I actually want rid now

Here is the place to talk about all things city and football!

Re: I actually want rid now

Postby Ted Hughes » Mon Mar 21, 2011 4:44 pm

I agree with John's sentiments but I'm not sure they apply anymore. I think a point is being missed when we look at the history of sacking managers & the horrific damage it used to cause. In the past, those managers were in charge of everything, even upto the point when Hughes came in & had things like the training ground etc vastly changed & improved. Whilst he was doing that however, Khaldoon & Co were looking at the very foundations of the club & putting together a plan to seperate most of the club from the manager's control. That is now the case. Marwood runs it & he is in effect the power behind the throne.

Each manager in the past also brought with him his own cronies & contacts in the scouting department, so in Pearce's case, it would be him, travelling to Belgium by moped. Now the club has a worldwide network of scouts to recommend players to the manager should he wish it & our own people to do the negotiating, rather than the old 'brown envelope behind the hot waterpipes' method, so the manager doesn't need to be involved in most of the negotiations.

In short, things have changed & the manager is now the head coach. Changing him changes the short term future of the 1st team, but very little else. The decision on Bob should be made on whether it's the best thing for the club over the next few years, no more no less. I believe it's important for the club that we start to play more entertaining football as much as win stuff; the global profile is paramount.

Nobody anywhere wants to watch the team that played at Chelsea, not even City fans. Bob has to address that as well as win stuff.
The pissartist formerly known as Ted

VIVA EL CITY !!!

Some take the bible for what it's worth.. when they say that the rags shall inherit the Earth...
Well I heard that the Sheikh... bought Carlos Tevez this week...& you fuckers aint gettin' nothin..
Ted Hughes
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Colin Bell's Football Brain
 
Posts: 28488
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:28 pm
Supporter of: Bill Turnbull
My favourite player is: Bill Turnbull

Re: I actually want rid now

Postby Kladze » Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:13 pm

john68 wrote:Slim, I have a great regard for your intelligence and usual analytical skills....but i am so sorry mate you and the others are so fucking wrong...it reeeally beggers belief.

What bit of "stability breeds success and constant change breeds failure don't any of you understand"...and dikdik...one appearance in a losing final after a change of manager is NOT sustained success...in fact we lost.
[highlight]What bit of "money buys you players but teams win trophies and teams take time to build" can't you get your heads round?[/highlight]

The needle is stuck, simply because it is the truth and there is no other way of hammering home the message.
Busby took from the 40s to the late 50s to build his babes. After Munich, it took another 5 years to build his next dominant team.
Liverpool had it's stable boot room mentality that gave them sustained success even after Shankly disappeared. it was Souness playing billy big bollox, believing his way was better that fucked it up. Any success they have had since was not sustained.
Taggart failed miserably initially and took around seven years to build his empire.
Wenger may not have won anything for a few years, but they are the the nearest England has to challenging taggart's title charge.
Revie...Clough...Stein...all had time....and by the way didn't our own ron saunders go onto win the European Cup? How long did he last under Swales?
Our own success under Mercer/Allison took 3 years to build and they reigned for around 6 years. It was reverting back to our version of City's stable boot room mentality under book that brought success back.

I have never suggested that all those old City managers were any good. Some should never have been employed, simply because the old manager should never have been sacked in the 1st place.
The crucial bit is that when each one of them arrived with their own ideas, they demolished the previous work done and started their own projects, none were ever allowed the time to finish them.

...and Dikdik...changing a manager and getting ONE trip to a losing final is NOT sustained success.


And how long does it take to develop an attractive, entertaining, attacking philosophy?

How long do we have to wait before we see any breathtaking football?
We saw quite a few glimpses of it under the last manager. The current incumbent will continue to bore my arse solid regardless of whether we win anything.
[center]Image[/center]
User avatar
Kladze
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Rosler's Grandad Bombed The Swamp
 
Posts: 3388
Joined: Sun May 04, 2008 5:42 pm
Location: Manchester
Supporter of: City
My favourite player is: NdJ

Re: I actually want rid now

Postby john68 » Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:42 pm

lets all have a disco wrote:John is Mancini your man for 5-10 years regardless?


No Mate...My only loyalty is to City. Mancini stands or falls by his own record and the underlying progress, if any we are making. I am a City licker, never was a hughes nor am a Mancini licker. I just think that the lynch mob is out far too early with their rope.

Mancini's big problem is to meet the immediate demands of success, whilst trying to put a team together for the long term. Those aims are at odds with each other. A young team that will grow and must be successful now is almost too ridiculous for words.
Too many questions remain unanswered about our squad and we probably won't know some of those answers untill midway through next season, when the likes of Boateng, Dzeko and Kolarov have either succeeded or failed.
It will be years before Hart reaches his potential and Micah still has a lot to learn but is getting there. Lescott has improved with games and his partnership with Kompany could be improved even further with time together.
How good will Silva be be when those around him understand him more and he himself has even more experience of English football?
Adam Johnson often fucks up but has a bag of raw talent. How good could he become?
Balotelli...Who knows what he may do? become a young Messiah in front of goal or be fucked off back home?
Will Tevez stay? Or will we be supporting a new strikeforce?
Kolo Banned? Yaya? will he be surrounded by a newer more dynamid midfield?...and what of Barry and Milner? Still be at eastlands or shipped out?

