Mancini out

[The Man In Blue]

have i been asleep for three months? has the season finished? are we in the cl?


nah, didn't think so.

Hubris is most unbecoming.

[BobKowalski]

Looks like I hit a wee nerve... You remind me a lot of Socrates.... anyway...

You refer to these "people" again.

Again- Can we see the list of those who want Mancini to fail please? Because at the end of the day if you don't want to name these people, you should shut the fuck up and stick to rimming Mancini even when we do shite.

I would refer you to the 'Mancini talking drivel' thread.

And get off the we want Mancini to fail bollocks. I am talking about taking every chance to piss on Mancini no matter what because some people don't rate/like the guy or preferred us to stick with the last manager. That is not wanting City to fail or even Mancini to fail. Its just giving the manager zero slack and not missing an opportunity to shit on his head when it goes wrong. It gets fucking tiresome and dull. We get it. Change the fucking record.

You said to me to come back when Mancini had won a game of note because the win against the other mob didn't count. Well he did that against Chelsea. And still we are bitching because the first half wasn't good, we were lucky that Tevez got that goal and so on.
I've already pointed out what I think of the first half and the game as a whole and if that is rimming Mancini then fine. If rimming Mancini is taking a slightly longer view then 2 months or looking to see what he is trying to do then count me in as a 'rimmer'.

[carl_feedthegoat]

Right, its clear as day that you believe their to be an agenda against Mancini himself as you intimate it in every post.

Be a man and name those who don't want city to do well. Tell us who doesn't really support City. Tell us why they want Mancini to fail. Or else chill out with the conspiracy theories because its getting a bit tedious mate and because I'm one of those who wasn't impressed with performances of late and getting knocked out of two cups, I'm starting to think you are putting me in that category, so I really am intrigued to see who's on your list?

What he said....I always rated you as a poster previously. You were/are one of those who were anti-Hughes who could at least put their views forward in a manner which enabled other sane people to respond.

Aligning yourself with the rabid idiots who are nodding in agreement with each other in this thread does you no favours.

As OD says......no-one is anti-Mancini. Lots of us have been angry at him, disappointed in what we've been served up to date but no-one has an agenda, I'm pretty certain EVERYONE wants to avoid more fucking regime change, upheaval and chaos, I certainly want him to succeed.

Yes, I have said (after a match and when feelings running very high after a shite performance) that I wanted him "out of my club" but I've not then continued banging on about it once I've calmed down in the cold light of day. I think that applies equally for most posters who harbour doubts as to whether he has the right stuff.

I don't want a new manager and I certainly have nothing against Roberto Mancini. I just want us to seem like we are moving forward rather than backwards. I hope that Saturday is the start of that process. But if you, or anyone else thinks that "out of respect" we should put up quietly with unacceptable results and performances then you are delusional.

THIS...........AGAIN IN AGREEANCE. (MUST BE SOMETHING IN THE AIR)

[Original Dub]

Looks like I hit a wee nerve... You remind me a lot of Socrates.... anyway...

You refer to these "people" again.

Again- Can we see the list of those who want Mancini to fail please? Because at the end of the day if you don't want to name these people, you should shut the fuck up and stick to rimming Mancini even when we do shite.

I would refer you to the 'Mancini talking drivel' thread.

And get off the we want Mancini to fail bollocks. I am talking about taking every chance to piss on Mancini no matter what because some people don't rate/like the guy or preferred us to stick with the last manager. That is not wanting City to fail or even Mancini to fail. Its just giving the manager zero slack and not missing an opportunity to shit on his head when it goes wrong. It gets fucking tiresome and dull. We get it. Change the fucking record.
You said to me to come back when Mancini had won a game of note because the win against the other mob didn't count. Well he did that against Chelsea. And still we are bitching because the first half wasn't good, we were lucky that Tevez got that goal and so on.
I've already pointed out what I think of the first half and the game as a whole and if that is rimming Mancini then fine. If rimming Mancini is taking a slightly longer view then 2 months or looking to see what he is trying to do then count me in as a 'rimmer'.

Excellent.

Its just strange that you haven't had one bit of criticism towards Mancini over the last couple of months and there has been plenty to criticise, from perfomances to results.... yet said not one word. Then you jump on the opportunity to put the rest of down because we analised the game in full, rather than just the result.

Mancini said our performance against Stoke was better than the one against Chelsea. Are we allowed discuss that, or just the result?

I, along with many many others saw a game of two halves and like the rest of us who are delighted with the result, but cautious to get too over optomistic, I want to see which half was the real city.

Whereas you don't mind if we play like we did in the first, I don't think we'll get near fourth unless we play like we did in the second.

I'm hardly calling Mancini a wanker for a bad first half performance, I'm just intrigued to see which half we replicate against Sunderland. I don't think there's anything wrong with that, but clearly it annoys you that anything is questioned under Mancini.

And yes, I did say come back when he's won a game of note and this was the absolute best way to respond to that concern of mine. I make no bones about it, that second half performance was every bit as good as our performances against Arsenal and Chelsea earlier in the season. Fantastic stuff. I still don't get why I can't be critical of how we set our stall out and why I, and others on here, should just say the whole performance was fantastic when we didn't think it was?!

There's two or three of you who obviously had great hope even when Lampard scored, but based on what I had seen for the last two months and 40 odd mins in the game, I felt we would lose by a pretty fair margin.

And while I hope this is a turning point, forgive me for not breaking out the Moet and Chandon just yet.

[john@staustell]

Its just strange that you haven't had one bit of criticism towards Mancini over the last couple of months and there has been plenty to criticise, from perfomances to results.... yet said not one word. Then you jump on the opportunity to put the rest of down because we analised the game in full, rather than just the result.

