Official Hughes v Mancini thread

[Ted Hughes]

Is nobody going to point out that some of the managers in that table were in charge of us in lower divisions?

Or that one of them was sacked after 21 games & built a side that ended up winning the European Cup?

[King Kev]

And that you can prove anything with statistics!


I love The Groundhog Game me, we should play it more often!

[petrov]

What is this infatuation with Hughes, I was a supporter of his (well catiously optimistic) but he's gone Mancini is here and these are the decisions we'll live or die by. Hughes was unlucky to lose his job but he's gone. I'm still not sure of Bobby Manc but he's here now and we need to get behind him 100%, at least till his contract is up at the end of the season, these threads are useless. Nobody knows what Mancini would of done with Hughes games and nobody knows what Hughes would of done yesterday.

[Wonderwall]

And that you can prove anything with statistics!


I love The Groundhog Game me, we should play it more often!

The game nobody ever wins, I expect to see it a few more times over the coming years

[Patrick]

Statistically Mancini is the better manager.

The average life of a manager here is......

Just less than 90 games!

Oh for the heady days of a 3rd season manager

[Im_Spartacus]

I think some are getting ahead of themselves here.

Nobody is after Mancini being sacked after a handful of games. I think that Ant put it best though when saying that if we are going to play shit football, then we might as well get the coach who is the best in the world at it, and who can motivate these millionaires like no other coach in the world.

Is it coincidence that this morning papers are full of rumours about Mourinho buying out his contract this summer - why this summer? Ferguson isnt retiring, Guardiola has signed a contract for another year. The only realistic potential vacancies are Liverpool or City, and I think he would prefer to go to the richest club in the world rather than the 2nd most indebted.

I think people need to start to get used to the idea that if Mourinho is available, Mancini is a dead man walking come summer, regardless what position we finish in the league or whether we win a cup, it is a 6 months contract for a reason, so before we start thinking about Mancini building dynasties at the club, and getting time to get it right, wise up, it aint going to happen.

[Ted Hughes]

I think people need to start to get used to the idea that if Mourinho is available, Mancini is a dead man walking come summer

Is this why the players don't seem to be putting in the same effort as they were earlier in the season?

I agree IF we're going to play shit football we may as well have the maestro of shite in charge but I'm still hoping Mancini will produce the flair he was credited with at Inter. (Although I thought Inter were shite myself when I saw them & still are but I'm going off the word of others)

[Original Dub]

but he's hardly going to be short of job offers back in Italy.

correct me if i'm wrong but he was out of work for a year and a half?

CFFR?

He was, and to be honest I think he would have been for a long time. The only available spots that could have interested him were AC Milan, Juventus and Roma after Spalletti left but for various reasons all were off limits for him, Milan and Juventus due to the big rivality with Inter, their fans wouldn't have welcomed him well I guess, and more or less the same goes for Roma, even more so because he played at and managed Lazio too. Besides, Roma wouldn't have been able to afford his wages.

That's simply not true. He wanted to manage a few clubs who didn't go for him. Sunderland? Pompey?

He has won things, but in fairness, he was in a better position to win things IMO. I don't think he would have done any better than Hughes had he managed Wales and Blackburn, no more than I think Hughes would have done any worse had he been handed Inter Milan that season.

I suppose we'll never know, but the facts are that both are young, ambitious managers and so far, as far as Man City is concerned, Mancini has not taken us forward since hughes left.

[DoomMerchant]

I think people need to start to get used to the idea that if Mourinho is available, Mancini is a dead man walking come summer

Is this why the players don't seem to be putting in the same effort as they were earlier in the season?

I agree IF we're going to play shit football we may as well have the maestro of shite in charge but I'm still hoping Mancini will produce the flair he was credited with at Inter. (Although I thought Inter were shite myself when I saw them & still are but I'm going off the word of others)

i agree with this...i think if we don't put our focus behind stability and trust then we'll never get anywhere. I hope Mancio gets it done. I haven't seen anything particularly special yet, but should i have by now? i dunno it's just a handful of matches really. Regardless, I think the Jose noise has to be, and i mean for the sake of the club, has to be bollox...we can't swap out Roberto for Jose in the summer. Just can't. I don't care how much he's coveted at the Swamp or defined as the greatest manager alive by pundits worldwide.

