Mancini (The Ted Hughes and BBS thread)

[saulman]

But we went straight for Arsenals throat when we played them last. In hidsight, was that the correct thing to do?

It left us exposed at the back which ultimately left us with 10 men. Was there a lesson to be learned there, or doesn't it matter?
Would we have been better playing Arsenal for a draw and coming away with a point?

[Niall Quinns Discopants]

But we went straight for Arsenals throat when we played them last. In hidsight, was that the correct thing to do?

It left us exposed at the back which ultimately left us with 10 men. Was there a lesson to be learned there, or doesn't it matter?
Would we have been better playing Arsenal for a draw and coming away with a point?

People say that they weren't happy with the performance and don't care about the result but they'd be first screaming for his head had we lost. Most of these people have been having a pop at him eversince he was appointed. For whatever reason.

[Im_Spartacus]

But we went straight for Arsenals throat when we played them last. In hidsight, was that the correct thing to do?

It left us exposed at the back which ultimately left us with 10 men. Was there a lesson to be learned there, or doesn't it matter?
Would we have been better playing Arsenal for a draw and coming away with a point?

People say that they weren't happy with the performance and don't care about the result but they'd be first screaming for his head had we lost. Most of these people have been having a pop at him eversince he was appointed. For whatever reason.

Saulman, from where I was sitting we were very much on the back foot because they went at us from the off and got through on a couple of occasions in the first few minutes, which led to the sending off. The rest of the game, to be fair I have no negative comment on, as you can't play Arsenal with 10 men for so long and expect to get away with it. Having said that, Mancini's teams CAN defend for 90 minutes but I think we lost all shape and had no idea who was doing what, and so ended up just playing off the cuff. I saw a lot in the players that day though, I saw their effort for each other, their passion and it encouraged me.

With regards screaming for his head had we lost those games - even as an avid Hughes hater, there was no way I could criticise that performance last year at OT, and I think very few did. If the team give it a go and come up short, thats life, shit happens sometimes, but we will win a lot more than we lose. I hate seeing City lose in any circumstances, but I would rather lose trying, than not try at all.

[Original Dub]

But we went straight for Arsenals throat when we played them last. In hidsight, was that the correct thing to do?

It left us exposed at the back which ultimately left us with 10 men. Was there a lesson to be learned there, or doesn't it matter?
Would we have been better playing Arsenal for a draw and coming away with a point?

People say that they weren't happy with the performance and don't care about the result but they'd be first screaming for his head had we lost. Most of these people have been having a pop at him eversince he was appointed. For whatever reason.

Its not for whatever reason, its because he has us playing boring football for the most part. That's it in a nutshell my friend. His brand of football is frustrating and sometimes folk voice their concern/criticism over it.

You disagree that its boring. But quite a few... actually, no... every neutral was bored silly watching our match against United. Because our tactics stank. We looked terrified of them. Absolutely petrified.

I want Mancini to succeed and I concede there will be games we have to win ugly. But we should always want to win.

I was a the home derby last season and it was almost a carbon copy of this one. Sure, we lost to a last minute goal last time round, but that could just as easily have happened in this game.

I'm just glad this time I didn't drive and ferry return from Holyhead this time around. Because the last time was a complete waste of time and money, to watch my team cower and hide from the team I hate the most.

If he doesn't change his brand of football I want him to leave. However, my preference is that he stays and changes. NOW.

[Niall Quinns Discopants]

But we went straight for Arsenals throat when we played them last. In hidsight, was that the correct thing to do?

It left us exposed at the back which ultimately left us with 10 men. Was there a lesson to be learned there, or doesn't it matter?
Would we have been better playing Arsenal for a draw and coming away with a point?

People say that they weren't happy with the performance and don't care about the result but they'd be first screaming for his head had we lost. Most of these people have been having a pop at him eversince he was appointed. For whatever reason.

Its not for whatever reason, its because he has us playing boring football for the most part. That's it in a nutshell my friend. His brand of football is frustrating and sometimes folk voice their concern/criticism over it.

You disagree that its boring. But quite a few... actually, no... every neutral was bored silly watching our match against United. Because our tactics stank. We looked terrified of them. Absolutely petrified.

I want Mancini to succeed and I concede there will be games we have to win ugly. But we should always want to win.

I was a the home derby last season and it was almost a carbon copy of this one. Sure, we lost to a last minute goal last time round, but that could just as easily have happened in this game.

I'm just glad this time I didn't drive and ferry return from Holyhead this time around. Because the last time was a complete waste of time and money, to watch my team cower and hide from the team I hate the most.