Many of our players had a long last season followed by a world cup, followed by this season. No pre-season at city. so will they benefit greatly from proper preparation this summer?

So many questions are unaswered mate...but halfway through next season may be the 1st chance we have to start making definitive judgements.
I KNOW THAT YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU UNDERSTOOD WHAT YOU THINK I WROTE, BUT I AM NOT SURE YOU REALISE THAT WHAT YOU READ IS NOT WHAT I MEANT
User avatar
john68
Kaptain Kompany's Komposure
 
Posts: 14630
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 4:47 pm
Location: Sittin' on the dock of the bay...wastin' time.
Supporter of: ST MARKS (W GORTON)
My favourite player is: BERT TRAUTMANN

Re: I actually want rid now

Postby s1ty m » Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:45 pm

john68 wrote:Slim, I have a great regard for your intelligence and usual analytical skills....but i am so sorry mate you and the others are so fucking wrong...it reeeally beggers belief.

What bit of "stability breeds success and constant change breeds failure don't any of you understand"...and dikdik...one appearance in a losing final after a change of manager is NOT sustained success...in fact we lost.
What bit of "money buys you players but teams win trophies and teams take time to build" can't you get your heads round?

The needle is stuck, simply because it is the truth and there is no other way of hammering home the message.
Busby took from the 40s to the late 50s to build his babes. After Munich, it took another 5 years to build his next dominant team.
Liverpool had it's stable boot room mentality that gave them sustained success even after Shankly disappeared. it was Souness playing billy big bollox, believing his way was better that fucked it up. Any success they have had since was not sustained.
Taggart failed miserably initially and took around seven years to build his empire.
Wenger may not have won anything for a few years, but they are the the nearest England has to challenging taggart's title charge.
Revie...Clough...Stein...all had time....and by the way didn't our own ron saunders go onto win the European Cup? How long did he last under Swales?
Our own success under Mercer/Allison took 3 years to build and they reigned for around 6 years. It was reverting back to our version of City's stable boot room mentality under book that brought success back.

I have never suggested that all those old City managers were any good. Some should never have been employed, simply because the old manager should never have been sacked in the 1st place.
The crucial bit is that when each one of them arrived with their own ideas, they demolished the previous work done and started their own projects, none were ever allowed the time to finish them.

...and Dikdik...changing a manager and getting ONE trip to a losing final is NOT sustained success.


I think your sentiments are right John, stablity trumps change, most times. My issue is that I am happy for some stability for the right man. Mancini isn't it. His football is appalling and is the reason why we can barely fill our stadium for even Premier League games. He lacks courage and has badly handled some players of considerably more ability than those he brought in to say 'yes, sir'. Bellamy and Adebayor or Balotelli and Dzeko? All that pace going forward has been stopped (balotelli is allegedly quick, but he can't be arsed to try, the twat that he is). It's not even close and if he can't handle the character players, he should fuck off out of managing a club that will be buying them, because that is where we are. If he stays, Tevez will be off and that spells big time trouble for us. The moment Dzeko and Balotelli started being used, Tevez has faded. Further proof of his clueless management.

But his real weakness is in the transfer market, where he has been dire. That or the dross football that is barely worth watching.

There is nothing I can see about Mancini that makes me think we should stick with him and allow him to build. He's an Italian and has the mindset of the Catanaccio coaches of yesteryear. It was shite then and is shite now. Fine if that is your football culture, but I want nothing to do with it at City; I'd much rather play attractive football and give it a go. There has to be a better man to lead us into that. Surely?
After the ball was centred, after the whistle blew...
User avatar
s1ty m
David Silva's Silky Skills
 
Posts: 6303
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2005 1:44 pm
Location: uk

Re: I actually want rid now

Postby john68 » Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:48 pm

Kladze,
I don't know mate...but what timespan do you put on it?
1 hour...2 hours...maybe a week.
Remember mate...bored or not, we are having a very successful season considering how long this thing has been going on, when considered we are attemptingto compete against some of Europe's best teams. the rags, Chelsea, Arsenal and Spurs are no mugs and we are right in the mix with them.
I KNOW THAT YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU UNDERSTOOD WHAT YOU THINK I WROTE, BUT I AM NOT SURE YOU REALISE THAT WHAT YOU READ IS NOT WHAT I MEANT
User avatar
john68
Kaptain Kompany's Komposure
 
Posts: 14630
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 4:47 pm
Location: Sittin' on the dock of the bay...wastin' time.
Supporter of: ST MARKS (W GORTON)
My favourite player is: BERT TRAUTMANN

Re: I actually want rid now

Postby Slim » Mon Mar 21, 2011 6:07 pm

John, I have great respect for your cab driving skills and role as an infantryman in the Crimean War, but on this you are not right. Now I say not right because I don't know if you are wrong, but your almost fanatical obsession with this aspect is in no means right.