The players need to know that they are playing for a gaffer who has the future, their future, in mind and will focus and hone their skills to get the best footballing out of them. If they doubt that, they doubt themselves and start to think so selfishly that the team results speak volumes. Happens in any sport. and in business as well. Teams that don't trust, fail together.

cheers

[Im_Spartacus]

I think people need to start to get used to the idea that if Mourinho is available, Mancini is a dead man walking come summer

Is this why the players don't seem to be putting in the same effort as they were earlier in the season?

I agree IF we're going to play shit football we may as well have the maestro of shite in charge but I'm still hoping Mancini will produce the flair he was credited with at Inter. (Although I thought Inter were shite myself when I saw them & still are but I'm going off the word of others)

You have to wonder after the last couple of games?

After the debacle of the press conference I just dont think anybody at City including Mancini himself believe that this appointment is anything more than a stop gap.

Analysis of the transfer window is very very interesting. We loaned Robbie so he could be available for next season so he "could play games before the world cup". So we assume he will be happy to come back under Mancini and sit on the bench next year? Bullshit, the club are keeping their options open for Robbie to return under a new manager.

The mess with Gago / Mariga almost sounds like the club actually DIDNT want to sign the players, which backs up a theory I have held since the start with Mancini, that the owners are not prepared to buy players unless they are of the quality that ANY manager would want them in the team. Johnson falls in that category, as it was a comittee initiated purchase, not one Mancini was particularly involved in.

I think we all have to stop kidding ourselves on, everything, absolutely everything is pointing to the fact that we have a caretaker manager.

[edge275]

I think people need to start to get used to the idea that if Mourinho is available, Mancini is a dead man walking come summer

Is this why the players don't seem to be putting in the same effort as they were earlier in the season?

I agree IF we're going to play shit football we may as well have the maestro of shite in charge but I'm still hoping Mancini will produce the flair he was credited with at Inter. (Although I thought Inter were shite myself when I saw them & still are but I'm going off the word of others)

You have to wonder after the last couple of games?

After the debacle of the press conference I just dont think anybody at City including Mancini himself believe that this appointment is anything more than a stop gap.

Analysis of the transfer window is very very interesting. We loaned Robbie so he could be available for next season so he "could play games before the world cup". So we assume he will be happy to come back under Mancini and sit on the bench next year? Bullshit, the club are keeping their options open for Robbie to return under a new manager.

The mess with Gago / Mariga almost sounds like the club actually DIDNT want to sign the players, which backs up a theory I have held since the start with Mancini, that the owners are not prepared to buy players unless they are of the quality that ANY manager would want them in the team. Johnson falls in that category, as it was a comittee initiated purchase, not one Mancini was particularly involved in.

I think we all have to stop kidding ourselves on, everything, absolutely everything is pointing to the fact that we have a caretaker manager.

Yeah I have that feeling too. Solid post mate. Personally I'd love Jose at City.

[Original Dub]

I hope to god we don't end up with Mourinho, but its looking more likely every passing day.

The reason I don't want him is because I don't like the style of football he brings. That said, we're not exactly looking like Arsenal or Barca at the moment so if we're going to play ugly and negative, I'd rather we were winning.

Its all a bit depressing to be honest. All the money in the world and we can't play attractive football and win on a consistant basis.

[ant london]

Didn't see this posted last week....apologies if it was but more intrigue

Brian Marwood's role in spotlight as Manchester City deny discontent

Are there signs of renewed discontent at Manchester City? The sacking of Mark Hughes caused upheaval although the measured start Roberto Mancini has made – plus a relatively comfortable run of games – has calmed matters

But now there are rumours – flatly rejected by the club – of tensions and claims that City missed out on January transfers targets and ended up, in Adam Johnson, with a player the manager did not regard as essential.

