Sticking with the manager

[Kladze]

I want him to stay because as somebody said its cycles well we know our cycle get a manager, get excited, lose a few, moan like fuck, Sack the manager and start over.

however if he does go I don't want a short term fix ie. Jose or hiddink. I[highlight]would like to see us offer Uwe Rosler the job[/highlight]and tell him baring a major fuck up the job is his for 5 years

Lillestrom >>> Viking >>> Molde >>> Manchester City ........ get real please.

[lets all have a disco]

I want him to stay because as somebody said its cycles well we know our cycle get a manager, get excited, lose a few, moan like fuck, Sack the manager and start over.

however if he does go I don't want a short term fix ie. Jose or hiddink. I[highlight]would like to see us offer Uwe Rosler the job[/highlight]and tell him baring a major fuck up the job is his for 5 years

Lillestrom >>> Viking >>> Molde >>> Manchester City ........ get real please.

ROSLER SHOULD BE ON THE COACHING SETUP,BUT NOT MANAGER.

Fuck Platt and The Bald Eagle.

Both top nobs.

[aaron bond]

I want him to stay because as somebody said its cycles well we know our cycle get a manager, get excited, lose a few, moan like fuck, Sack the manager and start over.

however if he does go I don't want a short term fix ie. Jose or hiddink. I[highlight]would like to see us offer Uwe Rosler the job[/highlight]and tell him baring a major fuck up the job is his for 5 years

Lillestrom >>> Viking >>> Molde >>> Manchester City ........ get real please.

I am pleased some of the people on this board aren't running the club. Some of the potential replacements for Mancini offered by posters on here are just plain ridiculous. Mick McCarthy is my favourite so far, with O'Neill not far behind :-)

[roblues]

We always hear how consistency is the key, and you should stick with the manager and give him time.
Obviously this is all in reference to Fergiescum. I was just thinking, are there any other cases where this actually applies, other than to him?
Take Wenger. He's well under achieving and has been for years, and the arse have stuck with him, is it worth it? I know they're challenging for the title, but in true arse fashion, they'll bottle it and finish 4th. Then there is moyes, who did ok for a bit, and now is dropping into mediocrity. Ok, he's got no dough, and been unlucky with injuries, and to Everton maybe seen as a success, but its not really got them anywhere has it?
Take Barca. They change managers every 3 years or so. Its not like they fall apart. all the big teams in italy also, and the rest of the teams in spain. Even Bayern etc.
So I think Fergiescum is the exception, rather than the rule, and if the man you've got in isn't the right man, then changes need to be made.
Agreed?

I feel like the two examples given here, Wenger and Moyes, are different cases entirely to our situation. Both have had success at their clubs but to repeat that success would be to overachieve, considering their spending (unless the Arsenal board are throwing money at Wenger but he is refusing it out of plain stubbornness to prove a point).

Our situation is more like Barca or Real in that they are not afraid to spend big money to win and already have a core of excellent players. However, they have guaranteed worldwide income so the pressure for success on a season to season basis is not as huge - they will get back to winning ways.

In our case, we have no established tradition of winning, the worldwide income needed to get us in line with fair play rules is not there yet and we have only this season put together a squad capable of challenging for anything. The man at the helm has finished this period of squad building, has us on target for the board's expectations (barely) and if he meets them, we should be willing to see what he can do to build on that. If we bring in someone else, they have to be satisfied to work with Mancini's squad or rebuild which could easily set us back again. I can't see that a truly world class manager would be prepared to simply inherit someone else's squad, which means that we would have a take a rebuilding risk and possibly set back progress even further (risking failure to comply with the financial rules in a few years if we are still not there).

I am disappointed with many results since Mancini took over, but he and the players will learn the lessons they need to if they stick together and we stick with them.

[Wooders]

I think we should stick with him

until the end of the season

[roblues]

I think we should stick with him

until the end of the season

I know many people feel like this and I wouldn't be surprised if he did go. Can't understand those that want rid of him now though.

