Mancini & Europe

[Bluemoon16]

Roberto Mancini: Why Does Manchester City's Manager Consistently Fail in Europe?


The 2011-12 season has thus far been a fairy tale for Manchester City fans. After a close loss to Manchester United in the Community Shield, Manchester City has been on fire in the English Premier League and has won its Carling Cup matches with ease.

City’s undefeated EPL form and massive wins over top-level opposition (5-1 against Tottenham, 6-1 against Manchester United) has led to comparisons by both fans and the media between the current Manchester City side and the 2003-04 Arsenal Invincibles, as well as general praise from pundits around the world.

But yesterday, Manchester City’s magical season took a huge hit.

Manchester City lost their second Champions League group stage match to Napoli, courtesy of a Edinson Cavani double. Although the match was not significantly hyped up prior to being played, its implications now are huge for Manchester City fans: City is, most likely, out of the Champions League.

To qualify now, Manchester City would need to beat group-leader Bayern Munich, who Manchester City lost to 2-0 in Germany, and then hope that Napoli lose to Villarreal, who have picked up a point in the Champions League in all five group stage matches and have nothing to play for.

It’s not impossible, but the chances are certainly not in Manchester City’s favor.

Manchester City’s current situation raises a peculiar question: Why does this always happen to Roberto Mancini?

Mancini is the king of the domestic game. At Fiorentina, Lazio, Inter Milan and now Manchester City, Mancini has managed to bring in silverware against the odds and perform better than expectations.

Three consecutive Serie A titles with Inter Milan, four Coppa Italias (one with Fiorentina, one with Lazio, two with Inter Milan), and the FA Cup with Manchester City speaks to Mancini’s mastery of domestic league football.

Yet, at the final frontier, arguably the most competitive football competition in all of football, the UEFA Champions League, Roberto Mancini has just not been able to cut it.

In his four seasons at Inter Milan, Mancini only ever got to the quarterfinals of the Champions League, and never got any farther, losing in the Round of 16 in his final two seasons.

Ironically, a quarterfinal finish was fairly decent for Mancini in his first two seasons on the job, since Inter Milan were still, at best, the third-best team in Italy, after AC Milan and Juventus.

After Calciopoli, however, and the huge reinforcements that Inter Milan gained as a result, finishing at the Round of 16 was just not acceptable for Inter Milan, and this ultimately led to Mancini’s sacking as Inter manager.

In 2006-07, in the midst of a record-breaking 17 consecutive Serie A wins and setting a record league point total of 97 points, Inter Milan was knocked out in the Round of 16 to lowly Valencia, who finished their La Liga season that year with a decent but unspectacular point total of 66 points, good for fourth place.

In 2007-08, it was a case of déjà vu: High-flying Inter Milan, who would go on to win Serie A for the third consecutive year, lost to Liverpool, who like Valencia the year before only finished fourth in the EPL that season, in the Round of 16.

At Manchester City, It has been a case of more of the same. In the less-hyped-but-still-relevant Europa League, Mancini once against lost in the Round of 16, this time to Dynamo Kiev.

So what is it then that makes Europe such an impossible frontier for Mancini?

There are a myriad of reasons that can be offered.

Some argue that Mancini simply doesn't take Europe seriously enough. Yesterday, Mancini decided to leave regular starters Gale Clichy, Micah Richards and Sergio Aguero on the bench in favor of Alexander Kolarov, Pablo Zabaleta and Edin Dzeko.

The latter three would arguably walk into all but the best starting lineups in Europe, but they still are not the best players that Manchester City have to offer in their respective positions.

Others point to Mancini's strange tactical decisions. Despite the 4-2-3-1's immense success domestically, Mancini decided to ditch it for a more traditional 4-4-2, probably hoping for more offensive flair.

This backfired dramatically, as Man City found their defense much less protected and much more vulnerable whenever Napoli attacked.