You claim that we have a revolving door of managers and you are indeed correct about this, but we have other aspects. Corrupt chairman, overreaching chairman who spent too much that we couldn't afford, lack of money, lack of reputation. Given a stable environment, would Pearce have been able to challenge for honours with no money? Probably not, some may argue that Bolton and Stoke are financially poor, but both in recent times have been buying clubs and we would have been a continually selling club, so I would marginalize any manager pre-billions for the last 15-20 years as our reason for success or failure. Not completely wrong, but certainly only a minor factor.

Now I have no problem in giving the right man time to get his team in place, but what exactly have you seen in Mancini that makes you think he is the right man? Did Mercer seem like a clueless moron while he wasn't getting the results on the pitch or did it seem like we were at least heading in the right direction? We've had people go on about negative tactics, I think we can ignore that as it's been done. But what about the other aspect of his job, in his time at the club we have shipped out good solid players proven at this level in this league and replaced them with chancers, most of which have not come off. Silva is the only one I could point at and call a success, the rest range from "give him time" to "the worst player we have signed in 20 years"<--seriously, who said this? Was in the Kolarov thread. We have shipped game winners out for plodders and while you said unrealistically we should have 25 players of equal quality who can step in, I would think that our owners sinking hundreds of millions into the clubs would be entitled to having a squad of sufficient depth and quality that we can cope with all but the absolute worst of injury crises. As it is, Tevez gets rested and we are incapable of mounting even the most token of meaningful attacks, are we really that fragile? And who is to blame if we are?

We have this small squad who are exhausted according to Bobby, well who the hell's fault is that? We have two listed injuries at the moment to Tevez and Given, okay we just got Johnson back but being he was coming off the bench more often than not, how much impact would he have had on results or fitness of an entire team? Probably not that much. So let's show up the scenario's here...

a) Players are really exhausted:Rotate what we can, Milner, SWP, Boateng, Boyata, Jo, Guidetti all get some games as we plan around the more important fixtures such as the FA Cup and a possible top 3 deciding match against Chelsea.

b)Too many competitions:Sacrifice a competition, I am 100% sure people would understand that the Europa, while a good competition is lowest on the totem pole here and with a possible 9 round robin matches, it is the most intensive. Send the kids in, if they win then great, if they don't well it's good experience for them.

c) Players aren't really exhausted:Bobby lays the groundwork for failure, wasn't the piss poor tactics, transfers and selections, it was the exhaustion. Easy way to spot this is if he plays almost the exact same 11 players every week, ignoring form and fitness and certainly not taking into account the exhaustion that he preaches to the media.

d) Bobby has lost the dressing room: Your temperamental prodigy has a 1 in 2 strikerate for goals and cards, almost seems at times he is looking for someone in the right position to lose it with him and ship him out on the earliest plane back to Italy. Your captain hands in a transfer request, your former captain takes a banned substance and while the player you shipped out to Madrid went to great lengths to avoid criticising the boss, in what he didn't say you can infer his life was made pretty miserable and the atmosphere one of fear at City.

I am not saying I know 100% what's going on and some of them sort of dance around the point rather than making one, but the fact is, I am not pissed at the results, I am well and truly pissed off with the groundwork that brought us to this point. Groundwork that should have been done but wasn't, actions that were taken but shouldn't have been and quite frankly, 99% of his decisions appear on subsequent evidence to be the wrong ones. I am sure Busby and Mercer didn't get the results they wanted while they were laying the foundations of a successful era, but I am sure they were moving things in the right direction and were you privileged to goldfish bowl coverage that we are today, you would have seen that.

Wow this got long, tell me if it came out making any sense in the end.
Image
User avatar
Slim
Anna Connell's Vision
 
Posts: 30344
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 3:57 am
Location: Perth

Re: I actually want rid now

Postby Kladze » Mon Mar 21, 2011 6:30 pm

john68 wrote:Kladze,
[highlight]I don't know mate...but what timespan do you put on it?[/highlight]
1 hour...2 hours...maybe a week.
Remember mate...bored or not, we are having a very successful season considering how long this thing has been going on, when considered we are attemptingto compete against some of Europe's best teams. the rags, Chelsea, Arsenal and Spurs are no mugs and we are right in the mix with them.


Tomorrow .......... given the will to do it.
[center]Image[/center]
User avatar
Kladze
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Rosler's Grandad Bombed The Swamp
 
Posts: 3388
Joined: Sun May 04, 2008 5:42 pm
Location: Manchester
Supporter of: City
My favourite player is: NdJ

Re: I actually want rid now

Postby Ted Hughes » Mon Mar 21, 2011 7:35 pm

I can't find a huge argument against the points Slim raises as I've been going on about it all season. I still think the key however is whether Bob understands that he's fucked up & if so, is he the rigt man to fix it? Let's give him this chance to prove it.

Win lose or draw, we should LOOK LIKE A TOP SIDE. Everything is in our favour.