[King Kev]

We always hear how consistency is the key, and you should stick with the manager and give him time.
Obviously this is all in reference to Fergiescum. I was just thinking, are there any other cases where this actually applies, other than to him?
Take Wenger. He's well under achieving and has been for years, and the arse have stuck with him, is it worth it? I know they're challenging for the title, but in true arse fashion, they'll bottle it and finish 4th. Then there is moyes, who did ok for a bit, and now is dropping into mediocrity. Ok, he's got no dough, and been unlucky with injuries, and to Everton maybe seen as a success, but its not really got them anywhere has it?
Take Barca. They change managers every 3 years or so. Its not like they fall apart. all the big teams in italy also, and the rest of the teams in spain. Even Bayern etc.
So I think Fergiescum is the exception, rather than the rule, and if the man you've got in isn't the right man, then changes need to be made.
Agreed?

Mancini hasn't even had a season and a half yet and people want rid.

If he hasn't done anything after 3 full seasons then maybe look at replacing him but City fans should know better than anybody that replacing the boss doesn't bring success.

[carl_feedthegoat]

We always hear how consistency is the key, and you should stick with the manager and give him time.
Obviously this is all in reference to Fergiescum. I was just thinking, are there any other cases where this actually applies, other than to him?
Take Wenger. He's well under achieving and has been for years, and the arse have stuck with him, is it worth it? I know they're challenging for the title, but in true arse fashion, they'll bottle it and finish 4th. Then there is moyes, who did ok for a bit, and now is dropping into mediocrity. Ok, he's got no dough, and been unlucky with injuries, and to Everton maybe seen as a success, but its not really got them anywhere has it?
Take Barca. They change managers every 3 years or so. Its not like they fall apart. all the big teams in italy also, and the rest of the teams in spain. Even Bayern etc.
So I think Fergiescum is the exception, rather than the rule, and if the man you've got in isn't the right man, then changes need to be made.
Agreed?

Mancini hasn't even had a season and a half yet and people want rid.

If he hasn't done anything after 3 full seasons then maybe look at replacing him but City fans should know better than anybody that replacing the boss doesn't bring success.

A manager has to show that his side is improving as the season goes on.....so far Mancini has not improved at fuckign all yet you would give him 3 seasons........pmsl... I'm sure the owners throwing 300 million last year wont agree with you...thankfully.

[roblues]

We always hear how consistency is the key, and you should stick with the manager and give him time.
Obviously this is all in reference to Fergiescum. I was just thinking, are there any other cases where this actually applies, other than to him?
Take Wenger. He's well under achieving and has been for years, and the arse have stuck with him, is it worth it? I know they're challenging for the title, but in true arse fashion, they'll bottle it and finish 4th. Then there is moyes, who did ok for a bit, and now is dropping into mediocrity. Ok, he's got no dough, and been unlucky with injuries, and to Everton maybe seen as a success, but its not really got them anywhere has it?
Take Barca. They change managers every 3 years or so. Its not like they fall apart. all the big teams in italy also, and the rest of the teams in spain. Even Bayern etc.
So I think Fergiescum is the exception, rather than the rule, and if the man you've got in isn't the right man, then changes need to be made.
Agreed?

Mancini hasn't even had a season and a half yet and people want rid.

If he hasn't done anything after 3 full seasons then maybe look at replacing him but City fans should know better than anybody that replacing the boss doesn't bring success.

A manager has to show that his side is improving as the season goes on.....so far Mancini has not improved at fuckign all yet you would give him 3 seasons........pmsl... I'm sure the owners throwing 300 million last year wont agree with you...thankfully.

Last Season - improved points ratio under Mancini, finished 5th, knocked out of FA Cup fifth round.
This Season - on course to finish 4th, FA Cup semi final, more clean sheets.

Does this not count as an improvement?

[Arjan Van Schotte]

We always hear how consistency is the key, and you should stick with the manager and give him time.
Obviously this is all in reference to Fergiescum. I was just thinking, are there any other cases where this actually applies, other than to him?
Take Wenger. He's well under achieving and has been for years, and the arse have stuck with him, is it worth it? I know they're challenging for the title, but in true arse fashion, they'll bottle it and finish 4th. Then there is moyes, who did ok for a bit, and now is dropping into mediocrity. Ok, he's got no dough, and been unlucky with injuries, and to Everton maybe seen as a success, but its not really got them anywhere has it?
Take Barca. They change managers every 3 years or so. Its not like they fall apart. all the big teams in italy also, and the rest of the teams in spain. Even Bayern etc.
So I think Fergiescum is the exception, rather than the rule, and if the man you've got in isn't the right man, then changes need to be made.
Agreed?