If he doesn't change his brand of football I want him to leave. However, my preference is that he stays and changes. NOW.

I don't give a shit about neutrals and how the see us. And rags were just as bad as us.

[brite blu sky]

I don't give a flying fuck what the header said. The 'terrible state' Inter were in when he took over was a fucking sight better position than the 'terrible state' we're in now

Really not sure where you are coming from here Ted, the usual thoughtful analysis seems to have gone out of the window in response to posters who are suggesting patience towards Mancini. I know you have said you dont want him out but you are getting a right beef on about everything not being as you want it right now. Dont get me wrong criticism is great and needed, especially the thought out type that you offer, but i sense a real hardening of your temperament recently and more acid in the criticism.

Were you expecting everything to be honky dory by now or what?

Absolutely not. I'm just fucking sick of people pretending everything's right when it goes wrong. WBA game= good. Rags game= shite. When people have the audacity to say so, there's no need for a thousand word eulogy about the precieved exploits of Mancini in Italy to tell us how stupid we all are for daring to want to attack a bit more at home v the weakest rags side for 20 years.

Ok, fair dues and i can see how annoying an interpretation of saying everything is right could be or is. I would say though that that is the key to the disagreements that have sprung up.
While disappointed that we didn't hammer the rags and go about them as though we were just going to do just that regardless of their efforts, i can also see that not letting them defeat us is also an achievement of sorts. It is no surprise that a lot of the posters arguing that point are also posters arguing for the longer term view to be taken into consideration.
Ok so the rags look like they are at their weakest for a long time.. and failing to beat them down seems poor and not a statement of intent and has no psychological effect. In fact it seems like a failure. I think that is how a lot of fans see that game and the opportunity lost.
Taking a longer term view might seem like making excuses for the one off 'failures', but i think the longer term bunch (LTB) tend to see not letting them get a sniff as a small stepping stone to getting the concept of being out and out better than them.

Put it in perspective of Chelsea v us. We have now beaten them 3 times on the trot, twice maybe we were a little fortunate but took our chances, frustrated them and saw them off. The last game this season was a real biggie, now ready for us and knowing there was a statement involved in the outcome, we stopped them in their tracks in the way they usually do to others and looked positively stylish in the way we out Chelsea'd them.
Now think of the return game at Stamford bridge.. who is going to be more worried about that game? and who is going to be favourites?
If we get Chelsea in the FA cup, again who are going to be favourites?
Chelsea definitely don't look forward to playing us anymore, why because there is a 50-50 chance or more that we will stop them playing and doing what they want.

So there is a counter argument that while doing that or achieving that ability we are lacking intent to win and just containing the game, well i cant argue with that because that is what we are setting out to do. But by doing so and keep doing so we cement an idea that we would be capable of meeting Chelsea, Arsenal, and the rags in a cup final, CL, Title battle home or away and be at least as difficult as they are to score against and beat.

That, albeit something that a City team has never done for as long as most of care to remember is an achievement.. beyond that it is an achievement that sets us on a road to being in that club on a permanent basis.

Whatever you want, i want, fans want or even players want is secondary to that aim, and at the moment Mancini is the one calling the shots to try and achieve that aim.

As a side issue but related as everyone is moaning about the derby, we were a few split seconds on a number of occasions from opening them up.. and Zabba had the opportunity of a lifetime on a plate. Had something just worked that game would have been a totally different event.. one goal would have opened it right up, we all know that, it always happens in derbies.

[Ted Hughes]

I don't think we got much right tactically v the rags & I think Mancini's dropped quite a few bollocks in that department both by being under or over cautious at various points v different teams. I'm more critical of him right now than I would have been of Hughes this time last year, simply because we're a year further on & the squad has been extended & changed. That absolutely doesn't mean I want Mancini out though, quite the opposite. If Hughes was still here, I'd be looking at 4th or out but as Mancini has been brought in later, I'll give him more leeway provided I see genuine improvement in all areas. The derby wasn't an improvement on Hughes, Sven, Keegan or Pearce imo though. I want to see him do better than that with this squad, which is much stronger.

[london blue 2]

I know this is a ridiculously long post but it's well worth every minute you spend reading it. Someone should email it to Sky and MoTD.

I don't get it.

The analogy with Mourinho's Inter playing against Barca which took 5 minutes of my life to read misses the point entirely. He won the fucking tie. He won the tie by beating the team at home, and by attacking them at home because he knew it would be batten down the hatches back at their gaff. He played the tie perfectly, our tactics are far from perfect as they underuse half of the talent on the pitch.