City refute the claims as the work of disenchanted agents and those frozen out of the new regime. They point out that Mancini watched DVDs of Johnson, a player he was not overly familiar with, and sanctioned the move and that attempts to sign the likes of Fernando Gago were thwarted by inflated demands.

That may well be true although the fact that there are murmurings of unhappiness, from whatever quarter, inevitably leads the debate back to the role at City played by Brian Marwood, who, certainly, championed the signing of Johnson.

Marwood is the City's "football administration officer", a title that does not exist at any other club. What does it signify? And is Marwood really a problem at City or merely the victim of those feeling sore because of Hughes's departure?

The truth may lie between the two. City certainly feel there is a vendetta against Marwood, who is part of the club's curiously named "executive leadership team" (does that mean board?) established by chief executive Garry Cook, who brought the former winger from Nike, where the pair had worked together.

Apparently it was Hughes who insisted that Marwood was not referred to as the club's director of football. That sounded too grand. It was also a clear sign that the manager did not really want the new man. Who could blame him?

This was Marwood's first job at a club since he retired from playing in 1994.

And Hughes had his own ideas. The 'vision thing' à la Arsène Wenger and Sir Alex Ferguson, is a solo task. It is not a collective. Whatever protests City make, it is undeniable that Marwood played a central role in Hughes's departure and therefore is an important player at the club and in its politics.

[Beefymcfc]

Shouldn't this be called the 'Mancini v Mourinho thread?

Let's not forget, Mancio may still get us to a position where he get's to lead the team out in the Champions League. And that'll do for me sunshine!

[cityPinoy_fc]

come on guys isn't a little to early to compare the two managers. regarding jose i'm a firm believer of having a strong and solid defence so i'd welcome him.

[One cap Whitey]

Analysis of the transfer window is very very interesting. We loaned Robbie so he could be available for next season so he "could play games before the world cup". So we assume he will be happy to come back under Mancini and sit on the bench next year? Bullshit, the club are keeping their options open for Robbie to return under a new manager.

The mess with Gago / Mariga almost sounds like the club actually DIDNT want to sign the players, which backs up a theory I have held since the start with Mancini, that the owners are not prepared to buy players unless they are of the quality that ANY manager would want them in the team. Johnson falls in that category, as it was a comittee initiated purchase, not one Mancini was particularly involved in.

I think we all have to stop kidding ourselves on, everything, absolutely everything is pointing to the fact that we have a caretaker manager.

So, are you suggesting City agreed the fee and probably personal terms, brought him over, probably for a medical but then manipulated the commitee so that he wouldn't get a work permit?

That seems a bit far fetched doesn't it?

I'm more inclined to think that the club did back Mancini in this window and that he will stay barring a very poor end to the season.

[CityFanFromRome]

What is this infatuation with Hughes, I was a supporter of his (well catiously optimistic) but he's gone Mancini is here and these are the decisions we'll live or die by. Hughes was unlucky to lose his job but he's gone. I'm still not sure of Bobby Manc but he's here now and we need to get behind him 100%, at least till his contract is up at the end of the season, these threads are useless. Nobody knows what Mancini would of done with Hughes games and nobody knows what Hughes would of done yesterday.

Smart post this. I could understand still talking about Hughes for a couple weeks after he was gone, but it has been more than a month and a half now, surely it's time to let him go and just get behind the team?

I think people need to start to get used to the idea that if Mourinho is available, Mancini is a dead man walking come summer, regardless what position we finish in the league or whether we win a cup, it is a 6 months contract for a reason, so before we start thinking about Mancini building dynasties at the club, and getting time to get it right, wise up, it aint going to happen.

As much as I can't stand Mourinho personality-wise, I'd be all for getting him in the summer if available, shit football or not. However, this doesn't mean we should pass the next four months comparing Mancini to Hughes just because Mourinho might be available in the summer. If he will be, and we will go for him, ok, but till then, talking about other managers is useless as we have Mancini and we will stay with him at least until the end of the season.

That's simply not true. He wanted to manage a few clubs who didn't go for him. Sunderland? Pompey?

