The mancityfans.net football forum

Just been looking at the fixtures and the first thing that jumps out is how unlucky Hughes actually was. RM will have the two legged semi which is ultimately winable especially given the rumoured team United will put out. A cup tie against struggling lower league oposition, which should be a gimme and league fixtures against Stoke, Wolves, Blackburn, Everton, Stoke, Portsmouth, Hull and Bolton. Looking at that run of fixtures there is a real possibility we can win them all - leaving us in a position of a major final, passage into the next round of the FA and easily top 4. I think even Hughes would have had a lot of wins out of those fixtures but lets see what RM does with them and how he shapes the team before we make our judgement. By then we will have an idea where he is taking us with regard tactics, selection and desire (also a window of signings) and his ability to win these 'lesser' matches that many of MH could only draw.

Seems fair. More than RSC got!

Yeah dead unlucky was Hughes, given over £200m to spend and a horrendous run of fixtures against the likes of titans like Wigan, Fulham, Birmingham, Burnley, Hull and Bolton

Goaters 103 wrote:Yeah dead unlucky was Hughes, given over £200m to spend and a horrendous run of fixtures against the likes of titans like Wigan, Fulham, Birmingham, Burnley, Hull and Bolton

Why pick on half a sentence of the post and make a such a wanky comment about it? Why not just reply to the main subject matter?

We'll never know what Hughes would've done but it's unimportant now. Mancini has a defence which is desperately weak in the air so he may need a bit of luck against teams like Stoke & Everton. Boro have Wheater who's very good at set pieces & just the sort of bloke who used to massacre Dunney & co in previous years cup debacles. We've already let the rags piss on us in the air once so none of these games are forgone conclusions in my book.

Ted Hughes wrote:We'll never know what Hughes would've done but it's unimportant now. Mancini has a defence which is desperately weak in the air so he may need a bit of luck against teams like Stoke & Everton. Boro have Wheater who's very good at set pieces & just the sort of bloke who used to massacre Dunney & co in previous years cup debacles. We've already let the rags piss on us in the air once so none of these games are forgone conclusions in my book.

Don't agree with that - Mica, Ned, Kolo and Bridge are all decent in the air and on the floor - their inability to play together under the previous regime was the problem - hence the title and main content of the post - fair point about Hughes but it wasn't what I wanted to stress in the OP.

Typical City wrote:

Ted Hughes wrote:We'll never know what Hughes would've done but it's unimportant now. Mancini has a defence which is desperately weak in the air so he may need a bit of luck against teams like Stoke & Everton. Boro have Wheater who's very good at set pieces & just the sort of bloke who used to massacre Dunney & co in previous years cup debacles. We've already let the rags piss on us in the air once so none of these games are forgone conclusions in my book.

Don't agree with that - Mica, Ned, Kolo and Bridge are all decent in the air and on the floor - their inability to play together under the previous regime was the problem - hence the title and main content of the post - fair point about Hughes but it wasn't what I wanted to stress in the OP.

Imo Ned Kolo & Bridge are useless in the air. Also none will be playing.

Generous,Hughes got 11 seconds.

;-)

Ted Hughes wrote:

Typical City wrote:

Ted Hughes wrote:We'll never know what Hughes would've done but it's unimportant now. Mancini has a defence which is desperately weak in the air so he may need a bit of luck against teams like Stoke & Everton. Boro have Wheater who's very good at set pieces & just the sort of bloke who used to massacre Dunney & co in previous years cup debacles. We've already let the rags piss on us in the air once so none of these games are forgone conclusions in my book.

Don't agree with that - Mica, Ned, Kolo and Bridge are all decent in the air and on the floor - their inability to play together under the previous regime was the problem - hence the title and main content of the post - fair point about Hughes but it wasn't what I wanted to stress in the OP.

Imo Ned Kolo & Bridge are useless in the air. Also none will be playing.

It RM believes that (useless in the air) {I don't} then we'll see after the 11 games encapsulating the Jan window.

11 fixtures, well I guess if the Sheik expects 70 points by the end of the season. And it's not like were the only
team to sack managers at will (Scolari didn't even get to mid season with Chelsea.)

In defense of the new ownership, Hughes wasn't their pick for manager.
But if we sack Mancini at the end of the season for being on the edge of the Big 4.
We should burn Cook and co. in Effigy!!!

Hindsight is 20/20.

