as we needed to chase after the ball for longer :)

On a side note the Fulham players commented earlier this season that training under Hughes is more fun than under Roy who used to drill them relentlessly. I guess Fulham are now enjoying the fruits of those 'fun' training sessions.

Thank you for confirming what I thought. No substance at all just reports and hearsay.

On tactics I wouldn't dream of saying Hughes and co were better than Mancini but I would say I am far from convinced that Mancini is good tactically.I do think clear mistakes have been made and Stoke certainly is a case in point at the end where he didn't make the team changes to hold on for the win.Poznan away where he seemed to decide a draw was enough and just gave the initiative away and the points.

On man management I do feel that he is poor bordering on awful but just hope that his approach and the quality we have all the way through the team will be enough. I do wish though that he would stop going on and on about games every 3 days and didn't he say ( in that interview when he spoke about Ade) we had 10 or 11 games before the new year. He must have arranged some behind closed doors!