The mancityfans.net football forum

Can someone please take the time and highlight to me how it was done badly? I just don't see what was wrong with it. Not one bit. I had no problem with Cookie's press conference either.

It's never pleasant to sack the manager. I thought it was handled satisfactorily.

I keep reading snide remarks from posters about how poorly we handled it. Please explain yourselves and how it could have been handled better.

1. It was leaked before the game that he was sacked ala Jol for Spurs a couple of years ago. This meant he had to manage the game knowing he (and half the ground) was sacked. That is shitty no matter what. You cannot say we handled the situation well.

2. Cook is a cock of the highest order. After saying he wasn't going to answer any questions about the sacked he waded in 10 minutes later saying "right lads I'm going to say something here" and proceeded to slam his hand on the table time after time. He lost it completely. It was a PR disaster. He cannot handle anyone questioning him.

They could have got their heads together before they went into the press conference. It was like two naughty schoolboys going into the headmasters office. They looked like goody two shoes and gripper stebson from grange hill.

What MRM said. Adding to the fact that he actually was sacked despite not being awful of course.

I've noticed MH has laid low for a while. Even now he knows how to play the media perfectly. He's staying out of it and playing the bigger man. Pair play to him.

Cheers lads, I didn't see the 10 minutes MRM was referring to. Anyone got a clip? Would it be on youtube?

dazby wrote:Can someone please take the time and highlight to me how it was done badly? I just don't see what was wrong with it. Not one bit. I had no problem with Cookie's press conference either.

It's never pleasant to sack the manager. I thought it was handled satisfactorily.

I keep reading snide remarks from posters about how poorly we handled it. Please explain yourselves and how it could have been handled better.

It was 18 months too late.

hahahhahahhaha Now I can laugh.

This season has been unusual for sacking managers. It hasn't really been happening to any great degree. Last year was totally different.

There were signs and noises but it was still a surprise and it happened fast. The media are always going to go into the kind of frenzy that they eat their own tails when something like this happens.

This is a really slow period, there's nothing, not a single fucling thing going on of any interest to write about and suddenly this lands in their laps. They have to make as big a deal of it as possible.

There are two ways to parse the statements of Cook and Mancini. One way (apparently) contradicts, another makes perfect sense. One story is more interesting, you have to write something. Someone will take that slant and others then follow. It's exactly what happened. Story was reported and was no big deal. A few tabloids thought something more was afoot (because they were going to make something up anyway and this was better) and ran with it.

There's no easy way to sack your manager when you're having one of your best seasons in many fans memories. Certainly it could have gone smoother, but fuck it. His feelings are secondary at this point, besides those wankers in the press couldn't care less about how he feels, they wanted him sacked. And for more reasons than his sacking was a big Christmas present that sold a lot of papers in these tough times.

Cook is a liability whenever he speaks to the media but this accepted bollocks that the club did anything wrong in the actual sacking is really irritating me. It wasn't leaked by the club, it was leaked in Italy. It was unfortunate but is being overplayed massively by Hughes supporters with an axe to grind yet who cannot come up with any reason for him to be kept beyond being "not awful!"

I think it's the fact he had to manage the team despite 44,000 City fans in the ground practicly knowing he was sacked aswell as himself that has got us all the shit from the media, the way Mancini was so swiftly apointed made it obvious we had spoke to him whilst Hughes was still manager witch gave the media a huge stick, make that log to beat us with.

Cook on the other hand just constantly seems to drop a bollock evertime he speaks to the media in public, there is no doubt in my mind however that he has done alot for the club behind the scenes. As someone said before, when he said "I won't be saying anymore on the matter" only to have a full blown tantrum on national television 5 minutes later about the very topic makes him look very amature and stupid, again making it easy for the media to bash us.

My personal opinion on the whole matter is that I never expected Hughes to be here beyond the summer so he was always going to get the bullet sooner or later, I did think he would get the full season but it wasn't meant to be. Hughes has a reputation as a good young Brittish manager so he is always going to get job offers in the future. In Mancini I believe we have now got the right man in there to get the best out of these big name players. Ultimitly for Hughes he wasn't that man, which is why he has now been replaced.

Yes we could have handled it better but what's done is done, onwards and upwards with Roberto Mancini I say starting with Stoke City.

Did they really expect to sack someone in a vital role without having lined up a replacement or at least sounded some people out on the subject? I think the media are the true Clueless One.

Slim wrote:Did they really expect to sack someone in a vital role without having lined up a replacement or at least sounded some people out on the subject? I think the media are the true Clueless One.

while I don't think Cook handled the whole thing well, what I don't understand is how people can give him stick for having a quality replacement in? That is EXACTLY how it should be done.

Socrates wrote:Cook is a liability whenever he speaks to the media but this accepted bollocks that the club did anything wrong in the actual sacking is really irritating me. It wasn't leaked by the club, it was leaked in Italy. It was unfortunate but is being overplayed massively by Hughes supporters with an axe to grind yet who cannot come up with any reason for him to be kept beyond being "not awful!"

The fact that he got us to our first semi final in 28 years is reason enough on it's own to have kept him until at least February.