If we score in those big games, Mancini looks like a genius, but I think it is more down to luck than judgement. Mancini apologists will obviously use the Chelsea games this and last year as the evidence to the contrary, but the results, as on Wednesday night is not the full story of what is going on with our football - because on the face of it, a 0-0 draw against a team on a 24 match unbeaten run is a good result if taken in isolation. When you look at the bigger picture though, we had an opportunity to give them a right going over, and failed to even try to take it, just as we did at Arsenal & home vs United last season (which I believe ultimately cost us a Champions league spot)

Draws were no good to us in those games, because we were playing catch up, but we played for the draw in 2 games, and out of a clearly winnable 6 points, we came away with 1. Those 6 points were there for the taking, and he CHOSE not to go for them.

The Chelsea implosion after half time last year was for me, totally unprecedented. Some will say we pressured them into mistakes, others will say Chelsea had a bad day at the office in that 2nd half. The fact was, we were fucking abject, dire, dreadful in that first half, and yet again it was sheer persistance by Tevez that turned the game.

I don't buy into any tactic that is basically defend like fuck and give it to Tevez, which is how we beat Chelsea (and for that matter most of our other games) this year, and how we have played every game against the sky 4 under Mancini - you have to have luck for that to work, and football is based on skill, not luck.

Its not a tactic, thats a limited manager, inhibiting the natural abilities of his players.

It boils down to this: If you defend for a draw, you MIGHT get it, but if you don't try to score, you can't win without luck. I would prefer to rely on my players' ability rather than a bit of luck.

Agreed John, another thing that post did was to completely side step the shockingly poor performances against wolves, blackpool, newcastle etc (i know we won a few of them but through luck more than anything else).

I'm yet to be convinced.

[DoomMerchant]

I want to see him do better than that with this squad, which is much stronger.

Not just "much stronger" but honestly chalk and cheese, as you lot are wont to say.

cheers

[brite blu sky]

Ted Hughes » 12 Nov 2010 16:26

I don't think we got much right tactically v the rags & I think Mancini's dropped quite a few bollocks in that department both by being under or over cautious at various points v different teams. I'm more critical of him right now than I would have been of Hughes this time last year, simply because we're a year further on & the squad has been extended & changed. That absolutely doesn't mean I want Mancini out though, quite the opposite. If Hughes was still here, I'd be looking at 4th or out but as Mancini has been brought in later, I'll give him more leeway provided I see genuine improvement in all areas. The derby wasn't an improvement on Hughes, Sven, Keegan or Pearce imo though. I want to see him do better than that with this squad, which is much stronger.

Again fair dues and i am totally with the need for an improvement.. mostly in the final 3rd and to do better with the squad as is or with an addition. I would however take a 1-0 win over the rags at the swamp and another boring game if it meant that we were progressing in the way i wrote in the previous post. Im not saying that i like that idea or in any way want that football, but as i say i see a need for other priorities right now and just hope that the football will improve as we generally get it together more and more.
I thought it would have been quicker than it has been to get the understanding between the team and also the players and the manager, but we had a good few blows to the smooth integration of the new players and imo that deserves a bit of leeway to be applied. So even if we are behind in development terms i still expect us to be firing on all cylinders by New Year or end of Jan.. and hope we are really coming into our own towards the run-in. In fact i hope and expect us to be the best team in the country by the end of the season.

[Ted Hughes]

Ted Hughes » 12 Nov 2010 16:26

I don't think we got much right tactically v the rags & I think Mancini's dropped quite a few bollocks in that department both by being under or over cautious at various points v different teams. I'm more critical of him right now than I would have been of Hughes this time last year, simply because we're a year further on & the squad has been extended & changed. That absolutely doesn't mean I want Mancini out though, quite the opposite. If Hughes was still here, I'd be looking at 4th or out but as Mancini has been brought in later, I'll give him more leeway provided I see genuine improvement in all areas. The derby wasn't an improvement on Hughes, Sven, Keegan or Pearce imo though. I want to see him do better than that with this squad, which is much stronger.

Again fair dues and i am totally with the need for an improvement.. mostly in the final 3rd and to do better with the squad as is or with an addition. I would however take a 1-0 win over the rags at the swamp and another boring game if it meant that we were progressing in the way i wrote in the previous post. Im not saying that i like that idea or in any way want that football, but as i say i see a need for other priorities right now and just hope that the football will improve as we generally get it together more and more.
I thought it would have been quicker than it has been to get the understanding between the team and also the players and the manager, but we had a good few blows to the smooth integration of the new players and imo that deserves a bit of leeway to be applied. So even if we are behind in development terms i still expect us to be firing on all cylinders by New Year or end of Jan.. and hope we are really coming into our own towards the run-in. In fact i hope and expect us to be the best team in the country by the end of the season.

