The mancityfans.net football forum

Does anyone else think these poor lads in the youth teams will never get a chance under Mancini?
What the hell is the point in having players like Razak and others if they never ever get a sniff at playing in the first team?
I just do not get this at all.
Ok, we top of the table and in a bit of a glut (two games beaten on the trott, damn uses to be 15 :O).
They have not had a single chance ever since Mancini come to city.
I don't wanna disrespect bob as he's done a fantastic job at city but i don't see the point in having a youth system as good as ours yet they just end up going to other clubs on virtual free transfers?
Oh and why the fuck hasn't Hargreaves had a chance qagain?
The point in signing him was?
Edit plus 2.
The atmosphere in our ground is fucking horrid, we desperately need a standing singing area, too many glory hunters coming.

I dont think he was too impressed with what he saw when he first got here (compared to where he wanted to take us) - Boyata got some chances before being loaned out, that was about it really. It probably wont be long before some of the recent signings start getting (more) match time though - in matches that are not too pressurised hopefully.

if they are good enough they will break through, they are given time to progress and if they dont make the grade you dont play them, simple as that. Also your point about atmosphere has nothing to do with sitting down or standing up, its to do with the individuals at the game and the players also have a part to play.

Are or our ?

When we win the league the kids will get more of a look in. Bob is under pressure to deliver, hopefully contract negotiations coming up soon. IMO he has to be very clever on risk management until he is in a stronger position within the club, this means he won't gamble with the kids until he has secured his own long term future.

zuricity wrote:Are or our ?

What our you on about?

Our Youth team, not are youth team.

Blue2 wrote:Our Youth team, not are youth team.

What our you on about?

To be fair if we start nit picking on grammar, there would barely be a conversation on the internet, never mind this place.

I'm sure Bob would love to have opportunity to blood some youth, but we haven't exactly been in too many positions where we've been
coasting to victory of late. It's not like you'd throw a kid into, say, the last derby, unless we were well ahead, and as we know, certain people/situations saw to it that we weren't. Pantymellons isn't a kid and look at the stick he got.

When would you suggest we throw these youngsters into the fray exactly?

Edit: on second thoughts, getting 'our' and 'are' mixed up is bloody awful, and this type of thing is just one the reasons I hate the internet.

CityGer wrote:

Blue2 wrote:Our Youth team, not are youth team.

What our you on about?

I wish someone would change the thread title. It makes us look thick.

guv111 wrote:

CityGer wrote:

Blue2 wrote:Our Youth team, not are youth team.

What our you on about?

I wish someone would change the thread title. It makes us look thick.

'Us'? !

Goataldo wrote:

guv111 wrote:

CityGer wrote:

Blue2 wrote:Our Youth team, not are youth team.

What our you on about?

I wish someone would change the thread title. It makes us look thick.

'Us'? !

Ignorance by association.

Goataldo wrote:To be fair if we start nit picking on grammar,

spelling rather than grammar?

I've corrected it you fucking retards.

paulmclaren wrote:I've corrected it you fucking retards.

The winner of Ironic post of the year and we are only in January.

gillie wrote:

paulmclaren wrote:I've corrected it you fucking retards.

The winner of Ironic post of the year and we are only in January.

no need for the capital I in ironic there mate.

oh....

Arjan Van Schotte wrote:

Goataldo wrote:To be fair if we start nit picking on grammar,

spelling rather than grammar?

I think you'll find spelling is part of grammar, arsey-chops!

Thanks for proving the point though...

paulmclaren wrote:Does anyone else think these poor lads in the youth teams will never get a chance under Mancini?
What the hell is the point in having players like Razak and others if they never ever get a sniff at playing in the first team?
I just do not get this at all.
Ok, we top of the table and in a bit of a glut (two games beaten on the trott, damn uses to be 15 :O).
They have not had a single chance ever since Mancini come to city.
I don't wanna disrespect bob as he's done a fantastic job at city but i don't see the point in having a youth system as good as ours yet they just end up going to other clubs on virtual free transfers?
Oh and why the fuck hasn't Hargreaves had a chance qagain?
The point in signing him was?
Edit plus 2.
The atmosphere in our ground is fucking horrid, we desperately need a standing singing area, too many glory hunters coming.

Have you even bothered to check the number of youth players Mancini has given first team opportunities to since he has been at the club? If you had written this post about Hughes when he was manager then that would have been more appropriate.

The fact is, for years we've been producing players who were good enough for lower-Premiership clubs or clubs in the lower leagues. We are now trying to establish ourselves as one of the very best teams in Europe. The only player in the last 15 years who appears to have been good enough for that level is Micah (perhaps SWP if you're being generous but he was never a regular at Chelsea). The bar is a lot higher now for our youth players. Mancini has given debuts to plenty of youth players since he's arrived and the fact he is keeping some, such as Razak, in and around the first team squad at the moment suggests he thinks he may have some who are good enough to play for us.

Arjan Van Schotte wrote:

gillie wrote:

paulmclaren wrote:I've corrected it you fucking retards.

The winner of Ironic post of the year and we are only in January.

no need for the capital I in ironic there mate.

oh....

You need to capitalise the 'n'.

Goataldo wrote:

Arjan Van Schotte wrote:

Goataldo wrote:To be fair if we start nit picking on grammar,

spelling rather than grammar?

I think you'll find spelling is part of grammar, arsey-chops!

Thanks for proving the point though...

And I know you wouldn't. It's rather a case of poor orthography.