Mancini hasn't even had a season and a half yet and people want rid.

If he hasn't done anything after 3 full seasons then maybe look at replacing him but City fans should know better than anybody that replacing the boss doesn't bring success.

i'm not sure about that. on some occasions - you're right. but imho not always.

joe royle was "better" than frank clarke
kevin keegan was "better" than joe royle.
keegan needed to go when he did - debateable about psycho's credentials
Sven was "better" than psycho
hughes was arguably better than sven
and then, erm..... whilst no huge hughes fan, you can argue that he was better than mancini. IF we finish fifth and win fuck all (again), you could argue that there are many managers who would have done better than mancini.

now, if we'd kept sven - (in my dreams), he's got the contacts and the scouting network. we'd be challenging for the title rather than 4th.

[lets all have a disco]

We always hear how consistency is the key, and you should stick with the manager and give him time.
Obviously this is all in reference to Fergiescum. I was just thinking, are there any other cases where this actually applies, other than to him?
Take Wenger. He's well under achieving and has been for years, and the arse have stuck with him, is it worth it? I know they're challenging for the title, but in true arse fashion, they'll bottle it and finish 4th. Then there is moyes, who did ok for a bit, and now is dropping into mediocrity. Ok, he's got no dough, and been unlucky with injuries, and to Everton maybe seen as a success, but its not really got them anywhere has it?
Take Barca. They change managers every 3 years or so. Its not like they fall apart. all the big teams in italy also, and the rest of the teams in spain. Even Bayern etc.
So I think Fergiescum is the exception, rather than the rule, and if the man you've got in isn't the right man, then changes need to be made.
Agreed?

Mancini hasn't even had a season and a half yet and people want rid.

If he hasn't done anything after 3 full seasons then maybe look at replacing him but City fans should know better than anybody that replacing the boss doesn't bring success.

A manager has to show that his side is improving as the season goes on.....so far Mancini has not improved at fuckign all yet you would give him 3 seasons........pmsl... I'm sure the owners throwing 300 million last year wont agree with you...thankfully.

Last Season - improved points ratio under Mancini, finished 5th, knocked out of FA Cup fifth round.
This Season - on course to finish 4th, FA Cup semi final, more clean sheets.

Does this not count as an improvement?

Only another 400 million and we we will be winning the league.

[carl_feedthegoat]

We always hear how consistency is the key, and you should stick with the manager and give him time.
Obviously this is all in reference to Fergiescum. I was just thinking, are there any other cases where this actually applies, other than to him?
Take Wenger. He's well under achieving and has been for years, and the arse have stuck with him, is it worth it? I know they're challenging for the title, but in true arse fashion, they'll bottle it and finish 4th. Then there is moyes, who did ok for a bit, and now is dropping into mediocrity. Ok, he's got no dough, and been unlucky with injuries, and to Everton maybe seen as a success, but its not really got them anywhere has it?
Take Barca. They change managers every 3 years or so. Its not like they fall apart. all the big teams in italy also, and the rest of the teams in spain. Even Bayern etc.
So I think Fergiescum is the exception, rather than the rule, and if the man you've got in isn't the right man, then changes need to be made.
Agreed?

Mancini hasn't even had a season and a half yet and people want rid.

If he hasn't done anything after 3 full seasons then maybe look at replacing him but City fans should know better than anybody that replacing the boss doesn't bring success.

A manager has to show that his side is improving as the season goes on.....so far Mancini has not improved at fuckign all yet you would give him 3 seasons........pmsl... I'm sure the owners throwing 300 million last year wont agree with you...thankfully.

Last Season - improved points ratio under Mancini, finished 5th, knocked out of FA Cup fifth round.
This Season - on course to finish 4th, FA Cup semi final, more clean sheets.

Does this not count as an improvement?

Does not tell the whole picture does it.

[roblues]

We always hear how consistency is the key, and you should stick with the manager and give him time.
Obviously this is all in reference to Fergiescum. I was just thinking, are there any other cases where this actually applies, other than to him?
Take Wenger. He's well under achieving and has been for years, and the arse have stuck with him, is it worth it? I know they're challenging for the title, but in true arse fashion, they'll bottle it and finish 4th. Then there is moyes, who did ok for a bit, and now is dropping into mediocrity. Ok, he's got no dough, and been unlucky with injuries, and to Everton maybe seen as a success, but its not really got them anywhere has it?
Take Barca. They change managers every 3 years or so. Its not like they fall apart. all the big teams in italy also, and the rest of the teams in spain. Even Bayern etc.
So I think Fergiescum is the exception, rather than the rule, and if the man you've got in isn't the right man, then changes need to be made.
Agreed?

Mancini hasn't even had a season and a half yet and people want rid.

If he hasn't done anything after 3 full seasons then maybe look at replacing him but City fans should know better than anybody that replacing the boss doesn't bring success.

A manager has to show that his side is improving as the season goes on.....so far Mancini has not improved at fuckign all yet you would give him 3 seasons........pmsl... I'm sure the owners throwing 300 million last year wont agree with you...thankfully.

Last Season - improved points ratio under Mancini, finished 5th, knocked out of FA Cup fifth round.
This Season - on course to finish 4th, FA Cup semi final, more clean sheets.

Does this not count as an improvement?

Only another 400 million and we we will be winning the league.

I know what you're saying but if the owners spend the money and set the targets then all Mancini has to do is hit those targets. He is still on course to do that.

[Ted Hughes]

[url][/url]

We always hear how consistency is the key, and you should stick with the manager and give him time.
Obviously this is all in reference to Fergiescum. I was just thinking, are there any other cases where this actually applies, other than to him?
Take Wenger. He's well under achieving and has been for years, and the arse have stuck with him, is it worth it? I know they're challenging for the title, but in true arse fashion, they'll bottle it and finish 4th. Then there is moyes, who did ok for a bit, and now is dropping into mediocrity. Ok, he's got no dough, and been unlucky with injuries, and to Everton maybe seen as a success, but its not really got them anywhere has it?
Take Barca. They change managers every 3 years or so. Its not like they fall apart. all the big teams in italy also, and the rest of the teams in spain. Even Bayern etc.
[*]So I think Fergiescum is the exception, rather than the rule, and if the man you've got in isn't the right man, then changes need to be made.
Agreed?

Mancini hasn't even had a season and a half yet and people want rid.

If he hasn't done anything after 3 full seasons then maybe look at replacing him but City fans should know better than anybody that replacing the boss doesn't bring success.

A manager has to show that his side is improving as the season goes on.....so far Mancini has not improved at fuckign all yet you would give him 3 seasons........pmsl... I'm sure the owners throwing 300 million last year wont agree with you...thankfully.

Last Season - improved points ratio under Mancini, finished 5th, knocked out of FA Cup fifth round.
This Season - on course to finish 4th, FA Cup semi final, more clean sheets.

Does this not count as an improvement?

In the past, I would have agreed that keeping the manager is almost always the best way to go but the money changes things. It's a different job that's needed now.

If Mourinho took over this squad in July, it would look like a genuine title winning team by December. If it didn't people would be entitled to question his ability. A top manager should take one look at this team & be close to fixing the faults. Bob had 3 transfer windows & some faults are worse. Winning the league would be too much to expect but we should be looking like potential winners in the making. Did we last night?

When Sven started, he inherited a poor team. When Hughes started, most of Sven's signings were struggling & he had Vassell, Ched Evans, Gelson Fernandes etc to sift through as well as chaos behind the scenes. When Bob started, he had a stable club, Adebayor, Tevez, Robinho, Bellamy, SWP, Ireland, Petrov, RSC, plus the backbone of the present team & then signed AJ.

He was then given 100s of millions & has been at it over a year. He needs to be doing a lot better on the pitch, not just by quoting league positions.

If he can't do better than most of our recent games, he needs to go.

[roblues]

He was then given 100s of millions & has been at it over a year. He needs to be doing a lot better on the pitch, not just by quoting league positions.

If he can't do better than most of our recent games, he needs to go.

You can call it quoting league positions but he is still hitting the target he was set. The goalposts are being shifted because Chelsea have underachieved and the league has got tighter, but those who wanted 3rd preseason thought it would be at Arsenal's expense.
The target was set before the season started, and if he hits it we could be looking at another manager sacked whilst doing the job asked of him.

I've already said this but it's worth repeating. The owners spent the money and set the target. Not many were voicing their disapproval of this target pre-season and if it is a problem now, your gripe is with the owners as much as the manager.

[Blue Since 76]

He was then given 100s of millions & has been at it over a year. He needs to be doing a lot better on the pitch, not just by quoting league positions.

If he can't do better than most of our recent games, he needs to go.

You can call it quoting league positions but he is still hitting the target he was set. The goalposts are being shifted because Chelsea have underachieved and the league has got tighter, but those who wanted 3rd preseason thought it would be at Arsenal's expense.
The target was set before the season started, and if he hits it we could be looking at another manager sacked whilst doing the job asked of him.

I've already said this but it's worth repeating. The owners spent the money and set the target. Not many were voicing their disapproval of this target pre-season and if it is a problem now, your gripe is with the owners as much as the manager.

If you're a stock market trader, you might get a target of making a 10% profit in a year. If part way through the year there's a stock market crash, you're target might be reasonably reassessed to not losing more than 10%. Similarly, if there's a sudden boom, it might be changed to 15% profit.

In City's case, there was an assumption last season that Rags, Liverpool, Chelsea and Arsenal would do well and we had to somehow pip one. As Arsenal were 11 points behind 3rd, it was reasonable to assume they'd be the ones to drop out. When Liverpool exploded, it was reasonable to say we expect to finish above them, rather than hoping too. This season, it's been even tighter at the top with more points dropped by the top 4. Again, it's therefore reasonable to say we'd set 4th as a target, but that's now more than achievable, let's go for 3rd and automatic qualification. If we'd beat Everton, we'd have been top for Christmas, so a slip to 3rd would have been acceptable.

So no, I've no gripe with the owners if they think that 4th (if we get it) isn't good enough. They've done what any responsible business should do and reassessed their targets based on current market conditions.

[roblues]

He was then given 100s of millions & has been at it over a year. He needs to be doing a lot better on the pitch, not just by quoting league positions.

If he can't do better than most of our recent games, he needs to go.

You can call it quoting league positions but he is still hitting the target he was set. The goalposts are being shifted because Chelsea have underachieved and the league has got tighter, but those who wanted 3rd preseason thought it would be at Arsenal's expense.
The target was set before the season started, and if he hits it we could be looking at another manager sacked whilst doing the job asked of him.

I've already said this but it's worth repeating. The owners spent the money and set the target. Not many were voicing their disapproval of this target pre-season and if it is a problem now, your gripe is with the owners as much as the manager.

If you're a stock market trader, you might get a target of making a 10% profit in a year. If part way through the year there's a stock market crash, you're target might be reasonably reassessed to not losing more than 10%. Similarly, if there's a sudden boom, it might be changed to 15% profit.

In City's case, there was an assumption last season that Rags, Liverpool, Chelsea and Arsenal would do well and we had to somehow pip one. As Arsenal were 11 points behind 3rd, it was reasonable to assume they'd be the ones to drop out. When Liverpool exploded, it was reasonable to say we expect to finish above them, rather than hoping too. This season, it's been even tighter at the top with more points dropped by the top 4. Again, it's therefore reasonable to say we'd set 4th as a target, but that's now more than achievable, let's go for 3rd and automatic qualification. If we'd beat Everton, we'd have been top for Christmas, so a slip to 3rd would have been acceptable.

So no, I've no gripe with the owners if they think that 4th (if we get it) isn't good enough. They've done what any responsible business should do and reassessed their targets based on current market conditions.

I agree with pretty much everything here, except that I maybe didn't make my point clear enough. We have heard nothing to say that our target was changed by the owners. Mancini, from his interviews, is under the impression that 4th and a trophy is good enough. The owners have to have made it clear to him that more than this was expected or they would be acting unfairly if they sack him.

AJ said last week that Khaldoon told the players how important it would be for the club to be in the Champions League. If the players were to make the CL I think they would be surprised if the manager was sacked.

[Blue Since 76]

He was then given 100s of millions & has been at it over a year. He needs to be doing a lot better on the pitch, not just by quoting league positions.

If he can't do better than most of our recent games, he needs to go.

You can call it quoting league positions but he is still hitting the target he was set. The goalposts are being shifted because Chelsea have underachieved and the league has got tighter, but those who wanted 3rd preseason thought it would be at Arsenal's expense.
The target was set before the season started, and if he hits it we could be looking at another manager sacked whilst doing the job asked of him.

I've already said this but it's worth repeating. The owners spent the money and set the target. Not many were voicing their disapproval of this target pre-season and if it is a problem now, your gripe is with the owners as much as the manager.

If you're a stock market trader, you might get a target of making a 10% profit in a year. If part way through the year there's a stock market crash, you're target might be reasonably reassessed to not losing more than 10%. Similarly, if there's a sudden boom, it might be changed to 15% profit.

In City's case, there was an assumption last season that Rags, Liverpool, Chelsea and Arsenal would do well and we had to somehow pip one. As Arsenal were 11 points behind 3rd, it was reasonable to assume they'd be the ones to drop out. When Liverpool exploded, it was reasonable to say we expect to finish above them, rather than hoping too. This season, it's been even tighter at the top with more points dropped by the top 4. Again, it's therefore reasonable to say we'd set 4th as a target, but that's now more than achievable, let's go for 3rd and automatic qualification. If we'd beat Everton, we'd have been top for Christmas, so a slip to 3rd would have been acceptable.

So no, I've no gripe with the owners if they think that 4th (if we get it) isn't good enough. They've done what any responsible business should do and reassessed their targets based on current market conditions.

I agree with pretty much everything here, except that I maybe didn't make my point clear enough. We have heard nothing to say that our target was changed by the owners. Mancini, from his interviews, is under the impression that 4th and a trophy is good enough. The owners have to have made it clear to him that more than this was expected or they would be acting unfairly if they sack him.

AJ said last week that Khaldoon told the players how important it would be for the club to be in the Champions League. If the players were to make the CL I think they would be surprised if the manager was sacked.

Yeah, maybe they should have specified not looking scared to death of any team above half way in the league and not making half the crowd doze off in most home games.

They may have set him 4th, but I think he could get 3rd and still be sacked, whether they've warned him or not. A lot will depend on whether they can find a replacement they think is better. If not, he stays. As he stabbed Hughes in the back (thankfully), he must be aware of what is likely to be happening in the background now.

[getdressedmctavish]

I honestly dont think he brings anything to the party. He has a team shape and way of playing which he has imposed, getting rid of those who dont fit or who are a bit mercurial. But were still massively inconsistent, players brought in are no improvement or worse, and the system is dull as ditch water and easily sussed. He has drained many of the remaining players of confidence, and he rarely inovates to take account of the oppos weaknesses.As a result my enthusiasm is at its lowest point since Stu's final season and its clear many feel the same.A number of players are either pissed off or non commital. I dont envisage a players' strike if and when he goes, lol.Buying wise he has input to the committee. I think Kolarov and Balliotelli were strongly supported by him. Say no more.The thought of another season with him depresses me regardless of whether we hit our targets.If we get mullered Saturday I'd like to see him fecked off and Kidd allowed to employ some common sense and simple attacking football to the end of the season.Just by way of reference, how many players has Taggart feckin destroyed. Very few as far as I can see.They all give their best regardless of how often thay play, even Berbatrov.Its called management, and in my book Manchini doesnt understand it, atleast in the context of the PL. And he bottled it with Tevez. He should have been sold to the highest bidder. One goal from open play since Jan. So Manchini isn't even the tough guy he makes out.

[Kladze]

I'm sick and tired of hearing "targets and league position" quoted. They're becoming a mantra on the same level as "we need time to gel".

Use the evidence of your own fucking eyes. Even when we DO perform we do so only as 'slayers of the weak'.