Finally, others believe Mancini is simply too negative in Europe. This is certainly supported by his tactical decisions: Micah Richards and Gael Clichy are much more offensive full-backs than Zabaleta and Kolarov, while Aguero is more offensive the Dzeko.

Furthermore, the 4-2-3-1 has allowed Man City to play its free-flowing offense to full effect this season, whereas the 4-4-2, which City used last year, frequently forced Man City to grind out 1-0 and 2-1 wins and led to many draws as well.

This may be the most valid reason, as the same negativity can be seen in Inter Milan's Champions League exits; the Italian champions scored no goals against Liverpool, and exited the Champions League on away goals against Valencia.

Going even further back, Inter Milan exited the Champions League in 2005-06 against Villarreal due to an awful offensive performance. Against AC Milan, they were once again fairly limited on the offensive end, but to be fair, AC Milan were the better team at the time.

A combination of these reasons is likely why Mancini has simply not been good enough in Europe. He is certainly one of the best managers in Europe, and if he guides Manchester City to the EPL title as expected, he will still have done very well for himself and City this season.

But if Mancini hopes to ever enter the history books as one of the greatest managers of all time, he will surely have to overcome his record of consistent failure in Europe and finally guide his team to success in the world's greatest football competition.

By Hendy

[freshie]

Can't really argue with any of the reasons given as to why Mancini and City struggle in Europe

[Foreverinbluedreams]

"To qualify now, Manchester City would need to beat group-leader Bayern Munich, who Manchester City lost to 2-0 in Germany, and then hope that Napoli lose to Villarreal, who have picked up a point in the Champions League in all five group stage matches and have nothing to play for."

Wrong! If we win we have to hope for a draw, not just a Napoli defeat.

Villareal haven't picked up a point but this may be a typo, so I'll let him away with it, this time.

[Moonchesteri]

If we ever sack a manager due to poor european results after he has just won us the title I will be fuming.

That was a decent read though.

[Foreverinbluedreams]

"Furthermore, the 4-2-3-1 has allowed Man City to play its free-flowing offense to full effect this season, whereas the 4-4-2, which City used last year, frequently forced Man City to grind out 1-0 and 2-1 wins and led to many draws as well."

We've played with Dzeko and Aguero from the start in 6/12 domestic league games this season, surely this is a 4-4-2?

We've only actually started two games domestically with only one recognised striker on the pitch, on the opening day vs Swansea ( Dzeko ) and against Villa ( Balotelli ).

We didn't use a 4-4-2 frequently last year. We used a 4-2-3-1 in the majority of games.

So, whilst I agree that Mancini has his tactics wrong in Europe this fella is essentially talking shit when it comes to the domestic game.

[Mark Garrett]

If we ever sack a manager due to poor european results after he has just won us the title I will be fuming.

That was a decent read though.

I agree with this completely.

The Mancini in Europe question is an interesting one. Inter were not used to winning trophies and he changed that with 3 league titles and coppa Italia cup wins. Whatever the scandal in Italian football at that time - look in the history book and he won the league 3 times with Inter. Their defeats in Europe were to Valencia twice - they have been the 3rd best team in Spain for years and the other was to Liverpool when Inter were down to 10men in the 1st leg at Anfield for much of the game http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/footbal ... 250324.stm

Also the Champions Lge is a knockout competition after the group stage and so essentially anything can happen - the best team does not always win the competition - in 2004 Porto, 2005- Liverpool, 2010 Inter - these won the Champions Lge but they were not the best sides in Europe that season. Also dare I say it even took Ferguson 13yrs after his appointment at United for them to win the European Cup.

At City under Roberto Mancini in Europe, we got knocked out agst Kiev after being down to 10men for virtually all of the 2nd leg. I believe we would have gone through had Balotelli not been sent off but we will never know. This season, we were in the hardest group bar none and ok we may go out - these things happen. By the end of the season we could yet have a European trophy in the cabinet - the Europa Lge and I for one would be delighted. Also would improve our co-efficient pts to possibly enable us to be in a higher pot seedings for next season in Europe.

