What are your reservations about Mancini?

[Beefymcfc]

I'm thinking of starting a new thread entitled, 'Are all these managerial threads being started for real debate, or for certain individuals to make a point - To Each Other'!!!

[BobKowalski]

-There's an element of style over substance with him as a person. i.e. Groomed hair, sharp suits, that fucking scarf wrapped round his neck when the sun is shining.
-Signing Vieira. Any more over the hill crap and I'll sniper them off the field.
-Over cautious Football. Adebayor needed to start against Arsenal. Perhaps bring him off after we score like Sven would do with players.
-The fact that his record in Italy is brilliant yet Sven had won Titles in 3 Countries. Counted for nothing when he had one idea for City.
-Taking us out of both Cups. Nothing new there!
-Beating just one prominent side in a League Match. Is it only one of the top 7 or 8 that he's beaten in the Prem?

I just haven't warmed to the Guy. I was the same with Keegan from day one. Just found him false or insincere.

If you don't like the guy there is nothing that can be said or done and its fair enough. I thought similar of Hughes. Frankly I thought Hughes was an incompetent arsehole - others thought he was a good manager. You pay your money and take your choice I guess.

-Style over substance is an opinion.
-Vieira is crap.
-The Football is overtly Defensive. Fact.
-Appointing a Coach with no useful experience of English Football is a risk. I'm not counting his stint with Leicester.
-Took us out of both Cups. Fact.
-Beaten just one prominent side in the Premiership. Fact.

But equally all you are doing is reiterating the negative points with no attempt at balancing them with any positive points.

You do this because you don't like the guy. Fact.

[Socrates]

I'm thinking of starting a new thread entitled, 'Are all these managerial threads being started for real debate, or for certain individuals to make a point - To Each Other'!!!

Fact.

And do people really think we would have won both cups with Leslie?

[Grob]

My biggest reservation is that Manchester City fans won't give him the time to get the job done and make snap judgments that on paper look like a balanced view but aren't.

Happened under the last manager too.

Maybe we are just not very good supporters?

[Grob]

My main reservation is his lack of experience in the Premiership coupled with his lack firsthand knowledge about the players in the squad. Inexperience can lead to making mistakes and a degree of over caution when assessing a situation.

He seemed to get to grips with the players relatively quickly so really its just the lack of Premeriership experience for which the only solution is time. Given the situation time was and is not on Mancini's side but thats the hand he chose to play and has done so with (imo) considerable skill and thankfully without a shedload of excuses.

Whether he can close out the deal remains to be seen. Irrespective of whether he does or doesn't close out the deal I would like to see him in charge for a full season with the proviso that we are aiming for a credible challenge for the PL title with a CL spot as a given.

So no reservations other than he didn't manage here before?

Nothing you've seen has caused you any reservations? It certainly is a game of interpretation, that is becoming more evident in every passing week.

You asked for reservations and I gave you my main reservation so whats the problem? Not 'reservation' enough? I've explained enough times what I think of Mancini and the job that he is doing.

You don't like him I get. You think he isn't as good as Hughes I get.

You started a thread asking/looking for the downside of a manager whose has been in situ for 4 months after coming in half way through a season. How about a thread asking what are the positives about Mancini? For starters the fact he is so hands on coaching wise. The fact that he knows how to organise a team.

Change your name to NQD and the manager to Hughes and its last season all over again minus the shite results.

Hull x 1
Everton x 2
United x 1
Stoke x 2

[Grob]

I feel that many of the Hughes lovers have simply become Mancini haters simply because they lost out on their beloved.

It amazes me how people can start threads to list reasons to have a cry about the manager that has us aimed at our best finish in decades. Give him a transfer window (rather than an unprepared jan window) and a full season and then we can judge him.

I'll admit we did see some pretty dire football when he first came, but we couldnt defend for shit then, I feel as the squad are adapting to this new way of playing the games are improving gradually.

We are in the same spot in the table now than when Hughes was sacked for 'failing' to hit a target. Infact he never actually failed, the board just felt he would do.

I hope Mancini becomes the main man, i cant reiterate that enough, because I want stability to breed success. Which it will.

But i feel if Mancini fails then he should be reprimanded like the man before him to show consistancy. Its not how I would run a football club but the board have set a precedence now.

