Today's Times Hughes/Mancini Head to Head

[Niall Quinns Discopants]

Give Mancini 55 games and I'm sure he'll get the ratio down to 1.44 too!

always clever to mix facts with fiction to suit your agenda. And don't try to bullshit that you don't have one. Win, lose or draw you've moaned about Mancini eversince he came whereas you were very much high on Hughes. Nothing wrong with all that apart from shallow digs. I much prefer Kladze's 'say what I really mean attitude'.

[Socrates]

I guess that football messageboards aren't about blind optimism fella.

Anyway, a .3 points per game improvement isn't really something that gets the pulse racing. Especially when the football we are playing is so bloody boring!

.32 pts per game = 12 points over a season. You think that's insignificant?

[Ted Hughes]

I guess that football messageboards aren't about blind optimism fella.

Anyway, a .3 points per game improvement isn't really something that gets the pulse racing. Especially when the football we are playing is so bloody boring!

.32 pts per game = 12 points over a season. You think that's insignificant?

Depends on what your previous expectations were tbh. I expected us to get better if Hughes had stayed & be roughly where we are now but more fun to watch & I expect us to get better if Mancini stays & hopefully become more fun to watch. I could be wrong on both counts.

[Socrates]

I guess that football messageboards aren't about blind optimism fella.

Anyway, a .3 points per game improvement isn't really something that gets the pulse racing. Especially when the football we are playing is so bloody boring!

.32 pts per game = 12 points over a season. You think that's insignificant?

Depends on what your previous expectations were tbh. I expected us to get better if Hughes had stayed & be roughly where we are now but more fun to watch & I expect us to get better if Mancini stays & hopefully become more fun to watch. I could be wrong on both counts.

Needing to score twice every game to get a point might be fun to watch but it doesn't get you into the Champions League places. We all know teams are built from the back and Hughes was incapable of getting us attacking and defending in the same game! At least now we can see we are building from the back and that we have the flair and talent up front to really capitalise on that when we gel. If this side can get to 3 points off the top now then anything is possible as the season develops. Carping at the manager is madness in such circumstances.

[Socrates]

Goals scored per game Hughes 1.65 Mancini 1.62. Equates to 1 goal a season less with Mancini. People are getting in a pickle over 1 goal a season? They must really enjoy seeing the opposition score!!

[Grob]

Goals scored per game Hughes 1.65 Mancini 1.62. Equates to 1 goal a season less with Mancini. People are getting in a pickle over 1 goal a season? They must really enjoy seeing the opposition score!!

So Hughes squad plus 135 million pounds equals one less goal a season when spent and manged by Mantacticallyinept?

Great

[Socrates]

Goals scored per game Hughes 1.65 Mancini 1.62. Equates to 1 goal a season less with Mancini. People are getting in a pickle over 1 goal a season? They must really enjoy seeing the opposition score!!

So Hughes squad plus 135 million pounds equals one less goal a season when spent and manged by Mantacticallyinept?

Great

1 goal less scored per season and 22 less goals conceded per season. An improvement of +21 in Goal difference. People criticising tactics on the basis he doesn't do the fucking obvious don't impress me at all. Not doing the obvious is why we employ him. The idea you have to bring on a striker to turn a game around is schoolboy stuff. What if the reason you aren't winning is because you are losing the midfield battle? Sometimes bringing on a hard tackler to win the ball is a good idea. In such circumstances, bringing on a striker for a midfielder is tactical suicide!

[john68]

Just for interest sake, I looked at this seasons fixtures to see how Hughes and Mancini compared against the same opponents and then I compared Mancini's record this season against his own record last season.

.........................HUGHES...MANCINI
ARSENAL...........(H)..3pts.........0pts
CHELSEA...........(H)...3pts.........3pts
SPURS...............(A)..0pts.........1pt
WIGAN..............(A)..1pt..........3pts
Hughes......(H) 6pts...(A)...1pt....TOTAL...7pts
Mancini......(H) 3pt....(A)...4pts...TOTAL...7pts

......................2009-10........2010-11
B'BURN..............(H)..3pts.........1pt
BRUM...............(H)..3pts.........1pt
L'POOL..............(H)..1pt..........3pts
RAGS................(H)..0pts.........1pt
S'LAND...............(A)..1pt..........0pts
WOLVES.............(A)..3pts.........0pts
2009-10....(H) 7pts....(A) 4pts...TOTAL...11pts
2010-11....(H) 6pts....(A) 0pts...TOTAL...6pts

I'll let you draw your own conclusions.