If we don't, he's not good enough imo. A top manager would have this side flying, whether the right signings are there or not, there are enough good players to do well in most of our remaining games. There are no excuses, we have the advantage now. If he's any good, it will show in the coming weeks. If he can't get the team to perform, why on earth is there any reason to think he'll do better next season? There's nothing unfair about that, it's a perfectly reasonable test, not a kneejerk reaction. If he passes, he stays, simple.
The pissartist formerly known as Ted

VIVA EL CITY !!!

Some take the bible for what it's worth.. when they say that the rags shall inherit the Earth...
Well I heard that the Sheikh... bought Carlos Tevez this week...& you fuckers aint gettin' nothin..
Ted Hughes
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Colin Bell's Football Brain
 
Posts: 28488
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:28 pm
Supporter of: Bill Turnbull
My favourite player is: Bill Turnbull

Re: I actually want rid now

Postby Im_Spartacus » Mon Mar 21, 2011 7:35 pm

john68 wrote:Slim, I have a great regard for your intelligence and usual analytical skills....but i am so sorry mate you and the others are so fucking wrong...it reeeally beggers belief.

What bit of "stability breeds success and constant change breeds failure don't any of you understand"...and dikdik...one appearance in a losing final after a change of manager is NOT sustained success...in fact we lost.
What bit of "money buys you players but teams win trophies and teams take time to build" can't you get your heads round?

The needle is stuck, simply because it is the truth and there is no other way of hammering home the message.
Busby took from the 40s to the late 50s to build his babes. After Munich, it took another 5 years to build his next dominant team.
Liverpool had it's stable boot room mentality that gave them sustained success even after Shankly disappeared. it was Souness playing billy big bollox, believing his way was better that fucked it up. Any success they have had since was not sustained.
Taggart failed miserably initially and took around seven years to build his empire.
Wenger may not have won anything for a few years, but they are the the nearest England has to challenging taggart's title charge.
Revie...Clough...Stein...all had time....and by the way didn't our own ron saunders go onto win the European Cup? How long did he last under Swales?
Our own success under Mercer/Allison took 3 years to build and they reigned for around 6 years. It was reverting back to our version of City's stable boot room mentality under book that brought success back.

I have never suggested that all those old City managers were any good. Some should never have been employed, simply because the old manager should never have been sacked in the 1st place.
The crucial bit is that when each one of them arrived with their own ideas, they demolished the previous work done and started their own projects, none were ever allowed the time to finish them.

...and Dikdik...changing a manager and getting ONE trip to a losing final is NOT sustained success.


So how do you explain away Real Madrid and AC Milan's considerable success amongst constant turmoil?
Image
Im_Spartacus
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Denis Law's Backheel
 
Posts: 9588
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2008 8:41 pm
Location: Abu Dhabi
Supporter of: .

Re: I actually want rid now

Postby Ted Hughes » Mon Mar 21, 2011 7:42 pm

Im_Spartacus wrote:
john68 wrote:Slim, I have a great regard for your intelligence and usual analytical skills....but i am so sorry mate you and the others are so fucking wrong...it reeeally beggers belief.

What bit of "stability breeds success and constant change breeds failure don't any of you understand"...and dikdik...one appearance in a losing final after a change of manager is NOT sustained success...in fact we lost.
What bit of "money buys you players but teams win trophies and teams take time to build" can't you get your heads round?

The needle is stuck, simply because it is the truth and there is no other way of hammering home the message.
Busby took from the 40s to the late 50s to build his babes. After Munich, it took another 5 years to build his next dominant team.
Liverpool had it's stable boot room mentality that gave them sustained success even after Shankly disappeared. it was Souness playing billy big bollox, believing his way was better that fucked it up. Any success they have had since was not sustained.
Taggart failed miserably initially and took around seven years to build his empire.
Wenger may not have won anything for a few years, but they are the the nearest England has to challenging taggart's title charge.
Revie...Clough...Stein...all had time....and by the way didn't our own ron saunders go onto win the European Cup? How long did he last under Swales?
Our own success under Mercer/Allison took 3 years to build and they reigned for around 6 years. It was reverting back to our version of City's stable boot room mentality under book that brought success back.

I have never suggested that all those old City managers were any good. Some should never have been employed, simply because the old manager should never have been sacked in the 1st place.
The crucial bit is that when each one of them arrived with their own ideas, they demolished the previous work done and started their own projects, none were ever allowed the time to finish them.

...and Dikdik...changing a manager and getting ONE trip to a losing final is NOT sustained success.


So how do you explain away Real Madrid and AC Milan's considerable success amongst constant turmoil?


They change their managers from a position of strength & it's more a case of adding to a side that's already there. The incoming manager has an easier job in that case, like Ancelotti at Chelsea. I'm sure Bob could manage that Chelsea team now but would he have built it in the first place?

City are a building job & that's much harder but not as hard as the job people like Moyes do year in year out.
The pissartist formerly known as Ted

VIVA EL CITY !!!