[Mr Miyagi]

Mancini can't win it seems.... the widespread opinion was that our defence and team organisation were going down the pan. He was told to fix it. He has fixed it and now he isn't "attack-minded" enough.

[btajim]

But equally all you are doing is reiterating the negative points with no attempt at balancing them with any positive points.

You do this because you don't like the guy. Fact.

Are you a Fan of our new Manager? If so, then why don't you give me some positive points? That's the concept of a debate.

[btajim]

Fact.

And do people really think we would have won both cups with Leslie?

Do you think we will win both Cups with Mancini? His record is terrible so far. Out of the Carling Cup first time and out of the FA Cup to the first Premiership side we faced.

Hughes took us on a European Tour last season.

[BobKowalski]

But equally all you are doing is reiterating the negative points with no attempt at balancing them with any positive points.

You do this because you don't like the guy. Fact.

Are you a Fan of our new Manager? If so, then why don't you give me some positive points? That's the concept of a debate.

Like what I have seen so far. I have repeated some points I made the other day some of which details Mancini's positive points and compared to Hughes. It does go on a bit and I even ended up giving Hughes some credit. Whether Mancini is the man to win the PL title remains to be seen. You need at least a season to judge a manager properly and if Mancini does stay it will be on the basis that we push for the title next year with a CL spot as a given. Mancini will probably survive not getting a CL spot this year. Failure next year will not be an option.

----

"2. Huge improvement. Mancini can actually coach a team for one thing. Hughes first season was dire and his second season well thank god the owners put the entire regime out of its misery. Personally a loaded revolver and a glass of Scotch should have been left in Hughes office. But then he would have delegated the task to Bowen who would have cocked it up so probably best not. As to Hughes having a decent run well you only have to review the previous 10 games or in fact his entire 18 months at the club to get your answer. Serioulsy if after looking at Hughes record you are willing to cut him a break then in all decency you should do the same to Mancini even if we tank the next three games.

3. If Mancini does tank the next 3 games ie we lose badly then the owners may indeed sack him which is fair enough. Its a tough gig and only the best can hack it and if Mancini cannot hack it then adios.

However I don't think Mancini wil get the push even if we don't get 4th but thats just my opinion and based on nothing more than:

a) He fits into the City corporate structure on such matters as transfer policy
b) He is happy to blood academy players and encourage the youth policy
c) He is capable of coaching a team and utilising staff other than his 'favoured few'
d) Considering his sudden arrival and minimal influence on the shape and makeup of the squad he has got on with it without resorting to a million and one excuses as to why things cannot be done and has sought to do the one thing we were crying out for and that is coach the f**king squad. Like not conceding from corners and for f**Ks sake you have to concentrate for 90+ minutes (it must do Mancini's head in). The training is different and for some obviously difficult with its empahasis on tactics and team shape but we are trying to be amongst the best in the PL and Europe not be a glorified pub side with crazy 3-3 draws every other week.

I just think Mancini (or someone like Mancini) ticks a lot of boxes for the owners in a way that a Rafa or even a Jose does not especially if you consider youth policy or in transfer dealings. Both Rafa and Jose have never been strong in these departments and Rafa let loose with millions doesn't bear thinking about. I actually rate both managers (yes even Rafa) I just think they are the wrong animal for ADUG.

The owners contrary to popular belief do not have a history of rash managerial changes having made only one managerial appointment in their 18 months in charge - in fact they stuck with the incumbent manager and gave Hughes every chance to prove himself despite him not being their man and even after a disappointing first season and not qualifying for Europe. The porn barons took over WHU and started pissing over Zola in the first 5 minutes to barely a word of criticism whereas ADUG backed Hughes to the tune of £200m after a crap season and eventually sacked him after 1 win in 10 to a barrage of media vitriol and much angst and hand wringing from a lot of fans. Anyway the point is that they backed someone who wasn't their guy so why does everyone think they won't back the guy they actually appointed?

This is ADUG's first full season in charge and it has been bloody outstanding. We are pushing for a CL spot with 3 games to go which is unheard of. Irrespective of what I think of Hughes or whatever others think of Mancini the fact remain under their combined stewardship we have reached the point where our destiny is in our hands which for a new squad and one new manager to this bloody country I think is an excellent achievement. If we actually fulfill this destiny then will be an outstanding achievement and credit will go to all concerned - even those I don't rate - and the blame will also be shared if we don't.