I agree that we could be the best team in the country by the end of the season, which would make some of the points & cup tie wasting decisions of the 1st part all the more frustrating if we end up winning fuck all.

[brite blu sky]

I want to see him do better than that with this squad, which is much stronger.

Not just "much stronger" but honestly chalk and cheese, as you lot are wont to say.

cheers

I never quite understood that phrase.. as we have some very chalky cheese in the UK, but as you only have Cheddar substitute in your neck of the woods i dont suppose you have any issues with the saying.


like.

I have a very informative book on cheese, you might be interested to look it up:
The Great British Cheese Book, by Patrick Rance

He really does a splendid job of describing in detail all the textures, smells and tastes of thousands of cheeses.. even some which are now extinct !

[Original Dub]

But we went straight for Arsenals throat when we played them last. In hidsight, was that the correct thing to do?

It left us exposed at the back which ultimately left us with 10 men. Was there a lesson to be learned there, or doesn't it matter?
Would we have been better playing Arsenal for a draw and coming away with a point?

People say that they weren't happy with the performance and don't care about the result but they'd be first screaming for his head had we lost. Most of these people have been having a pop at him eversince he was appointed. For whatever reason.

Its not for whatever reason, its because he has us playing boring football for the most part. That's it in a nutshell my friend. His brand of football is frustrating and sometimes folk voice their concern/criticism over it.

You disagree that its boring. But quite a few... actually, no... every neutral was bored silly watching our match against United. Because our tactics stank. We looked terrified of them. Absolutely petrified.

I want Mancini to succeed and I concede there will be games we have to win ugly. But we should always want to win.

I was a the home derby last season and it was almost a carbon copy of this one. Sure, we lost to a last minute goal last time round, but that could just as easily have happened in this game.

I'm just glad this time I didn't drive and ferry return from Holyhead this time around. Because the last time was a complete waste of time and money, to watch my team cower and hide from the team I hate the most.

If he doesn't change his brand of football I want him to leave. However, my preference is that he stays and changes. NOW.

I don't give a shit about neutrals and how the see us. And rags were just as bad as us.

Neutrals generally give an unbiased account of a football game. Which is important, particularly when some people can't see a problem with our style of play and indeed intimate that the city fans who do see a problem with it are hysterical or have an agenda.

Our football for the most part is fucking BORING. My point is that everyone but a select few on here recognise this.

These people are not hysterical. They are not "knee-jerk". They do not hate Mancini.

My guess is they are concerned about the brand of football he delivers most weeks.

Its. As. Simple. As. That.

[sandman]

Neutrals generally give an unbiased account of a football game

No they dont. When you're a City fan you'll rarely meet anyone who is genuinely an honest neutral.

We are the most hated team in the world by many and in the least liked five by the majority of the rest. Mud sticks, people regurgitate bollocks they hear in the media and mistake bullshit press opinion to be fact. Jealousy is also a killer, as is the growing fashion of slander without foundation. In a short space of time we have ceased to get neutral and unbiased opinions, we now get most people claiming to be neutral but criticising for the sake of criticising and viewing our football through bitter jealous eyes.

[Original Dub]

Neutrals generally give an unbiased account of a football game

No they dont. When you're a City fan you'll rarely meet anyone who is genuinely an honest neutral.

We are the most hated team in the world by many and in the least liked five by the majority of the rest. Mud sticks, people regurgitate bollocks they hear in the media and mistake bullshit press opinion to be fact. Jealousy is also a killer, as is the growing fashion of slander without foundation. In a short space of time we have ceased to get neutral and unbiased opinions, we now get most people claiming to be neutral but criticising for the sake of criticising and viewing our football through bitter jealous eyes.

The people you refer to are not neutrals anymore then.

The people I refer to are neutrals. The reason most of the footballing world thought the manchester derby was a dire excuse for entertainment is not because they are looking through bitter eyes, its because the manchester derby was a dire excuse for entertainment.

There is no conspiarcy here, Manchester City play boring football most of the time. I hate the fact that its true and I pray every week this fact will change... but it is not a fabrication, it is very real.

[sandman]

Neutrals generally give an unbiased account of a football game

No they dont. When you're a City fan you'll rarely meet anyone who is genuinely an honest neutral.