Some take the bible for what it's worth.. when they say that the rags shall inherit the Earth...
Well I heard that the Sheikh... bought Carlos Tevez this week...& you fuckers aint gettin' nothin..
Ted Hughes
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Colin Bell's Football Brain
 
Posts: 28488
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:28 pm
Supporter of: Bill Turnbull
My favourite player is: Bill Turnbull

Re: I actually want rid now

Postby Im_Spartacus » Mon Mar 21, 2011 7:58 pm

Ted Hughes wrote:
Im_Spartacus wrote:
john68 wrote:Slim, I have a great regard for your intelligence and usual analytical skills....but i am so sorry mate you and the others are so fucking wrong...it reeeally beggers belief.

What bit of "stability breeds success and constant change breeds failure don't any of you understand"...and dikdik...one appearance in a losing final after a change of manager is NOT sustained success...in fact we lost.
What bit of "money buys you players but teams win trophies and teams take time to build" can't you get your heads round?

The needle is stuck, simply because it is the truth and there is no other way of hammering home the message.
Busby took from the 40s to the late 50s to build his babes. After Munich, it took another 5 years to build his next dominant team.
Liverpool had it's stable boot room mentality that gave them sustained success even after Shankly disappeared. it was Souness playing billy big bollox, believing his way was better that fucked it up. Any success they have had since was not sustained.
Taggart failed miserably initially and took around seven years to build his empire.
Wenger may not have won anything for a few years, but they are the the nearest England has to challenging taggart's title charge.
Revie...Clough...Stein...all had time....and by the way didn't our own ron saunders go onto win the European Cup? How long did he last under Swales?
Our own success under Mercer/Allison took 3 years to build and they reigned for around 6 years. It was reverting back to our version of City's stable boot room mentality under book that brought success back.

I have never suggested that all those old City managers were any good. Some should never have been employed, simply because the old manager should never have been sacked in the 1st place.
The crucial bit is that when each one of them arrived with their own ideas, they demolished the previous work done and started their own projects, none were ever allowed the time to finish them.

...and Dikdik...changing a manager and getting ONE trip to a losing final is NOT sustained success.


So how do you explain away Real Madrid and AC Milan's considerable success amongst constant turmoil?


They change their managers from a position of strength & it's more a case of adding to a side that's already there. The incoming manager has an easier job in that case, like Ancelotti at Chelsea. I'm sure Bob could manage that Chelsea team now but would he have built it in the first place?

City are a building job & that's much harder but not as hard as the job people like Moyes do year in year out.


John can't have this argument both ways.

The point is, if the club is moving in the direction we all discussed last week where everything except the lineup & tactics on a Saturday is removed from the manager's responsibilities, then the manager is solely responsible for what we see on the pitch. As the head coaches are at Real Madrid.

AC Milan had to rebuild a number of times, the excuses about "time to gel" etc didnt stop them sacking managers and continuing to be successful. Yes they had a higher starting level, but the fact was - if the coach didnt show progress early doors, they were gone, and they kept doing that until they found a successful one in Ancelotti whom they kept for 8 seasons.

How many managers who have been sacked by Real or Milan over the last 24 seasons has gone on to be consistently successful elsewhere? I suspect the answer will be something along the lines of the number of our sacked managers who have gone on to better things. Capello arguably, but he never stuck around anywhere for long either.

The fact remains that if you appoint the wrong man in the first place, you are always going to have to sack him sooner or later. Ferguson and Wenger remain the 2 exceptions - and yes, people should understand that word, they are exceptions. They have not turned from shit managers into good ones because they were given time, they were great managers in the first place, and whether they had been given 10 months or 10 years at their club, they would have been successful regardless
Image
Im_Spartacus
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Denis Law's Backheel
 
Posts: 9588
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2008 8:41 pm
Location: Abu Dhabi
Supporter of: .

Re: I actually want rid now

Postby Ted Hughes » Mon Mar 21, 2011 8:18 pm

Im_Spartacus wrote:
Ted Hughes wrote:
Im_Spartacus wrote:
john68 wrote:Slim, I have a great regard for your intelligence and usual analytical skills....but i am so sorry mate you and the others are so fucking wrong...it reeeally beggers belief.

What bit of "stability breeds success and constant change breeds failure don't any of you understand"...and dikdik...one appearance in a losing final after a change of manager is NOT sustained success...in fact we lost.
What bit of "money buys you players but teams win trophies and teams take time to build" can't you get your heads round?

The needle is stuck, simply because it is the truth and there is no other way of hammering home the message.
Busby took from the 40s to the late 50s to build his babes. After Munich, it took another 5 years to build his next dominant team.
Liverpool had it's stable boot room mentality that gave them sustained success even after Shankly disappeared. it was Souness playing billy big bollox, believing his way was better that fucked it up. Any success they have had since was not sustained.
Taggart failed miserably initially and took around seven years to build his empire.
Wenger may not have won anything for a few years, but they are the the nearest England has to challenging taggart's title charge.
Revie...Clough...Stein...all had time....and by the way didn't our own ron saunders go onto win the European Cup? How long did he last under Swales?
Our own success under Mercer/Allison took 3 years to build and they reigned for around 6 years. It was reverting back to our version of City's stable boot room mentality under book that brought success back.