So how about we enjoy the ride instead of trying tp pick holes in every little thing that Mancini does or doesn't do and getting depressed because we drew 0-0 away to Arsenal and I stop taking cheap shots at Hughes who has played a big part in this season for better or for worse."

-----

[walmai]

That he's going to change you bunch of under-achieving ass-wipes into a proper team...

...if given half a proper chance.

[the_georgian_genius]

I don't have any reservations about Mancini. I think he is doing a great job under the circumstances.

It would be best to judge him after he's built his own squad.

[Douglas Higginbottom]

I have read with interest the input to the question and seen plenty of opinion but little real substance.It's so easy to go off the specific topic and i am likley to do the same i am sure but let's see.The most common reservation is the over cautious approach with the standard response being that the priority when he came in was a leaky defence and it's miles better now and we are much better organised.

In one sense it's great to be more organised but I don't actually feel he has organised the team so much as organised the defensive part of the team.As yet he hasnt got the balance right between being able to defend well and still attack. It doesnt need to be all out attack but at least when we are in defensive mode we do need to pose some kind of attacking threat.Against the poorer sides we can get away with it because we have some real talented attacking players who occasionally can make things happen on their own but against quality that just hasnt been happening. As an example against Arsenal we didn't get the ball into their penalty area until the 39th minute.To a degree it might be down to the personnel but it seems to me is very much down to the mentality he puts into the team for most games. Our strength is in our attacking ability and I have always believed a team should play to it's strengths and work on the weaknesses and not just one or the other.

Hughes did try to get a better balance between attack and defence imo and was let down by crass mistakes at the back. The equalisers scored by Hull and Burnley weren't really down to bad tactics or bad organisation but silly mistakes by seasoned pros. Going 2 down to Burnley was ridiculous but we clawed it back ,got in front , were totally dominating the game , should have scored more and with almost their only attack they equalised. Cut out those mistakes but with the same balance between attack and defence and we will be /would have been very happy. I think , I need to believe that Mancini will improve on this balance as to date it isnt happening and he seems unperturbed by it.

Then there is the word motivate which I think BK used as something a manager has to do.I don't think I can see that he is a good motivator. I may be wrong but I don't believe the team look especially motivated.I can't put my finger on anything or suggest exactly what i expect to see to prove they are motivated but it just feels there is something missing in games.Maybe it all linked in together with man management and tactics.Maybe he hasnt sold exactly what he is trying to do to everybody. The thing is this all takes time and a few months isn't enough for definite and maybe it's a 2 , 3 or 4 year job.

Is he a good man manager? I am struggling to think of a player to show he is a good man manager.The truth is I don't know whether he is or not but again something doesnt feel right.

A reservation I have posted about before is his tactical thinking. For me far too often the tactics he has gone into games with have been found wanting and needed early changes.Some will say he is a great tactician for making the change but if he is that good why the mistakes in the first place. I worry about that but accept his is more willing to make changes. Then there is the issue of the changes he makes in games which can confuse the hell out of me as others have mentioned on here.

Our next two games could change my reservations a lot. We might not win them both and we might not get 4th but if that does happen I hope we don't go down with a whimper.Mancini must be given time to develop the squad even further , instil his ideas into the players and if we don't make it this time we will next time.

[gillie]

Well my reservations about our lack of attack in big games will need to change in the next 3 games.We simply have to attack as both Villa and Spuds know they dont have to make the play they only have to hit us on the break.The Spuds game is the one really as if as i expect they beat Bolton and we beat Villa they are still 1 pt in front of us.They then have Burnley last game and a draw at ours would suit them going into that as i think they could do what the monsoon stopped us from doing against Burnley and thats score double figures.So we have to throw off the shackles FACT.

[BobKowalski]

That he's going to change you bunch of under-achieving ass-wipes into a proper team...

...if given half a proper chance.