[1950]

"Furthermore, the 4-2-3-1 has allowed Man City to play its free-flowing offense to full effect this season, whereas the 4-4-2, which City used last year, frequently forced Man City to grind out 1-0 and 2-1 wins and led to many draws as well."

We've played with Dzeko and Aguero from the start in 6/12 domestic league games this season, surely this is a 4-4-2?

We've only actually started two games domestically with only one recognised striker on the pitch, on the opening day vs Swansea ( Dzeko ) and against Villa ( Balotelli ).

We didn't use a 4-4-2 frequently last year. We used a 4-2-3-1 in the majority of games.

So, whilst I agree that Mancini has his tactics wrong in Europe this fella is essentially talking shit when it comes to the domestic game.

Not only the domestic game.

Others point to Mancini's strange tactical decisions. Despite the 4-2-3-1's immense success domestically, Mancini decided to ditch it for a more traditional 4-4-2, probably hoping for more offensive flair.

This backfired dramatically, as Man City found their defense much less protected and much more vulnerable whenever Napoli attacked.

Finally, others believe Mancini is simply too negative in Europe. This is certainly supported by his tactical decisions: Micah Richards and Gael Clichy are much more offensive full-backs than Zabaleta and Kolarov, while Aguero is more offensive the Dzeko.

So Mancini was hoping for more offensive flair AND too negative at the same time?

In a traditional 4-4-2 with Balotelli wide left & Milner in an advanced central role? How does that work?

And to top it off, Aguero is "more offensive" than Dzeko?!

What the cunt am I reading here?

[Blue Since 76]

If we ever sack a manager due to poor european results after he has just won us the title I will be fuming.

That was a decent read though.

In the next couple of seasons yes. However if we won the next 10 premier leagues but always got knocked out at the group stages I'd say the manager's position was at risk

[Hazy2]

Rags have qualified 17 times for knockout stages, they have won it 3 times since 1955, I say won it they have been lucky twice with Bayern missing a dozen chances to go 2-0 and John Terry the twat slipping. I do think Bobby fucked up on Tuesday with his team selection, I also think the tean ran out of ideas against a team doing what we do which is counter attack at pace. So work to be done and lessons to be learned. Champs league has never been defended so it is tough, the players and we now that.

[brite blu sky]

That article is the biggest pile of tosh ever, contradicts itself to suit itself and is simply wrong on ALL of the points put forward.

Written by a total numpty.

[failsworthblue]

Roberto Mancini: Why Does Manchester City's Manager Consistently Fail in Europe?


The 2011-12 season has thus far been a fairy tale for Manchester City fans. After a close loss to Manchester United in the Community Shield, Manchester City has been on fire in the English Premier League and has won its Carling Cup matches with ease.

City’s undefeated EPL form and massive wins over top-level opposition (5-1 against Tottenham, 6-1 against Manchester United) has led to comparisons by both fans and the media between the current Manchester City side and the 2003-04 Arsenal Invincibles, as well as general praise from pundits around the world.

But yesterday, Manchester City’s magical season took a huge hit.

Manchester City lost their second Champions League group stage match to Napoli, courtesy of a Edinson Cavani double. Although the match was not significantly hyped up prior to being played, its implications now are huge for Manchester City fans: City is, most likely, out of the Champions League.

To qualify now, Manchester City would need to beat group-leader Bayern Munich, who Manchester City lost to 2-0 in Germany, and then hope that Napoli lose to Villarreal, who have picked up a point in the Champions League in all five group stage matches and have nothing to play for.

It’s not impossible, but the chances are certainly not in Manchester City’s favor.

Manchester City’s current situation raises a peculiar question: Why does this always happen to Roberto Mancini?