We are the most hated team in the world by many and in the least liked five by the majority of the rest. Mud sticks, people regurgitate bollocks they hear in the media and mistake bullshit press opinion to be fact. Jealousy is also a killer, as is the growing fashion of slander without foundation. In a short space of time we have ceased to get neutral and unbiased opinions, we now get most people claiming to be neutral but criticising for the sake of criticising and viewing our football through bitter jealous eyes.

The people you refer to are not neutrals anymore then.

The people I refer to are neutrals. The reason most of the footballing world thought the manchester derby was a dire excuse for entertainment is not because they are looking through bitter eyes, its because the manchester derby was a dire excuse for entertainment.

There is no conspiarcy here, Manchester City play boring football most of the time. I hate the fact that its true and I pray every week this fact will change... but it is not a fabrication, it is very real.

But its not bad football, its successful, just not entertaining.

[Douglas Higginbottom]

Neutrals generally give an unbiased account of a football game

No they dont. When you're a City fan you'll rarely meet anyone who is genuinely an honest neutral.

We are the most hated team in the world by many and in the least liked five by the majority of the rest. Mud sticks, people regurgitate bollocks they hear in the media and mistake bullshit press opinion to be fact. Jealousy is also a killer, as is the growing fashion of slander without foundation. In a short space of time we have ceased to get neutral and unbiased opinions, we now get most people claiming to be neutral but criticising for the sake of criticising and viewing our football through bitter jealous eyes.

The people you refer to are not neutrals anymore then.

The people I refer to are neutrals. The reason most of the footballing world thought the manchester derby was a dire excuse for entertainment is not because they are looking through bitter eyes, its because the manchester derby was a dire excuse for entertainment.

There is no conspiarcy here, Manchester City play boring football most of the time. I hate the fact that its true and I pray every week this fact will change... but it is not a fabrication, it is very real.

But its not bad football, its successful, just not entertaining.

It's successful football only if it achieves success and we have quite a while before we find that part out.

As I have said it's results I want and along the way I believe , I have to believe that the football/entertainment will get better. To be honest I don't actually believe we will be successful unless we play more entertaining football.

[Original Dub]

Neutrals generally give an unbiased account of a football game

No they dont. When you're a City fan you'll rarely meet anyone who is genuinely an honest neutral.

We are the most hated team in the world by many and in the least liked five by the majority of the rest. Mud sticks, people regurgitate bollocks they hear in the media and mistake bullshit press opinion to be fact. Jealousy is also a killer, as is the growing fashion of slander without foundation. In a short space of time we have ceased to get neutral and unbiased opinions, we now get most people claiming to be neutral but criticising for the sake of criticising and viewing our football through bitter jealous eyes.

The people you refer to are not neutrals anymore then.

The people I refer to are neutrals. The reason most of the footballing world thought the manchester derby was a dire excuse for entertainment is not because they are looking through bitter eyes, its because the manchester derby was a dire excuse for entertainment.

There is no conspiarcy here, Manchester City play boring football most of the time. I hate the fact that its true and I pray every week this fact will change... but it is not a fabrication, it is very real.

But its not bad football, its successful, just not entertaining.

It's successful football only if it achieves success and we have quite a while before we find that part out.

As I have said it's results I want and along the way I believe , I have to believe that the football/entertainment will get better. To be honest I don't actually believe we will be successful unless we play more entertaining football.

Thanks Doug, I'd go along with that.

and Sandman, I never said it was bad, I said it was boring.

[sandman]

Its not X-Factor, its football, we all want to be entertained, but at the end of the day if nobody can score against you then nobody can beat you, a goal or two and you've got three points, we need to find a healthy balance between defence and attack. Entertainment doesnt come into it. He's building from the back forwards. Success will come.

[Ted Hughes]

Its not X-Factor, its football, we all want to be entertained, but at the end of the day if nobody can score against you then nobody can beat you, a goal or two and you've got three points, we need to find a healthy balance between defence and attack. Entertainment doesnt come into it. He's building from the back forwards. Success will come.

He's SOMETIMES building from the back. So we grit our teeth, draw 0-0 away to a decimated Arsenal team, lose to a last minute goal by the rags after not getting out of our own half etc, miss the Chump's league, start this season building a solid team, being fairly negative but picking up a few results, chuck in the League Cup, build build... oh wait a minute.. two novices next to each other v Arsenal= game over. Building? Plan? Boillocks.

It hasn't been a superbly executed master plan each game like some people, for God knows what reason, want to pretend, it's been a mix & match of different plans, some of which have worked brilliantly, some have scraped through, some have failed & some have been fucking disasterous. It's the idea that some people like to push; that it's all been moving along to some divine pattern that we shouldn't dare question, which does my head in & winds me up tbh.

No it hasn't.