[john68]

Following on from the above post, our next 5 games:
FULHAM...(A)...3pts
STOKE.....(A)...1pt
BOLTON...(H)...3pts
W H U.....(A)...1pt
EVERTON..(H)...0pts

All these games when played last season were under Mancini's leadership, which should give us a fair idea whether we are improving under his tenure.

[zuricity]

Following on from the above post, our next 5 games:
FULHAM...(A)...3pts
STOKE.....(A)...1pt
BOLTON...(H)...3pts
W H U.....(A)...3pts
EVERTON..(H)...0pts

All these games when played last season were under Mancini's leadership, which should give us a fair idea whether we are improving under his tenure.

Hey John, Not sure what you mean. Are the points shown here what you expect us to get ? Because we drew at WHU last season.

Anways, I expect 15 points and nothing else is acceptable. IF we don't get maximum points we should start off by sacking the ball boys and the apprentices that clean the boots amd work our way up to David Platt ( but rapido !).

[Ted Hughes]

I guess that football messageboards aren't about blind optimism fella.

Anyway, a .3 points per game improvement isn't really something that gets the pulse racing. Especially when the football we are playing is so bloody boring!

.32 pts per game = 12 points over a season. You think that's insignificant?

Depends on what your previous expectations were tbh. I expected us to get better if Hughes had stayed & be roughly where we are now but more fun to watch & I expect us to get better if Mancini stays & hopefully become more fun to watch. I could be wrong on both counts.

Needing to score twice every game to get a point might be fun to watch but it doesn't get you into the Champions League places. We all know teams are built from the back and Hughes was incapable of getting us attacking and defending in the same game! At least now we can see we are building from the back and that we have the flair and talent up front to really capitalise on that when we gel. If this side can get to 3 points off the top now then anything is possible as the season develops. Carping at the manager is madness in such circumstances.

Like I said, depends what your expectations are. I expect a team with new & newish players to get better during the season but not without problems. Mancini's just had almost as bad a run as Hughes did before he was sacked & it will be worse if we cock up the next few games. I would keep him & expect him to turn it round, which I fully expected Hughes to do last season had he stayed & I fully expect Mancini to do this season if he stays. No miracles are being performed imo though. We finished last season more or less where we should be & we're more or less where we should be right now. As the usual top 4 are much worse than they've ever been, we have a title shot if the manager proves to be good enough to keep us improving as he should.

[Pretty Boy Lee]

Stats can be so misleading.

Mancini had an attacking side and managed to get some bloody good games out of them last season. Brum and Burnley in particular.

For some strange reason he's taken that side apart and replaced it with a defensive midfield gangster party.

[Dameerto]

I've still not forgiven Mother Nature for preventing us getting a potentially record-breaking goal haul at Burnley.

[Im_Spartacus]

Goals scored per game Hughes 1.65 Mancini 1.62. Equates to 1 goal a season less with Mancini. People are getting in a pickle over 1 goal a season? They must really enjoy seeing the opposition score!!

The thing is, what people are pissed off with is not about the number of goals scored. We could score 1,2 or 5 in a game, and I would still not enjoy the way we go about it.

I HATE going to COMS now, it is miserable, depressing, shite, and the thought about whether I should have just stayed at home creeps in the minute we kick off, and by 15 minutes in, I really want to go home regardless of whether we are winning, losing or drawing.

That feeling has been there since very early on under Mancini for me - I am paying £400 a year and getting nothing in return. All the talk about seeing world class players coming into COMS, bollocks, because the world class players are having the raw talent and ability squeezed out of them, and the direct result is that I really don't want to go any more.

[Im_Spartacus]

Stats can be so misleading.