Mancini is the king of the domestic game. At Fiorentina, Lazio, Inter Milan and now Manchester City, Mancini has managed to bring in silverware against the odds and perform better than expectations.

Three consecutive Serie A titles with Inter Milan, four Coppa Italias (one with Fiorentina, one with Lazio, two with Inter Milan), and the FA Cup with Manchester City speaks to Mancini’s mastery of domestic league football.

Yet, at the final frontier, arguably the most competitive football competition in all of football, the UEFA Champions League, Roberto Mancini has just not been able to cut it.

In his four seasons at Inter Milan, Mancini only ever got to the quarterfinals of the Champions League, and never got any farther, losing in the Round of 16 in his final two seasons.

Ironically, a quarterfinal finish was fairly decent for Mancini in his first two seasons on the job, since Inter Milan were still, at best, the third-best team in Italy, after AC Milan and Juventus.

After Calciopoli, however, and the huge reinforcements that Inter Milan gained as a result, finishing at the Round of 16 was just not acceptable for Inter Milan, and this ultimately led to Mancini’s sacking as Inter manager.

In 2006-07, in the midst of a record-breaking 17 consecutive Serie A wins and setting a record league point total of 97 points, Inter Milan was knocked out in the Round of 16 to lowly Valencia, who finished their La Liga season that year with a decent but unspectacular point total of 66 points, good for fourth place.

In 2007-08, it was a case of déjà vu: High-flying Inter Milan, who would go on to win Serie A for the third consecutive year, lost to Liverpool, who like Valencia the year before only finished fourth in the EPL that season, in the Round of 16.

At Manchester City, It has been a case of more of the same. In the less-hyped-but-still-relevant Europa League, Mancini once against lost in the Round of 16, this time to Dynamo Kiev.

So what is it then that makes Europe such an impossible frontier for Mancini?

There are a myriad of reasons that can be offered.

Some argue that Mancini simply doesn't take Europe seriously enough. Yesterday, Mancini decided to leave regular starters Gale Clichy, Micah Richards and Sergio Aguero on the bench in favor of Alexander Kolarov, Pablo Zabaleta and Edin Dzeko.

The latter three would arguably walk into all but the best starting lineups in Europe, but they still are not the best players that Manchester City have to offer in their respective positions.

Others point to Mancini's strange tactical decisions. Despite the 4-2-3-1's immense success domestically, Mancini decided to ditch it for a more traditional 4-4-2, probably hoping for more offensive flair.

This backfired dramatically, as Man City found their defense much less protected and much more vulnerable whenever Napoli attacked.

Finally, others believe Mancini is simply too negative in Europe. This is certainly supported by his tactical decisions: Micah Richards and Gael Clichy are much more offensive full-backs than Zabaleta and Kolarov, while Aguero is more offensive the Dzeko.

Furthermore, the 4-2-3-1 has allowed Man City to play its free-flowing offense to full effect this season, whereas the 4-4-2, which City used last year, frequently forced Man City to grind out 1-0 and 2-1 wins and led to many draws as well.

This may be the most valid reason, as the same negativity can be seen in Inter Milan's Champions League exits; the Italian champions scored no goals against Liverpool, and exited the Champions League on away goals against Valencia.

Going even further back, Inter Milan exited the Champions League in 2005-06 against Villarreal due to an awful offensive performance. Against AC Milan, they were once again fairly limited on the offensive end, but to be fair, AC Milan were the better team at the time.

A combination of these reasons is likely why Mancini has simply not been good enough in Europe. He is certainly one of the best managers in Europe, and if he guides Manchester City to the EPL title as expected, he will still have done very well for himself and City this season.

But if Mancini hopes to ever enter the history books as one of the greatest managers of all time, he will surely have to overcome his record of consistent failure in Europe and finally guide his team to success in the world's greatest football competition.

By Hendy

Dead Easy
Picked the wrong team at home against Napoli , not learned his lesson and did the same again in a more important game.

Very poor IMO.