I question the statement that Hughes wasn't their pick for manager. When they took over, they had a choice and THEY madeTHEIR decision to have Hughes as THEIR manager. AT THAT POINT, HE WAS THEIR CHOICE.

john68 wrote:I question the statement that Hughes wasn't their pick for manager. When they took over, they had a choice and THEY madeTHEIR decision to have Hughes as THEIR manager. AT THAT POINT, HE WAS THEIR CHOICE.

Fair enough. That's a very good point. But you have to admit, that considering the fact Hughes had been hired a month
or so before the sale, sacking him would have been public relations suicide. Cook probably figured, he'll at least if he fails, I will have an excuse to cover my ass. For me, COOK IS THE PROBLEM!!!

lets all have a disco wrote:Generous,Hughes got 11 seconds.

;-)

really? It sometimes seemed that some people were going to give him 11 years to make any progress.

john68 wrote:I question the statement that Hughes wasn't their pick for manager. When they took over, they had a choice and THEY madeTHEIR decision to have Hughes as THEIR manager. AT THAT POINT, HE WAS THEIR CHOICE.

And had they replaced him it would have cost £9M. I realise we all think that's a drop in the ocean, but you don't get to having £500bn by throwing away money you don't have to.

Edit:Better point, then it was Hughes decision to overhaul the squad? Then at that point, the gelling argument fails to carry water, his choice, live or die by it.

Typical City wrote:

Goaters 103 wrote:Yeah dead unlucky was Hughes, given over £200m to spend and a horrendous run of fixtures against the likes of titans like Wigan, Fulham, Birmingham, Burnley, Hull and Bolton

Why pick on half a sentence of the post and make a such a wanky comment about it? Why not just reply to the main subject matter?

I believe your own "wanky comment" in the first place prompted the response.

To suggest City have a run of fixtures that they could win them all is rather a little fanciful too given how the season has panned out.

Let's take each game one at a time eh ?

I would like to see city not concede a goal on saturday. We know we can score at will.

If Man Cini does that for Man City this saturday, I would say we have made improvements.

Typical City wrote:Just been looking at the fixtures and the first thing that jumps out is how unlucky Hughes actually was. RM will have the two legged semi which is ultimately winable especially given the rumoured team U***d will put out. A cup tie against struggling lower league oposition, which should be a gimme and league fixtures against Stoke, Wolves, Blackburn, Everton, Stoke, Portsmouth, Hull and Bolton. Looking at that run of fixtures there is a real possibility we can win them all - leaving us in a position of a major final, passage into the next round of the FA and easily top 4. I think even Hughes would have had a lot of wins out of those fixtures but lets see what RM does with them and how he shapes the team before we make our judgement. By then we will have an idea where he is taking us with regard tactics, selection and desire (also a window of signings) and his ability to win these 'lesser' matches that many of MH could only draw.

As the majority of those games are against shite opposition, I would have predicted a lot of goals conceded and a large number of draws or losses.

Earlier in the season we embarked on a similar run of easy games and everyone predicted good times. How wrong we were.

New manager syndrome and the honeymoon period SHOULD see us over this spell quite comfortably. We already had the players to deal with seams like these. Let's just hope Mancini is up to the job of playing them correctly.

Why 11 games? why not 12?

This is the shittest thread of the week, and thats going some.

Ted Hughes wrote:

Typical City wrote:

Ted Hughes wrote:We'll never know what Hughes would've done but it's unimportant now. Mancini has a defence which is desperately weak in the air so he may need a bit of luck against teams like Stoke & Everton. Boro have Wheater who's very good at set pieces & just the sort of bloke who used to massacre Dunney & co in previous years cup debacles. We've already let the rags piss on us in the air once so none of these games are forgone conclusions in my book.

Don't agree with that - Mica, Ned, Kolo and Bridge are all decent in the air and on the floor - their inability to play together under the previous regime was the problem - hence the title and main content of the post - fair point about Hughes but it wasn't what I wanted to stress in the OP.

Imo Ned Kolo & Bridge are useless in the air. Also none will be playing.

I agree with that.

Crossie - typicalcity said 11 games because they should all be winnable looking at the oppo. But the easy answer to this thread is that Hughes seemed to draw all the winnable games home or away, which is why he is now enjoying a relaxing Xmas with a glass of wine or 2.

Expect some defensive reinforcements next week. Personally I believe Upson CAN do a better job than the current crop, and both he and Cahill will be sold if their clubs see the lure of £££££££££££s.

Niall Quinns Discopants wrote:

lets all have a disco wrote:Generous,Hughes got 11 seconds.

;-)

really? It sometimes seemed that some people were going to give him 11 years to make any progress.

All i wanted was another 11 weeks.

Just see after xmas and the Cup final if we got there.