Having said that, despite being a [strike]Hughes[/strike] stability supporter, I'm moving on and excited to see what Mancini can do. Maybe it's time you did the same.

It's over. Can't we move on?

Forward with Robbie Manc!

john@staustell wrote:It's over. Can't we move on?

Forward with Robbie Manc!

amen. Soon he will be just faded memory. Onwards and upwards!

Just to put something else to bed! hughes DID know he was getting the chop beforehand!
A mate who worked at an electrical shop in macclesfield got a call from his ex boss on the Friday before the Sunderland game and he told him that the store were booked in to do some electrical work at MH's house the following Monday but on the Thursday my mates ex boss received a call from mrs. Hughes cancelling the work as they "would be away on holiday"!

The club should have dissmissed him before that game and put Brian Kid in charge untill last monday when mancini could be unvielled.
Like many have said though, we'd have been totally naive to not have done the groundwork beforehand.

Another theroy about the whole affair is that as long as a year ago (when we were initially linked with Mancini) the wheels could have put in motion. The owners had to be seen to give hughes time: Mancini was available for work but ultimately stayed 'unemployed' until the time was right to sever ties with Hughes (although I believe he was still contracted to Inter this would have been easily overcome had another suiter required his services).
Mancini had spent a great deal of time in this country learning the language and familliarizing himself with the EPL and possibly our club?
it all seems to add up and maybe the full story will never come out but its possible this was done this time last year.

I think the point is that there was absolutely no need for it to be handled this way. Whether people like Hughes or not, if they were going to sack him he could & should have been sacked immediately after the Spuds game. The reason he wasn't is supposed to be that the chairman wanted to sack him in person so left him to squirm on the hook until he turned up to put him out of his misery at the weekend because he was busy doing something more important during the week. He's then fucked off again & left someone with the incompetent media skills of Cook to explain it all.

Shabby, disgraceful & has brought us the worst publicity we've ever had in my lifetime of supporting City. As the people involved have money & we need it, everyone is happy to pretend it's fine to behave like that.

M147WN wrote:Another theroy about the whole affair is that as long as a year ago (when we were initially linked with Mancini) the wheels could have put in motion. The owners had to be seen to give hughes time: Mancini was available for work but ultimately stayed 'unemployed' until the time was right to sever ties with Hughes (although I believe he was still contracted to Inter this would have been easily overcome had another suiter required his services).
Mancini had spent a great deal of time in this country learning the language and familliarizing himself with the EPL and possibly our club?
it all seems to add up and maybe the full story will never come out but its possible this was done this time last year.

I can believe that. Maybe because it makes sense or just because I want to but I like it.

Mancini studies for his next job with what's probably going to be the best job in the Prem, whilst he waits for a huge payout from Inter who fucked him over. Everyone's a winner!!!! (except Lesley and Inter, of course.)

Ted Hughes wrote:I think the point is that there was absolutely no need for it to be handled this way. Whether people like Hughes or not, if they were going to sack him he could & should have been sacked immediately after the Spuds game. The reason he wasn't is supposed to be that the chairman wanted to sack him in person so left him to squirm on the hook until he turned up to put him out of his misery at the weekend because he was busy doing something more important during the week. He's then fucked off again & left someone with the incompetent media skills of Cook to explain it all.

Shabby, disgraceful & has brought us the worst publicity we've ever had in my lifetime of supporting City. As the people involved have money & we need it, everyone is happy to pretend it's fine to behave like that.

But we couldn't sack him after the Spurs match as we didn't have a replacement lined up yet.

We were not going to sack Hughes and be left managerless. The board and owners wanted to make sure we had a replacement confirmed before getting rid. That is a perfectly logical thing to do.

It is a shame that it was leaked out before Khaldoon and Cook could tell Hughes themselves, but I think ensuring we had a new manager before sacking Hughes was the right thing to do.

We would have been in a worse position within the club if we went through a period with no manager at all!

aaron bond wrote:

Ted Hughes wrote:I think the point is that there was absolutely no need for it to be handled this way. Whether people like Hughes or not, if they were going to sack him he could & should have been sacked immediately after the Spuds game. The reason he wasn't is supposed to be that the chairman wanted to sack him in person so left him to squirm on the hook until he turned up to put him out of his misery at the weekend because he was busy doing something more important during the week. He's then fucked off again & left someone with the incompetent media skills of Cook to explain it all.

Shabby, disgraceful & has brought us the worst publicity we've ever had in my lifetime of supporting City. As the people involved have money & we need it, everyone is happy to pretend it's fine to behave like that.

But we couldn't sack him after the Spurs match as we didn't have a replacement lined up yet.

We were not going to sack Hughes and be left managerless. The board and owners wanted to make sure we had a replacement confirmed before getting rid. That is a perfectly logical thing to do.

It is a shame that it was leaked out before Khaldoon and Cook could tell Hughes themselves, but I think ensuring we had a new manager before sacking Hughes was the right thing to do.

We would have been in a worse position within the club if we went through a period with no manager at all!

We all know now that's not true but I don't want to get into arguments about it. I'm 100% behind Mancini now & hope the board are too.