The mancityfans.net football forum

Agreed its too early to compare fully but now that the hate has gone.......

How do you think they compare so far?

we attacked alot better under hughes...

Patrick wrote:Agreed its too early to compare fully but now that the hate has gone.......

How do you think they compare so far?

Both had a bright start

Hughes was found tactically and motivationally wanting pretty quickly
Last 4 games worry me that Mancini is also tactically and motivationally wanting + the football last week was the worst I have ever seen

Early days, but it doesnt look like much of an upgrade

Patrick wrote:Agreed its too early to compare fully but now that the hate has gone.......

How do you think they compare so far?

Are you Andrew Davies in disguise?

NO, NO, NO please not another Hughes thread.... But like you say its still to early to compare the two.

King Kev wrote:

Patrick wrote:Agreed its too early to compare fully but now that the hate has gone.......

How do you think they compare so far?

Are you Andrew Davies in disguise?

ouch

just a bit drunk - really sorry

pissed you off that much?

Patrick wrote:

King Kev wrote:

Patrick wrote:Agreed its too early to compare fully but now that the hate has gone.......

How do you think they compare so far?

Are you Andrew Davies in disguise?

ouch

just a bit drunk - really sorry

pissed you off that much?

Ha ha. I take it back mate, I was way too harsh.

Hughes-Good attacking,no wins in derbies,got us to our first semi in years,okish tactics,6th in the league,shit defending,low work rate at times.

Mancini-Ok ish attacking,one win in a derby match but no final,Ok ish tactics,same defending as Hughes,6th in the league,low work rate at times.

Hmmmmmmm,i dunno.

Mancini does wear a scarf better.

ITS NOT THE MANAGERS!!!!!

its the players on 150 k a week contracts !

Where is the motivation? they dont have any you can see it , they turn up when the oposition is shit or they get a stage where they can show off like big games against the top 4. But playing the teams below there is no effort at all unless the teams below us are poor.

Mancini's better looking, but Hughes is a better manager.

BlueMoonAwoken wrote:ITS NOT THE MANAGERS!!!!!

its the players on 150 k a week contracts !

Where is the motivation? they dont have any you can see it , they turn up when the oposition is shit or they get a stage where they can show off like big games against the top 4. But playing the teams below there is no effort at all unless the teams below us are poor.

What a load of crap,Bacon,Mourinho,Ancelotti etc manage to get there boys going.

Chelsea were under the kosh at Hull but managed to drag a draw out of it.

LookMumI'mOnMCF.net wrote:Mancini's better looking, but Hughes is a better manager.

Mancini has won stuff as a manager, sparky hasn't. In what way is sparky the better manager?

I've always got the feeling in these type of games our players think its a cake walk. Now is the manager held responsible for this or is it the players who need to change their mentality themselves? I'm baffled at times and there appears to be no solution...

lets all have a disco wrote:

BlueMoonAwoken wrote:ITS NOT THE MANAGERS!!!!!

its the players on 150 k a week contracts !

Where is the motivation? they dont have any you can see it , they turn up when the oposition is shit or they get a stage where they can show off like big games against the top 4. But playing the teams below there is no effort at all unless the teams below us are poor.

What a load of crap,Bacon,Mourinho,Ancelotti etc manage to get there boys going.

Chelsea were under the kosh at Hull but managed to drag a draw out of it.

Well they all said on here mancini would change us??

And how many players at chelsea , inter milan , united are on over 100 k a week contacts?

Even ireland is on 80 k a week??????????????

I think players at city are being payed waaaaaay too much and play like it too.

Id put money on it now that if we got mourinho and still had the same players we wouldnt be doing any better than we are now.

How the hell can this thread be 'official' when it clearly hasn't been sanctioned by BBL??

FAAAKE!

King Kev wrote:How the hell can this thread be 'official' when it clearly hasn't been sanctioned by BBL??

FAAAKE!

Sorry ill wait for his blessing unitl i post again KK :- D

much of a muchness for me. I support city regardless of the manager. The way i look at it is does he pick the correct starting eleven. Hughes didn't and mancini isn't. Both as bad as each other them imo. We have quality wingers and ade in the middle. Simple really, why have so many defensive midfielders

BlueMoonAwoken wrote:Id put money on it now that if we got mourinho and still had the same players we wouldnt be doing any better than we are now.

Cant agree with you there mate. THAT wouldnt have happened under Jose today - we might have been beaten, but it wouldnt have been for a lack of effort from the team.

He seems to have a knack of knowing how to make the players think they are the best in the world, and get them to project it on the pitch. He is like a upgraded Sam Allardyce in that respect.

He probably isnt the best coach, and he is tactically limited, but he sticks to what he knows and is without doubt the best motivator in world football. With all the billy big bollox at our club, its the natural choice, but lets see if Bobby can turn this round first

This is an interesting phenomenon. If Hughes were in charge after todays game, there would be so much more of shit storm on here. I think they are very similar managerial wise, if anyone is the better manager in my opinion it is Hughes.

Keeping - Hughes

Shay is still the same as he was under Hughes, but Hughes gets the nod because he signed him.

Defence - Exactly the same.

Still complete shit. I think Hughes was more apt to put out a consistant pairing making it possible for form in the long run, with Mancini it is still up in the air what the future of our defence holds.

Attack - Hughes

I hate the way Mancini instructs the wide players to tuck in. It drives me absolutly mad and many of our goals from under hughes came from our width.

Signings - Hughes

Although this is less of a factor due to amounts of windows and board genorosity, in my opinion a Kaka or Terry fiasco is more understandable then a Gago fiasco.

Tatics - Even

I would give the nod to Hughes solely on consistancy, but it is even because I like the way Mancini gives more of an opportunity to the younger players then Hughes did. What drives me mad is although hughes seemed stubborn tatically, he seemed to know the posistions that players should be in better then Mancini. Petrov should never slot in on the right, and Ireland is not a wide player.

I think that this board has been a better place since hughes left because the hughes out brigade has finally shut up and allowed some peace. To say that we are in a better posistion then we are in under Hughes is just completly foolish. I think that the people who didn't like hughes didn't like him because of how he was as a manager but just because he played for the rags. The amount of conflict came from people not being able to look past that, not where we were going or the belief in continuity (which is a proven fact with resources and a half way decent manager). So overall, people who like to bitch will always bitch and hughes never really had a chance from day one.