You might want to check the spelling on that one Dubs!

[Original Dub]

Its just strange that you haven't had one bit of criticism towards Mancini over the last couple of months and there has been plenty to criticise, from perfomances to results.... yet said not one word. Then you jump on the opportunity to put the rest of down because we analised the game in full, rather than just the result.

You might want to check the spelling on that one Dubs!

Yeah it doesn't look too good mate ;)

Fucking spelling is gone to pot these days.... must have been all that pot years ago catching up on me...

Hey - that must be where the saying comes from "gone to pot".

Mint

[john@staustell]

Its just strange that you haven't had one bit of criticism towards Mancini over the last couple of months and there has been plenty to criticise, from perfomances to results.... yet said not one word. Then you jump on the opportunity to put the rest of down because we analised the game in full, rather than just the result.

You might want to check the spelling on that one Dubs!

Yeah it doesn't look too good mate ;)

Fucking spelling is gone to pot these days.... must have been all that pot years ago catching up on me...

Hey - that must be where the saying comes from "gone to pot".

Mint

Thought it was another 'my young boyzz will win the league' thread for a minute (Oops)

[BobKowalski]

Looks like I hit a wee nerve... You remind me a lot of Socrates.... anyway...

You refer to these "people" again.

Again- Can we see the list of those who want Mancini to fail please? Because at the end of the day if you don't want to name these people, you should shut the fuck up and stick to rimming Mancini even when we do shite.

I would refer you to the 'Mancini talking drivel' thread.

And get off the we want Mancini to fail bollocks. I am talking about taking every chance to piss on Mancini no matter what because some people don't rate/like the guy or preferred us to stick with the last manager. That is not wanting City to fail or even Mancini to fail. Its just giving the manager zero slack and not missing an opportunity to shit on his head when it goes wrong. It gets fucking tiresome and dull. We get it. Change the fucking record.
You said to me to come back when Mancini had won a game of note because the win against the other mob didn't count. Well he did that against Chelsea. And still we are bitching because the first half wasn't good, we were lucky that Tevez got that goal and so on.
I've already pointed out what I think of the first half and the game as a whole and if that is rimming Mancini then fine. If rimming Mancini is taking a slightly longer view then 2 months or looking to see what he is trying to do then count me in as a 'rimmer'.

Excellent.

Its just strange that you haven't had one bit of criticism towards Mancini over the last couple of months and there has been plenty to criticise, from perfomances to results.... yet said not one word. Then you jump on the opportunity to put the rest of down because we analised the game in full, rather than just the result.

Mancini said our performance against Stoke was better than the one against Chelsea. Are we allowed discuss that, or just the result?

I, along with many many others saw a game of two halves and like the rest of us who are delighted with the result, but cautious to get too over optomistic, I want to see which half was the real city.

Whereas you don't mind if we play like we did in the first, I don't think we'll get near fourth unless we play like we did in the second.

I'm hardly calling Mancini a wanker for a bad first half performance, I'm just intrigued to see which half we replicate against Sunderland. I don't think there's anything wrong with that, but clearly it annoys you that anything is questioned under Mancini.

And yes, I did say come back when he's won a game of note and this was the absolute best way to respond to that concern of mine. I make no bones about it, that second half performance was every bit as good as our performances against Arsenal and Chelsea earlier in the season. Fantastic stuff. I still don't get why I can't be critical of how we set our stall out and why I, and others on here, should just say the whole performance was fantastic when we didn't think it was?!

There's two or three of you who obviously had great hope even when Lampard scored, but based on what I had seen for the last two months and 40 odd mins in the game, I felt we would lose by a pretty fair margin.

And while I hope this is a turning point, forgive me for not breaking out the Moet and Chandon just yet.

Who says you cannot be critical? You are on the whole critical because you do not like what you see so far and feel that this is what it will be like in the future. I think you are wrong and I get tired of the sniping which is what it all boils down to in essence.

Nor was I overly optimistic when Lampard scored. I never felt that we would lose by a wide margin because the way Mancini is setting them up and drilling them is not to lose by a wide margin. I thought before the match it would be a cagey affair with the odd goal in it and I was hoping for a draw. To quote the Guardian (I think) City set out to frustrate and then hit Chelsea with swift counter attacks. This was Mancini's plan and it worked far better than I ever hoped it would. If Hughes went to Chelsea with a plan and executed that plan and came away with a 4-2 victory I would have been stunned, then delighted and then maybe wonderd if we did have a manager who could mix it with the big boys after all.

No one is popping open the champers anymore than we were over the victory over Chelsea at home - well I assume no one on here was popping open the champers and everyone was celebrating that result but urging caution because it was important to take the lessons from that victory and apply them in the forthcoming games (which we didn't) and we need to do exactly that second time round. Mancini knows this which is why he said it was an important victory for the mentality. Oddly enough I take heart from Belamy who clearly doesn't like/agree with the Mancini way but damn if the guy isn't applying himself to it 100% as indeed all the team seem to be doing so.

And talking of heart yeah I do take heart from 4 games against the so called 'top 4' - 2 victories, 1 draw and 1 defeat. I like that in his first 2 and bit months.

[Original Dub]

Sound, you should have just said that in the first place Bob.

A fair and reasoned post, with no conspiracy theories or suggestions of persoanl vendettas against the guy. You think this was a turning point and there's a good chance you're right. I hope to fuck you are!

[BobKowalski]

Sound, you should have just said that in the first place Bob.

A fair and reasoned post, with no conspiracy theories or suggestions of persoanl vendettas against the guy. You think this was a turning point and there's a good chance you're right. I hope to fuck you are!

I love it when we agree, just love it :)