No chance mate. First sign of anyone attempting to drag the club and its football into the modern era and we will sabotage it first chance we get. And we like things straightforward. Left footed winger? Well you play on the f**king left. Things not working on the pitch and manager doesn't change things. Tactical idiot. Thinks not working on the pitch and manager changes things. Tactical idiot and a twat for not getting it right in the first place. Defence crap. Get rid of the players. Still crap. Get rid of the players. Coach the actual defence and team to actually defend and cut out crass and stupid mistakes? Novel idea but pfft f**king useless c**t of a manager because we ain't bombing forward anymore. You would think someone would make the connection between gungho attack and gaping holes at the back or the reason why a defence under constant pressure just might make crass mistakes. Mind you Hughes and Bowen never made the connection so maybe I expect too much.

Its going to be interesting to see how much time Mancini gets from the owners who in fairness didn't panic when Hughsie was getting buttfucked by Brighton and Notts Forest or when we spent Christmas in the bottom 3 (I was so tempted to post Hughes promise that we would get 'Top 6 and no excuses'. I resisted. It was just too easy a target). But people did want to believe in Hughes. He was going to be our Taggart. Funny. Do you know how often I was told that we had to stick with Hughes because it took Taggart 3 years and they almost sacked him and Rome wasn't built in a day? Lost count how many times that was trotted out to defend Hughes. Mancini. 3 months tops and you better get 4th place or else sunshine. Rome? Shithole anyway.

Even odder is that I would never have picked Mancini in the first place. Lack of PL experience was a big concern but hey we got him and damn if didn't actually start coaching the team which is something I like in a manager. It won't catch on though. This coaching/tactical malarky. Not at City. As Shay said. "The lads just want to play footie". Well knock yoursleves out lads. They'll be pissing their pants at the Nou Camp.

[john68]

Bob,
I find you quite a quick witted and amusing poster mate. You use your wit to good measure when putting down others' arguments or points and it is a very effective strategy.
However you do seem to exagerate what others have said in order to ridicule their points.
I don't think anyone has suggested anything about the team bombing forward. I think they merely suggested that there is a better balance between attack and defence. In fact the point was made that with the talent we have up front, to create that balance and attack a little more would actually be playing to the strengths of our more talented players.
Doug is not an idiot mate. Try meeting him and having a deep conversation with him and you will find him to be an extremely erudite and knowledgeable person, who thinks deeply about the game and talks sense. Doug is quite correct when he states that Mancini very often has to change things round because they are not working. It is valid therefore to ask why does it not work so often?

Thanks for the entertainment though, I do enjoy it.

[ronk]

Bob,
I find you quite a quick witted and amusing poster mate. You use your wit to good measure when putting down others' arguments or points and it is a very effective strategy.
However you do seem to exagerate what others have said in order to ridicule their points.
I don't think anyone has suggested anything about the team bombing forward. I think they merely suggested that there is a better balance between attack and defence. In fact the point was made that with the talent we have up front, to create that balance and attack a little more would actually be playing to the strengths of our more talented players.
Doug is not an idiot mate. Try meeting him and having a deep conversation with him and you will find him to be an extremely erudite and knowledgeable person, who thinks deeply about the game and talks sense. Doug is quite correct when he states that Mancini very often has to change things round because they are not working. It is valid therefore to ask why does it not work so often?

Thanks for the entertainment though, I do enjoy it.

It was a good point by Doug and serves well to illustrate a key difference between Mancini and Hughes. Hughes was exceptionally well prepared and we often did very well at the start of a match. It was only after opposition changed tactics that we'd struggle somewhat. Mancini is the complete opposite, from early on he'd go out, try something a bit funky and sometimes get it wrong (not every match of course) but would take clear measures to adapt.

Where Hughes would sit down and work out a plan in advance, Mancini had a team better prepared to adapt. This is strength and weakness of both managers, but that can change with time. It's always more likely with a new coach.

I got the impression from Doug's reports that Hughes could be somewhat reactive, if something wasn't working one week they'd immediately work on that area. There's nothing wrong with that, of course, you need to address weaknesses. But it's also not the way to get ahead, it's too easy to forget to do what you're good at or to neglect other areas until they too get exploited. I haven't noticed a real impression either way from Mancini.

[ross.mcfc]

He’s not Jose Mourinho

[Slim]

He’s not Jose Mourinho

Neither is Guardiola apparently.

[ross.mcfc]

He’s not Jose Mourinho

Neither is Guardiola apparently.

Will be interesting to see what kind of manager Guariola is outside the Barca set up.