Mancini had an attacking side and managed to get some bloody good games out of them last season. Brum and Burnley in particular.

For some strange reason he's taken that side apart and replaced it with a defensive midfield gangster party.

The Brum game is a perfect example of why you dont rely on statistics. It was fucking dire, we played in the same negative way we always do, but Brum rolled over and surrendered, that will always happen from time to time.

[Swales4ever]

My nick says what I feel for the actual gaffer and I got plenty of respect for what - right and wrong - the previous one did in order to rise the Club's fortune.
Actuallly I don't give a shit about their head to head, until and unless City will win all the silverware up for grabs.
That's what our blessing Owner is keen to, that what everybody at and around the Club should aim to.

Come on City!
Good luck Messrs. Hughes and Mancini, for your respective job.

[petrov]

I guess that football messageboards aren't about blind optimism fella.

Anyway, a .3 points per game improvement isn't really something that gets the pulse racing. Especially when the football we are playing is so bloody boring!

No cause theres no difference in averaging 55 points a season or 66 is there?

[The Goose]

I guess that football messageboards aren't about blind optimism fella.

Anyway, a .3 points per game improvement isn't really something that gets the pulse racing. Especially when the football we are playing is so bloody boring!

No cause theres no difference in averaging 55 points a season or 66 is there?

To be honest, I'm not trying to judge Mancini right now. A win today and we're back in the title race. I just find those stats never ever tell the full story.

[brite blu sky]

Stats are pretty useless apart form long term analysis that you cant see otherwise.

Mancini managed a pts / game of 1.81 last season in the league. So far this season he has 1.69
So from that you can see he is doing a lot worse than the half season he had.
1.8 is a stat that would get roughly 4th spot.
So any conclusion has to be that we have to improve to catch last seasons form and go beyond that to be sure of staying with the top.
A win today would up the ratio to 1.78 ( not too bad) another win would bump it to 1.86 and 3 wins on the trot would land us on track with 1.94
4 consecutive wins would push the seasons av. to the magical 2.0 that is title winning or there abouts.

Another way of looking at it is over the next 10 games we need 24 pts to get on a title winning form, so can afford to drop 6 pts in 10 games... 2 Losses 0 Draws, or 3 Draws and 0 Losses, take your pick. We would have 46 pts after 23 games, ratio of 2.0 / game.

next 10 are: i would take those draws under the circumstances, the rest we are capable of winning with our away form.

Fulham A
Stoke City A - Draw
Bolton Wanderers H
West Ham United A
Everton H - Draw
Newcastle United A
Aston Villa H
Blackpool H
Arsenal A - Draw
Wolves H

[saulman]

Goals scored per game Hughes 1.65 Mancini 1.62. Equates to 1 goal a season less with Mancini. People are getting in a pickle over 1 goal a season? They must really enjoy seeing the opposition score!!

The thing is, what people are pissed off with is not about the number of goals scored. We could score 1,2 or 5 in a game, and I would still not enjoy the way we go about it.

I HATE going to COMS now, it is miserable, depressing, shite, and the thought about whether I should have just stayed at home creeps in the minute we kick off, and by 15 minutes in, I really want to go home regardless of whether we are winning, losing or drawing.

That feeling has been there since very early on under Mancini for me - I am paying £400 a year and getting nothing in return. All the talk about seeing world class players coming into COMS, bollocks, because the world class players are having the raw talent and ability squeezed out of them, and the direct result is that I really don't want to go any more.

Mate, you must be sitting around a right bunch of miserable bastards if that's how you really feel. I suggest you get over to the family stand and have some chicken nuggets or something.

To say you're paying £400 and getting nothing in return is complete twaddle. We've beaten Liverpool 3-0. We've beaten Chelsea. The Newcastle game was quality, IMO. The Arsenal game was entertaining, even if the result was poor.

So we've had a couple of negative performances whilst the ship is steadied, it's not the end of the world. You don't have to look too far back into the past to find football that really wasn't worth the price of a season ticket. This is a transitional period and at the end of it, if it works, we'll all be happier.

That sort of talk does nobody any good. The fans, the manager, the team, the club.

Jesus, give a mole a shovel.................