I have never suggested that all those old City managers were any good. Some should never have been employed, simply because the old manager should never have been sacked in the 1st place.
The crucial bit is that when each one of them arrived with their own ideas, they demolished the previous work done and started their own projects, none were ever allowed the time to finish them.

...and Dikdik...changing a manager and getting ONE trip to a losing final is NOT sustained success.


So how do you explain away Real Madrid and AC Milan's considerable success amongst constant turmoil?


They change their managers from a position of strength & it's more a case of adding to a side that's already there. The incoming manager has an easier job in that case, like Ancelotti at Chelsea. I'm sure Bob could manage that Chelsea team now but would he have built it in the first place?

City are a building job & that's much harder but not as hard as the job people like Moyes do year in year out.


John can't have this argument both ways.

The point is, if the club is moving in the direction we all discussed last week where everything except the lineup & tactics on a Saturday is removed from the manager's responsibilities, then the manager is solely responsible for what we see on the pitch. As the head coaches are at Real Madrid.

AC Milan had to rebuild a number of times, the excuses about "time to gel" etc didnt stop them sacking managers and continuing to be successful. Yes they had a higher starting level, but the fact was - if the coach didnt show progress early doors, they were gone, and they kept doing that until they found a successful one in Ancelotti whom they kept for 8 seasons.

How many managers who have been sacked by Real or Milan over the last 24 seasons has gone on to be consistently successful elsewhere? I suspect the answer will be something along the lines of the number of our sacked managers who have gone on to better things. Capello arguably, but he never stuck around anywhere for long either.

The fact remains that if you appoint the wrong man in the first place, you are always going to have to sack him sooner or later. Ferguson and Wenger remain the 2 exceptions - and yes, people should understand that word, they are exceptions. They have not turned from shit managers into good ones because they were given time, they were great managers in the first place, and whether they had been given 10 months or 10 years at their club, they would have been successful regardless


Some managers had to be fired to get the right man in, that's true but at some point, the sacking has to stop. We are close to that point, if we're not there already.

The biggest problem with changing managers over quickly in the past has, imo, been down to the staff & players they leave behind. In the old days when City sacked managers regularly, you could have a bloke taking over players signed by 4 different managers, with various members of staff who were loyal to different people, all that lot disgruntled, banding together against the new manager telling their mates in the press stories etc.

Look at the shit Hughes had to deal with from Sven's boys & then Bob had to deal with when he dropped Ireland, fucked around with Bellamy etc etc. The next manager would have Balotelli to deal with, then if he drops Yaya Toure & say, Micah after Bob's got him playing again, they're off dropping stories to Oliver Holt etc. It causes shit, but at least now, the shit would be limited to the 1st team, rather than Hughes getting shit off the youth coaches & every Tom Dick & Harry for stuff that Khaldoon & Marwood were doing. It makes for trouble though.

In Bob's case, I don't think he's bonded much with the players so it should be minimal & most fans & media in the country hate watching us so it would be a bit easier than some sackings.
The pissartist formerly known as Ted

VIVA EL CITY !!!

Some take the bible for what it's worth.. when they say that the rags shall inherit the Earth...
Well I heard that the Sheikh... bought Carlos Tevez this week...& you fuckers aint gettin' nothin..
Ted Hughes
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Colin Bell's Football Brain
 
Posts: 28488
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 4:28 pm
Supporter of: Bill Turnbull
My favourite player is: Bill Turnbull

Re: I actually want rid now

Postby Chinners » Mon Mar 21, 2011 8:29 pm

Renato_CTID wrote:It's hard to say but too many Citizens here look like they ignore our beloved club hasn't the same traditions of Real, Barca, AC Milan, Liverpool and so on. Passing from Gillingham play offs to a Santiago Bernabeu or a San Siro trip you have to change a lot of things in your players, in your staff and even in all fans' way of work, could you imagine this is an easy thing to do?
Only God knows how much time we need to become exactly like those clubs! Months or years? All in all this is the reason why mr Strongest Ego of the World alias Josè Mourinho will never sign for us! He's a mercenary fox who'll take the job only where they guarantee tropheys to win


Eh? Our 'beloved' club hasn't the same traditions! Granted we've been shit for a while now but we certainly have a great history and tradition, we can [strike]get[/strike] buy it back as quickly as we blew in the first place 'll have you know ... so there
Image
User avatar
Chinners
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Kaptain Kompany's Komposure
 
Posts: 14256
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 12:52 pm
Location: Hampton Court Palace
Supporter of: B*ll*x
My favourite player is: Kun Tueart

Re: I actually want rid now

Postby Im_Spartacus » Mon Mar 21, 2011 11:03 pm

Ted Hughes wrote:
Im_Spartacus wrote:John can't have this argument both ways.

The point is, if the club is moving in the direction we all discussed last week where everything except the lineup & tactics on a Saturday is removed from the manager's responsibilities, then the manager is solely responsible for what we see on the pitch. As the head coaches are at Real Madrid.

