Yep. He is rubbish.
Yep. He is rubbish.
It's harsh if you look at it purely on-paper, but he can't really complain.
I think Rodgers is something like the 6/7th longest serving PL manager
to have any chance of winning the prem you have to keep spending more year on year. however they fucked up wasting what money they did want to splurge on useless crap.Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory
Balotelli under the right manager could be a world beater.
Sacking Mancini will make city better for sure.
I think that’s the wrong attitude and where it’s all falling apart for the Prem . City had enough good players there to win the league and it’s the same for Chelsea. It’s not a problem regarding quality in players with those clubs. In our case, we need to spend because our squad has no balance and we need some major surgery. City and Chelsea constantly splashing the cash is like Michael Jackson saying he needed more plastic surgery. How many times can you visit the table to get more work done in an area that’s seen enough? You just mess yourself up. Mancini couldn’t manage the squad he had and instead of trying to fix those relationships and bring in a team spirit he wanted the quick fix. New players would only compound the problem.
Well Balotelli has 11 in 12 since his move to AC.
Mancini couldn't even get performances out of someone he was close to.
Mancini won trophies at Inter by default, as Juventus were in the wilderness following the match-fixing scandals and AC, Fiorentina and Lazio were punished too. Being an extremely wealthy club of course helped as well. At Citeh, he spent £63456 billion to achieve a narrow FA Cup win over Stoke and a League title by the skin of his teeth. Both Inter and Citeh were an embarrassment in Europe though.
If he goes to a more modest club without endless money/privilege to aid him and achieves something, then fair enough. He'll undoubtedly be off to a super-rich French/Russian/Chinese club though.
Perhaps, but it's also true.
http://transferpriceindex.com/2011/0...match-outcome/
Chelsea spent over £100m this season and still couldn't challenge for the title. Liverpool spent more than us and always have but haven't finished above us in years. There is more to it than that.
Think thats harsh on Mancini.
Things have gone against him and he's also done himself no favours, its six of one, half a dozen of the other, both parties are at fault, he cannot solely be blamed.
You need to strengthen after you win the title to keep things fresh, the keep the hunger and to look after the needs of the squad. You don't have to buy another 10 players but still strengthen, Man U do it all the time after winning.
City needed a CB, DM, winger option and forward because Tevez/Balotelli/Dzeko's futures were up in the air, obviously tevez-gate, dzeko wanting more playing time, balotelli being a loose canon.
Mancini recognised this and wanted Agger, Javi Martinez, Hazard and RVP since he was on the market. Marwood was too slow or ineffective in getting these in or similar quality alternatives, which spoilt their summer and they had to get bargain basement signings in. Mancini complained publicly affecting the relationship with the club.
Adam Johnson doesn't put the effort in. Neither does Lescott. Nasri felt he had arrived and lost the hunger he had in his early career. Mancini is rightly aggrieved but he complains publicly, thus alienating members of the squad, with divides starting to rupture it. He also needs to motivate the players and he hasn't been able to do so, bridging the divides.
Mancini realizes that tactically City need more than the 4-4-2 to really push on. He tries the 3-5-2 system, which if done right can be highly successful. City's players don't like it and don't want to put the effort in. Hart, Micah Richards etc. complain in public, Mancini complains in public. No harm in trying a new system, but rifts start to develop because of it. Lescott even reveals that he only communicates via the captain Kompany, Mancini and him are no longer on speaking terms.
Those are just some examples where things have gone against him, but he's also contributed to the problem. Both parties are at fault, and since the dressing room and the board have been lost then its probably mutually beneficial for him to leave.
Last edited by Tipsychubbs; 14-05-2013 at 01:32 PM.
The figures say differently. What it breaks down is that when you spend more and more every season, not an accumulative spend, you will get to the top. Seems simple enough.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote