Suppository Takes A Strange Turn

[johnny crossan]

[youtube]EMr0MnBEjII[/youtube]

black start to a black day

[johnny crossan]

[youtube]321i1-0-wIw[/youtube]

[dazby]

It's funny that these hacks get paid to have that conversation. We have the same one. A little bit more passionate, but the same one.

[Tokyo Blue]

It's funny that these hacks get paid to have that conversation. We have the same one. A little bit more passionate, but the same one.

Somewhat more knowledgeable as well we are.

[Alex Sapphire]

It's funny that these hacks get paid to have that conversation. We have the same one. A little bit more passionate, but the same one.

Somewhat more knowledgeable as well we are.

dead right you are.

Translate your posts into Yoda speak here

[johnny crossan]

[youtube]-CaaTxYMWzI[/youtube]

[Tokyo Blue]

Funny that, just on the day of a reasonably big match. I am sure no-one could have seen anything like that coming.

[johnny crossan]

Funny that, just on the day of a reasonably big match. I am sure no-one could have seen anything like that coming.

It's a very big one

[Beefymcfc]

I know we love to watch and read these things to see what they say about our club but the reality is that these people are journalists talking about their own stories. As was said there, Rob Beasley has made an assumption and tried to put it across as fact. Now, the other journo's are talking fact about the very same assumption. Strange concept but one that we are all used.

Although I have no problem with Guardiola it does seem strange that this story in the Sun would come out on the day of a big game. It also seems strange that a self-confessed Chelsea supporter would pen a story that in some way tries to undermine the management. I've no idea why they'd do such a thing, what do they have to gain?

On a brighter note, Beasley fucking hates Rafa Benitez. He must be loving it down at Stamford Bridge at the moment. A first class turd.

[Ted Hughes]

I know we love to watch and read these things to see what they say about our club but the reality is that these people are journalists talking about their own stories. As was said there, Rob Beasley has made an assumption and tried to put it across as fact. Now, the other journo's are talking fact about the very same assumption. Strange concept but one that we are all used.

Although I have no problem with Guardiola it does seem strange that this story in the Sun would come out on the day of a big game. It also seems strange that a self-confessed Chelsea supporter would pen a story that in some way tries to undermine the management. I've no idea why they'd do such a thing, what do they have to gain?

On a brighter note, Beasley fucking hates Rafa Benitez. He must be loving it down at Stamford Bridge at the moment. A first class turd.

The story has come from an absolute turd & does seem to be deliberately timed to help out the rags. That doesn't mean it's neccessarily untrue mid you.

The interesting thing to me though is the comments of the geezers on that panel, none of whom have ever given us anything but shit. Fair enough, they all think Mancini has had it & Pep is favourite, but where are the 'why would he go to City?' or 'he'll just get sacked after 2 months if they're not top of the league' comments ?

Go back a year or so & these lot would be ripping the shit out of us about this & how Sheikh Mansour will 'lose interest' & Guardiola would be 'better off waiting for the Utd job' etc. None of it.

They have finally realised that City are here to stay, & that if we did bring in Guardiola, it would be to head the next stage of 'the project' & help build from within, & not as a short term, knee jerk reaction. They are resigned to the fact that it is going to happen, Pep or no Pep.

Our message has finally got through, & well done to the PR people for delivering it.

As for the Pep story, I would be interested to hear Henry Winter's take on it. I recon he gets the occasional word from on high.

[Plain Speaking]

I know we love to watch and read these things to see what they say about our club but the reality is that these people are journalists talking about their own stories. As was said there, Rob Beasley has made an assumption and tried to put it across as fact. Now, the other journo's are talking fact about the very same assumption. Strange concept but one that we are all used.

Although I have no problem with Guardiola it does seem strange that this story in the Sun would come out on the day of a big game. It also seems strange that a self-confessed Chelsea supporter would pen a story that in some way tries to undermine the management. I've no idea why they'd do such a thing, what do they have to gain?

On a brighter note, Beasley fucking hates Rafa Benitez. He must be loving it down at Stamford Bridge at the moment. A first class turd.

Dont you think most Chelsea supporters, (Beasley included?) would love to have Jose back? Jose said he'll "go where he's wanted"
Apparently Abramovic is offering a fortune to Pep, but Pep seems a man of principle. To me Arsenal, the rags or ourselves are more likely for Pep.

[Beefymcfc]

I know we love to watch and read these things to see what they say about our club but the reality is that these people are journalists talking about their own stories. As was said there, Rob Beasley has made an assumption and tried to put it across as fact. Now, the other journo's are talking fact about the very same assumption. Strange concept but one that we are all used.

Although I have no problem with Guardiola it does seem strange that this story in the Sun would come out on the day of a big game. It also seems strange that a self-confessed Chelsea supporter would pen a story that in some way tries to undermine the management. I've no idea why they'd do such a thing, what do they have to gain?

On a brighter note, Beasley fucking hates Rafa Benitez. He must be loving it down at Stamford Bridge at the moment. A first class turd.

The story has come from an absolute turd & does seem to be deliberately timed to help out the rags. That doesn't mean it's neccessarily untrue mid you.

The interesting thing to me though is the comments of the geezers on that panel, none of whom have ever given us anything but shit. Fair enough, they all think Mancini has had it & Pep is favourite, but where are the 'why would he go to City?' or 'he'll just get sacked after 2 months if they're not top of the league' comments ?

Go back a year or so & these lot would be ripping the shit out of us about this & how Sheikh Mansour will 'lose interest' & Guardiola would be 'better off waiting for the Utd job' etc. None of it.

They have finally realised that City are here to stay, & that if we did bring in Guardiola, it would be to head the next stage of 'the project' & help build from within, & not as a short term, knee jerk reaction. They are resigned to the fact that it is going to happen, Pep or no Pep.

Our message has finally got through, & well done to the PR people for delivering it.

As for the Pep story, I would be interested to hear Henry Winter's take on it. I recon he gets the occasional word from on high.

I don't think anybody will ahve an inside track on managerial matters at the moment mate, not while we've still got the league and FA Cup to compete in. One thing I'd hate to see is similar to what happened with Hughes or what happened with Mancini at Inter with Mourinho skulking in the shadows.

The Hughes sacking was a very dark day for me.

[Ted Hughes]

I know we love to watch and read these things to see what they say about our club but the reality is that these people are journalists talking about their own stories. As was said there, Rob Beasley has made an assumption and tried to put it across as fact. Now, the other journo's are talking fact about the very same assumption. Strange concept but one that we are all used.

Although I have no problem with Guardiola it does seem strange that this story in the Sun would come out on the day of a big game. It also seems strange that a self-confessed Chelsea supporter would pen a story that in some way tries to undermine the management. I've no idea why they'd do such a thing, what do they have to gain?

On a brighter note, Beasley fucking hates Rafa Benitez. He must be loving it down at Stamford Bridge at the moment. A first class turd.

The story has come from an absolute turd & does seem to be deliberately timed to help out the rags. That doesn't mean it's neccessarily untrue mid you.

The interesting thing to me though is the comments of the geezers on that panel, none of whom have ever given us anything but shit. Fair enough, they all think Mancini has had it & Pep is favourite, but where are the 'why would he go to City?' or 'he'll just get sacked after 2 months if they're not top of the league' comments ?

Go back a year or so & these lot would be ripping the shit out of us about this & how Sheikh Mansour will 'lose interest' & Guardiola would be 'better off waiting for the Utd job' etc. None of it.

They have finally realised that City are here to stay, & that if we did bring in Guardiola, it would be to head the next stage of 'the project' & help build from within, & not as a short term, knee jerk reaction. They are resigned to the fact that it is going to happen, Pep or no Pep.

Our message has finally got through, & well done to the PR people for delivering it.

As for the Pep story, I would be interested to hear Henry Winter's take on it. I recon he gets the occasional word from on high.

I don't think anybody will ahve an inside track on managerial matters at the moment mate, not while we've still got the league and FA Cup to compete in. One thing I'd hate to see is similar to what happened with Hughes or what happened with Mancini at Inter with Mourinho skulking in the shadows.

The Hughes sacking was a very dark day for me.

And me. It would be uncomfortable to see Bob fired unless the last part of the season really went badly pear shaped.

But Cook, in his state of subsequent panic after the Hughes fiasco, spilled the beans that it is standard proceedure for clubs to be chatting up other managers in secret & it would continue & all the rumours I have heard suggest City have been doing exactly that since then, with people such as Mourinho for example, on a regular basis.

[Beefymcfc]

And me. It would be uncomfortable to see Bob fired unless the last part of the season really went badly pear shaped.

But Cook, in his state of subsequent panic after the Hughes fiasco, spilled the beans that it is standard proceedure for clubs to be chatting up other managers in secret & it would continue & all the rumours I have heard suggest City have been doing exactly that since then, with people such as Mourinho for example, on a regular basis.

If a manager is to be moved on then I have no problems, usually supporting the move, but the way the Hughes debacle was dealt with was totally unprofessional and lacked any sort of dignified manner, one that our owners would not have been proud of. It was obvious that Hughes had wind of what was going to happen and from there his agents leaked the goss to paint us in a bad light. It's a pity that Garry Cook didn't deal with it earlier and left it for Khaldoon to do the deed.

As for other managers, I'd assume that we have contact with many, even the top ones now. However, I don't for a second believe we are having active disscusions with regard to replacing Mancini as yet. There are a lot of people trying to paint pictures at the moment, usually for their own gain, but a lot of what is inferred is just the usual guess work followed by statement of fact. Similar to the media in fact.

If we were in discussions our top brass would not let this information slip to anybody, nevermind some gobshite who wants to put it out to all and sundry. I take what I hear with a pinch of salt as those who spout such things are clearly not at the level to know such things, more guess work and conjecture.

[s1ty m]

I would be surprised if Pep wasn't in charge at City next season. Bringing in the executives that we brought in is a giveaway if ever there was one. The failure in the CL is the key to Mancini's thin ice, regardless of of winning what he has. Bizarre, but there it is.

[Ted Hughes]

I would be surprised if Pep wasn't in charge at City next season. Bringing in the executives that we brought in is a giveaway if ever there was one. The failure in the CL is the key to Mancini's thin ice, regardless of of winning what he has. Bizarre, but there it is.

I've thought about this a lot & imo, the question is down to whether they think Pep was an essential part of creating what happened at Barca, or just a great manager who happened to pass through the system & did a great job while he was there. If the answer is that they think Pep was mainly a manager who helped Barca's system, then it would make no sense at all to replace Mancini with him, unless they think Mancini isn't up to the job, as Mancini is the current Prem champion. Why replace someone who has won the league in this country, with someone who hasn't ever managed here, & had Lionel Messi in his team ? It wouldn't be rational.

If however they think Pep was a driving force behind the creation of the modern Barca, given the fact that City are modelling the whole club on that, it would be a failure, even a deriliction of duty on their part, not to do everything they could to bring him in.

If he is genuinely that good & we step aside & let Chelsea or the rags have him, then we would be putting our whole academy plan at risk, as he will do it accross the road, with or without the big money, & he will have more pulling power than us.

Txiki & Soriano know the answer to those questions & that will decide whether Bob is still here next season imo.

@ Beefy, if we are in the market for Pep, we will be doing it now, we have no other choice.

[mcfc1632]

I know we love to watch and read these things to see what they say about our club but the reality is that these people are journalists talking about their own stories. As was said there, Rob Beasley has made an assumption and tried to put it across as fact. Now, the other journo's are talking fact about the very same assumption. Strange concept but one that we are all used.

Although I have no problem with Guardiola it does seem strange that this story in the Sun would come out on the day of a big game. It also seems strange that a self-confessed Chelsea supporter would pen a story that in some way tries to undermine the management. I've no idea why they'd do such a thing, what do they have to gain?

On a brighter note, Beasley fucking hates Rafa Benitez. He must be loving it down at Stamford Bridge at the moment. A first class turd.

The story has come from an absolute turd & does seem to be deliberately timed to help out the rags. That doesn't mean it's neccessarily untrue mid you.

The interesting thing to me though is the comments of the geezers on that panel, none of whom have ever given us anything but shit. Fair enough, they all think Mancini has had it & Pep is favourite, but where are the 'why would he go to City?' or 'he'll just get sacked after 2 months if they're not top of the league' comments ?

Go back a year or so & these lot would be ripping the shit out of us about this & how Sheikh Mansour will 'lose interest' & Guardiola would be 'better off waiting for the Utd job' etc. None of it.

They have finally realised that City are here to stay, & that if we did bring in Guardiola, it would be to head the next stage of 'the project' & help build from within, & not as a short term, knee jerk reaction. They are resigned to the fact that it is going to happen, Pep or no Pep.

Our message has finally got through, & well done to the PR people for delivering it.

As for the Pep story, I would be interested to hear Henry Winter's take on it. I recon he gets the occasional word from on high.

I don't think anybody will ahve an inside track on managerial matters at the moment mate, not while we've still got the league and FA Cup to compete in. One thing I'd hate to see is similar to what happened with Hughes or what happened with Mancini at Inter with Mourinho skulking in the shadows.

The Hughes sacking was a very dark day for me.

And me. It would be uncomfortable to see Bob fired unless the last part of the season really went badly pear shaped.

But Cook, in his state of subsequent panic after the Hughes fiasco, spilled the beans that it is standard proceedure for clubs to be chatting up other managers in secret & it would continue & all the rumours I have heard suggest City have been doing exactly that since then, with people such as Mourinho for example, on a regular basis.

I was also one of those that did find the manner in which the Hughes sacking was dealt with distasteful - but not out of setntiment for Hughes as he was well compensated - more fore my desire for stability at the club and there was no real evidence that Mancini (IMO) would make it in the PL. Now I am in the same - only stronger - position with Mancini. I would hope that we stick with him at least until the end of next season and only change if we have another CL debacle or end ouside the top 3.

The club have demonstrated that we intend to comply with FFPR so backing Mancini (unless it goes totally tits this season (which would mean outside the top 4)) fits well - as does his 5 year contract.

The papers make most of this stuff up and do not seem to have any accountability for being wrong. I really wonder what the accuracy rate would be if you were to list all the 'facts' these suppository guys have printed in recent years and compare to the reality - they would be clearly be proven to be the incompetent dross we know they are - so why do we (I do not mean you Ted) give them so much credence?

Anyway the point I meant to make was that we should all realise that the executive jobs at CITY - and that includes the manager - are MAJOR appointments. Accordingly they should be carefully and strategically planned - with a form of 'head-hunting' undertaken. Only in the football industry would anybody think that it could make any sense to sack the incumbent and then start the search for a replacement - in all other major industries (which football now is) that would in itself be gross incompetence.

[Ted Hughes]

Imagine though, that Arsenal for instance had brought in Barca's CEO & Director Of Football, just after Pep had gone on a year's gardening leave. Every single one of us on here would be saying it's a done deal. It's purely the title win & our own personal attachment to Bob, which is making us think otherwise.

[Beefymcfc]

I would be surprised if Pep wasn't in charge at City next season. Bringing in the executives that we brought in is a giveaway if ever there was one. The failure in the CL is the key to Mancini's thin ice, regardless of of winning what he has. Bizarre, but there it is.

I've thought about this a lot & imo, the question is down to whether they think Pep was an essential part of creating what happened at Barca, or just a great manager who happened to pass through the system & did a great job while he was there. If the answer is that they think Pep was mainly a manager who helped Barca's system, then it would make no sense at all to replace Mancini with him, unless they think Mancini isn't up to the job, as Mancini is the current Prem champion. Why replace someone who has won the league in this country, with someone who hasn't ever managed here, & had Lionel Messi in his team ? It wouldn't be rational.

If however they think Pep was a driving force behind the creation of the modern Barca, given the fact that City are modelling the whole club on that, it would be a failure, even a deriliction of duty on their part, not to do everything they could to bring him in.

If he is genuinely that good & we step aside & let Chelsea or the rags have him, then we would be putting our whole academy plan at risk, as he will do it accross the road, with or without the big money, & he will have more pulling power than us.

Txiki & Soriano know the answer to those questions & that will decide whether Bob is still here next season imo.

@ Beefy, if we are in the market for Pep, we will be doing it now, we have no other choice.

The shortest yet most significant word in your last sentence is 'if' and that's what I'm talking about.

If we are talking to PG then we have already decided to bin Mancini which is a little early in the reckoning. Like me, you ask yourself the question of whether the new board members were brought in to basically bring PG in yet they were brought in at the time when Mancini was given the 5 year contract. That says more to me than anything else as regardless of get out clauses etc, our owners are not so knee-jerk as some of the media. How long did they give Hughes?

Soriano and Txiki were brought in for their European pedigree (Soriano making great gains commercially) and it's nothing to do with hiring PG. They were the ones who oversaw the transition of Barca and Soriano was a key member of the old G14. The link is there with PG but the reality is that we wanted the best minds and experience to progress within the confines of a closed shop. We did that, we now move on with the experience we need. To say that Sheikh Mansour brought these guys in to push the Guardiola link is a bit naive. To say that we won't be interested though is well off the mark. We're always interested in top names, as Hughes always used to spout ;-)

Imagine though, that Arsenal for instance had brought in Barca's CEO & Director Of Football, just after Pep had gone on a year's gardening leave. Every single one of us on here would be saying it's a done deal. It's purely the title win & our own personal attachment to Bob, which is making us think otherwise.

To be fair mate, not everyone works like that and some like to look at the bigger picture.

[Ted Hughes]

I would be surprised if Pep wasn't in charge at City next season. Bringing in the executives that we brought in is a giveaway if ever there was one. The failure in the CL is the key to Mancini's thin ice, regardless of of winning what he has. Bizarre, but there it is.

I've thought about this a lot & imo, the question is down to whether they think Pep was an essential part of creating what happened at Barca, or just a great manager who happened to pass through the system & did a great job while he was there. If the answer is that they think Pep was mainly a manager who helped Barca's system, then it would make no sense at all to replace Mancini with him, unless they think Mancini isn't up to the job, as Mancini is the current Prem champion. Why replace someone who has won the league in this country, with someone who hasn't ever managed here, & had Lionel Messi in his team ? It wouldn't be rational.

If however they think Pep was a driving force behind the creation of the modern Barca, given the fact that City are modelling the whole club on that, it would be a failure, even a deriliction of duty on their part, not to do everything they could to bring him in.

If he is genuinely that good & we step aside & let Chelsea or the rags have him, then we would be putting our whole academy plan at risk, as he will do it accross the road, with or without the big money, & he will have more pulling power than us.

Txiki & Soriano know the answer to those questions & that will decide whether Bob is still here next season imo.

@ Beefy, if we are in the market for Pep, we will be doing it now, we have no other choice.

The shortest yet most significant word in your last sentence is 'if' and that's what I'm talking about.

If we are talking to PG then have already decided to bin Mancini which is a little early in the reckoning. Like me, you ask yourself the question of whether the new board members were brought in to basically bring PG in yet they were brought in at the time when Mancini was given the 5 year contract. That says more to me than anything else as regardless of get out clauses etc, our owners are not so knee-jerk as some of the media. How long did they give Hughes?

Soriano and Txiki were brought in for their European pedigree (Soriano making great gains commercially) and it's nothing to do with hiring PG. They were the ones who oversaw the transition of Barca and Soriano was a key member of the old G14. The link is there with PG but the reality is that we wanted the best minds and experience to progress within the confines of a closed shop. We did that, we now move on with the experience we need. To say that Sheikh Mansour brought these guys in to push the Guardiola link is a bit naive. To say that we won't be interested though is well off the mark. We're always interested in top names, as Hughes always used to spout ;-)

I didn't say I thought they were brought in to ditch Mancini. I don't think that. I think they are great appointments whoever the manager.

We have had a plan all along based quite a bit on Barca though. We copied their system, brought in their top brass. Do you really believe these blokes haven't sounded out Pep ? What would you do in their position ? If you didn't sound him out, you would be the wrong man for the job, it is your duty to look at the option. Whether they are negotiating or have signed him is another question but they will have asked him what he thinks about it at least. If they haven't they are crap. What if Bob became ill or his wife insisted on leaving ? We miss out on Pep because we are too honest & too nice to have spoken to him ?

As for Bob's deal; he may have demanded it. He's not stupid. He was talking to other clubs.

If we were Chelsea, what would you expect to happen next ?