AC Milan had to rebuild a number of times, the excuses about "time to gel" etc didnt stop them sacking managers and continuing to be successful. Yes they had a higher starting level, but the fact was - if the coach didnt show progress early doors, they were gone, and they kept doing that until they found a successful one in Ancelotti whom they kept for 8 seasons.

How many managers who have been sacked by Real or Milan over the last 24 seasons has gone on to be consistently successful elsewhere? I suspect the answer will be something along the lines of the number of our sacked managers who have gone on to better things. Capello arguably, but he never stuck around anywhere for long either.

The fact remains that if you appoint the wrong man in the first place, you are always going to have to sack him sooner or later. Ferguson and Wenger remain the 2 exceptions - and yes, people should understand that word, they are exceptions. They have not turned from shit managers into good ones because they were given time, they were great managers in the first place, and whether they had been given 10 months or 10 years at their club, they would have been successful regardless


Some managers had to be fired to get the right man in, that's true but at some point, the sacking has to stop. We are close to that point, if we're not there already.

The biggest problem with changing managers over quickly in the past has, imo, been down to the staff & players they leave behind. In the old days when City sacked managers regularly, you could have a bloke taking over players signed by 4 different managers, with various members of staff who were loyal to different people, all that lot disgruntled, banding together against the new manager telling their mates in the press stories etc.

Look at the shit Hughes had to deal with from Sven's boys & then Bob had to deal with when he dropped Ireland, fucked around with Bellamy etc etc. The next manager would have Balotelli to deal with, then if he drops Yaya Toure & say, Micah after Bob's got him playing again, they're off dropping stories to Oliver Holt etc. It causes shit, but at least now, the shit would be limited to the 1st team, rather than Hughes getting shit off the youth coaches & every Tom Dick & Harry for stuff that Khaldoon & Marwood were doing. It makes for trouble though.

In Bob's case, I don't think he's bonded much with the players so it should be minimal & most fans & media in the country hate watching us so it would be a bit easier than some sackings.


Surely the sign of a good manager is one who can bring a squad together in adversity. One who can make a TEAM out of a squad, whichever 11 players take to the field, even if he doesnt know them particularly well.

Aside from Fergie, there is only one man I know of who can do that. Short of Mourinho, we will most probably keep on changing managers every 2/3 years, as I dont see any manager out there who can do what we are looking for. Regardless though, I don't believe Mancini is that man either, so we might as well give the next candidate a shot
Image
Im_Spartacus
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Denis Law's Backheel
 
Posts: 9588
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2008 8:41 pm
Location: Abu Dhabi
Supporter of: .

Re: I actually want rid now

Postby gillie » Tue Mar 22, 2011 12:33 am

My problem with Bob is he is too reactive and not proactive why wait till we go 1 down to change things when we could all see the changes that were needed 15 or 20 mins beforehand.And thats why i think he will fail he is too scared to make game CHANGING decisions.Baconface took off his hot striker Cichadorito for Berbaflop on satdi v Bolton and guess who scored their winner.Good managers can change games Bob cant or wont.
User avatar
gillie
Donated to the site
Donated to the site
Pablo Zabaleta's Manc Accent
 
Posts: 13894
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2008 10:55 pm
Location: our house
Supporter of: Manchester City
My favourite player is: Colin Bell

Re: I actually want rid now

Postby john68 » Tue Mar 22, 2011 3:09 am

@ Spartacus,
I'm sure i don't want it both ways Mate...(sounds very painful).
With regard to the Mancini/Marwood roles, we have no real evidence of the delineation of their jobs but we can glean some info from various statements that have been made. We know marwood is in charge of football and we know that he oversees the general policy of the club. We know that mancini has responsibility for the 1st team and possibly some of the players around its fringes but after that the picture becomes a bit blurred.
I can only surmise that whilst hold the club's strategic football reins, Mancini holds the tactical ones at 1st team level. I think that on issues that govern team selection and the wheres and hows of the game, that ball is firmly in Mancini's court. I do think that marwood will have some input about new players, negotiations and contracts etc.
I KNOW THAT YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU UNDERSTOOD WHAT YOU THINK I WROTE, BUT I AM NOT SURE YOU REALISE THAT WHAT YOU READ IS NOT WHAT I MEANT
User avatar
john68
Kaptain Kompany's Komposure
 
Posts: 14630
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 4:47 pm
Location: Sittin' on the dock of the bay...wastin' time.
Supporter of: ST MARKS (W GORTON)
My favourite player is: BERT TRAUTMANN

Re: I actually want rid now

Postby dazby » Tue Mar 22, 2011 3:29 am

If we got rid of Mancio right now, Hiddink would be the man to save our season. The squad we have would fit perfectly in his system. De Jong, yaya and gazbaz fighting for two positions. Silva, Tevez and yaya for the advanced midfield role. Silva and Johnno for the left, sweep and johnno for the right and one striker in the middle. Tasty.
Attack the argument of the person, not the person of the argument- except Carl.
User avatar
dazby
Joe Mercer's OBE
 
Posts: 19308
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:02 am
Location: Brisbane Australia
Supporter of: Manchester City
My favourite player is: Ed

Re: I actually want rid now

Postby Slim » Tue Mar 22, 2011 3:40 am

dazby wrote:If we got rid of Mancio right now, Hiddink would be the man to save our season. The squad we have would fit perfectly in his system. De Jong, yaya and gazbaz fighting for two positions. Silva, Tevez and yaya for the advanced midfield role. Silva and Johnno for the left, sweep and johnno for the right and one striker in the middle. Tasty.