I was talking about clubs in Italy though.

[Im_Spartacus]

Analysis of the transfer window is very very interesting. We loaned Robbie so he could be available for next season so he "could play games before the world cup". So we assume he will be happy to come back under Mancini and sit on the bench next year? Bullshit, the club are keeping their options open for Robbie to return under a new manager.

The mess with Gago / Mariga almost sounds like the club actually DIDNT want to sign the players, which backs up a theory I have held since the start with Mancini, that the owners are not prepared to buy players unless they are of the quality that ANY manager would want them in the team. Johnson falls in that category, as it was a comittee initiated purchase, not one Mancini was particularly involved in.

I think we all have to stop kidding ourselves on, everything, absolutely everything is pointing to the fact that we have a caretaker manager.

So, are you suggesting City agreed the fee and probably personal terms, brought him over, probably for a medical but then manipulated the commitee so that he wouldn't get a work permit?

That seems a bit far fetched doesn't it?

I'm more inclined to think that the club did back Mancini in this window and that he will stay barring a very poor end to the season.

Not far fetched at all. The committee didnt need manipulating, the player didnt fit the work permit criteria. You can offer the club £20m and the player £500k a week, its all irrelevant if you know that he is not going to get a work permit. It actually seems the prime minister wanted this deal more than city - if we had really wanted the player, and knew there would be complications with a work permit, we wouldnt have waited until deadline day.

Aside from Mariga, what is your explanation for what happened with Gago then? Maybe, just maybe there is a bit of truth in what the agent is saying, that they were used, and that city had no intention of doing a deal.

Anyway, apologies I have taken this off the original subject

[One cap Whitey]

Analysis of the transfer window is very very interesting. We loaned Robbie so he could be available for next season so he "could play games before the world cup". So we assume he will be happy to come back under Mancini and sit on the bench next year? Bullshit, the club are keeping their options open for Robbie to return under a new manager.

The mess with Gago / Mariga almost sounds like the club actually DIDNT want to sign the players, which backs up a theory I have held since the start with Mancini, that the owners are not prepared to buy players unless they are of the quality that ANY manager would want them in the team. Johnson falls in that category, as it was a comittee initiated purchase, not one Mancini was particularly involved in.

I think we all have to stop kidding ourselves on, everything, absolutely everything is pointing to the fact that we have a caretaker manager.

So, are you suggesting City agreed the fee and probably personal terms, brought him over, probably for a medical but then manipulated the commitee so that he wouldn't get a work permit?

That seems a bit far fetched doesn't it?

I'm more inclined to think that the club did back Mancini in this window and that he will stay barring a very poor end to the season.

Not far fetched at all. The committee didnt need manipulating, the player didnt fit the work permit criteria. You can offer the club £20m and the player £500k a week, its all irrelevant if you know that he is not going to get a work permit. It actually seems the prime minister wanted this deal more than city - if we had really wanted the player, and knew there would be complications with a work permit, we wouldnt have waited until deadline day.

Aside from Mariga, what is your explanation for what happened with Gago then? Maybe, just maybe there is a bit of truth in what the agent is saying, that they were used, and that city had no intention of doing a deal.

Anyway, apologies I have taken this off the original subject

What, agent upset in losing a fortune shock?

Maybe I'm being naive but I just think Gago was back up and the other deal fell through so late we ran out of time.

We'll see in the summer eh, maybe we'll go after him again.

Re Mariga, I still think it very unlikely that City would go through the whole masquerade if they knew full well that the work permit would be denied.

Anyway, back on topic its too too early to say.

[carl_feedthegoat]

CANT BELIEVE THIS THREAD HAS COME UP (GIVE YOURSELF A FUCKING SLAP PATRICK) AFTER ALL THE SHIT WE ALL WENT THROUGH WITH THE HUGHES IN AND OUT THREADS I THOUGHT WE HAD GOT PAST IT.

THEN THIS THREAD COMES UP.

I THINK ILL STAY AWAY FROM IT AS IT,S FUCKING STUPID TO COMPARE AFTER A HANDFULL OF GAMES.