avoidconfusion wrote:Mancini needs to put out his strongest team and stop fucking around with the defense on Sunday.
He has to get 3 points, if he does not, that will put another dampener on confidence and I think the snowball effect would be that we would lose to United in the derby as well and I think that could be enough for our owners to pull the trigger.
Wooders wrote:zab is not a defensive midfielder - he didn't have a clue what to do
a chelsea, arsenal, man utd or tottenham wouldn't have come away with that result - something is rotten in denmark and the buck stops with mancini
who's out there though? O'Neill? I'd rather not
Hiddink? Couldn't get one of the best russian teams ever into the world cup, but has great club history... could be a shout
Maradonna - hésus no..
Scolari - see above...
Redknapp - would he realistically leave spurs? Even if we throw a fortune at him? He would be the answer for me, can't stand the bloke but you can't argue he knows where to play players and get them going
who else?
I think its only worth sackin mancini if we have a better replacement coming in, this was my problem with the hughes sacking, was mancini really not a gamble? Course he was...
Wooders wrote:We need someone like redknapp who knows how and where to play players to get the best out of them
Ted Hughes wrote:Wooders wrote:zab is not a defensive midfielder - he didn't have a clue what to do
a chelsea, arsenal, man utd or tottenham wouldn't have come away with that result - something is rotten in denmark and the buck stops with mancini
who's out there though? O'Neill? I'd rather not
Hiddink? Couldn't get one of the best russian teams ever into the world cup, but has great club history... could be a shout
Maradonna - hésus no..
Scolari - see above...
Redknapp - would he realistically leave spurs? Even if we throw a fortune at him? He would be the answer for me, can't stand the bloke but you can't argue he knows where to play players and get them going
who else?
I think its only worth sackin mancini if we have a better replacement coming in, this was my problem with the hughes sacking, was mancini really not a gamble? Course he was...
Agreed if Zaba is played in midfield it should be part of a 3 and with Vieira not being one of them. Same to a point for if we play Vieira he needs to play with 2 others with legs! Mancini took a gamble and it failed. There were times that the City attack was isolated as the 2 midfielders just hadnt got up but also times ( too many) where they had got up but were caught out and too slow getting back.
Mancini has made it pretty clear that the chumps league is his priority and he is picking teams which reflect that without thinking that winning games by picking close to the strongest side all the time and getting good results might actually breed confidence ( and a winning mentality) which would get the 4th place minimum anyway.
As for alternative managers I would say anybody and I mean anybody bar Jose M would be a gamble.
I think Zabba can play there but not just with Vieira. No problem seeing him there as part of a 3 but 2? When one is as old as Vieira? Silly. For an away game like that, with that 11, it would have made more sense to have Milner stay back there as well & just have a wall in front of the back 4. Let SWP Johnson & Ade play on the break. Some occasions Poznan had 4 v 4 in that position & caught us on the break instead.
We can't sack Bob without even seeing his 1st 11 play! The idea is just ridiculous. If the worst comes to the worst & Bob has a nervous breakdown or something, a new manager wouldn't need the transfer window anyway so there's no reason Bob can't be left to sort it out, even if we lose a few games. Obviously there's a limit to how far it can go but with 3 points for a win, we could easily pull back a bad spell (as we could have when MH was unfairly sacked). I just hope we keep our heads & don't repeat last season's mistake.
Return to The Maine Football forum
Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 47 guests