I think that's half our problem right there.
Image
User avatar
Slim
Anna Connell's Vision
 
Posts: 30344
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 3:57 am
Location: Perth

Re: I actually want rid now

Postby john68 » Tue Mar 22, 2011 4:01 am

Yhat was a tremendous post Slim and at last there seems to be an exchange of ideas on here.

Whilst I agree totally that those factors you mention undoubtedly had an adverse effect on city's past progress. I have to say that Swales in particular and there were others that must have kept the axe on their office wall, with a quick release catch and while |i agree that some of our managers would probably never have succeeded, I will argue that others were never given the time to develop their squads. Ron Saunders went to win the European Cup with Villa, yet Swales only allowed him 29 games. Book gave us around 6 years of reasonable football and some success, yet when form dropped (and I don't know the reason), he wasn't trusted to put things right. He had already proven he could do the job. Allison was brought in, promoted over his head, then subsequently both sacked. John Bond complained bitterly about his treatment by the Swales 5th column and not being allowed to do the job. Had he been better supported, who knows. Reid was sacked because of club politics not football reasons. We had 2 5th place finishes under him. Royle stabilised the club and began our upward journey. 2 promotions, reaching the top division with a similar suqad that had been playing 2 divisions lower only a season previously. Bolton kept faith with Big Sam and he took them into Europe. We sacked Royle. Eriksson 1 years and never allowed to develop a squad into the 2ng season. Hughes was dumped and deemed to ahve failed only 18 months into his project and now we seemancini's head being dragged to the chopping block. Our only period of success was when we allowed Book the years to do the job.

Just a quick point about Joe Mercer, whom you mention. He won us 1 league and several cups. His point/games ratio looks excellent. but it that good? His league finishes were: 15th, 1st, 13th, 10th, 11th. He was considered God back then but nowadays would he have survived the chop...with some of the impatience shown by fans and the media...possibly not.

Much has been made of the word "tired" and mancini has been ridiculed extensively for saying it. I always translated it to mean "level of performance" meaning that the players were unable to compete at that very top level. It only takes a very small dip in performance level to make a huge difference. I do agree that he was wrong to publicise it. I also think that the injuries to our spine, the most important areas had an adverse effect. Kompany, Silva, De Jong missing was diastrous. In 1968, Colin Bell missed 4 games and it almost cost us the league. There is a finer line betwwen success and failure than some would like to admit.

I freely admit that I have no clue if Mancini can eventually take this side to the top but as with Hughes last season, we still have too many unanswered questions. Who knows how Dzeko, Boateng, Kolarov, Balotelli will perform after a summer break and a full pre season? Who knows how Hart or Micah may progress? How Lescott may gel even better with Kompany? The raw talent of Adam coupled with a returning Michael, may add further improvement and who knows what little marvel(s) may be added from transfers.

The longer this season has gone on, the more I am convinced that this season is being set up for huge success next.
I KNOW THAT YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU UNDERSTOOD WHAT YOU THINK I WROTE, BUT I AM NOT SURE YOU REALISE THAT WHAT YOU READ IS NOT WHAT I MEANT
User avatar
john68
Kaptain Kompany's Komposure
 
Posts: 14630
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 4:47 pm
Location: Sittin' on the dock of the bay...wastin' time.
Supporter of: ST MARKS (W GORTON)
My favourite player is: BERT TRAUTMANN

Re: I actually want rid now

Postby CityFanFromRome » Tue Mar 22, 2011 7:00 am

Im_Spartacus wrote:
So how do you explain away Real Madrid and AC Milan's considerable success amongst constant turmoil?

What success? Madrid hasn't won the CL since 2001 I think, and that's a long time for a team like them, considering they're more often than not gone out in the last 16 of the tournament, some times to lesser teams too. As for the Liga, how many times have they won it in the last years? Once? Look at Barca instead. They have changed one manager in the last 8 years I think, and they have won much more than Madrid.

As for Milan, their best period in recent years has been in the years they were under Ancelotti, with two CL won and a Serie A title. When they have constantly changed managers they have won fuck all. This year they are already out of CL and the Italian Cup, not to mention they sit top of Serie A but with a reduced margin over Inter which is now only two points behind with a Derby game to play next week.
User avatar
CityFanFromRome
Joe Hart's 29 Clean Sheets
 
Posts: 5129
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 6:20 pm
Location: Rome
Supporter of: Man City & Roma
My favourite player is: Carlos Tévez

PreviousNext

Return to The Maine Football forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot], PeterParker, Stan, zuricity and 250 guests