• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

OT Mancini - judgement time

Because a Spurs team set up for a draw would get booed off of the pitch

haha ive seen many an attacking team also receive boos from the oh so knowledgeable crowd at WHL

you know there are Spurs fans on this very board who cant stand the tippy tappy football of Barcelona. Very interesting
 
Identifying players and managing ego's isn't an easy task. It's difficult to judge, as it's a fairly unique position. I guess you could liken it to Mourinho's failure to win La Liga in his first year (although this is Mancini's 2nd/3rd year), despite spending massive money.

I really do think it's bigger than just buying players, coaching them to success. The mindset is such a huge factor for me. We are seeing 2 perennial under achievers in City and Spurs throwing away fantastic leads over their rivals. You have to wonder just how much psychology of the past seasons will have played in this all.

=D> fcuking spot on Diego
 
Many on here thought that Emirates Marketing Project winning the title on Mancini was a formality when he joined and thought that he was a manager that we should have tried to attract. Three years later and it hasn't quite worked out like that. What do people think of him as a manager now?

i dont remember that at all to be honest. infact i remember people rubbishing his achievements because of a weak and corrupt league

i thought though that he could at least guide a group of talented players into a solid team . now? i dont think he has the temperament or the senior experience in true adversity to win a league title. Good tactical coach though....
 
It's his team now, so he can have little excuses. I think that they have the best players in the league but they do not have the best team. That is Mancini's fault, as is his failure to deal with the disruptive influences in the dressing room. Bad management.

Thing is, he was fine up until the last month or 2. He could be excused of all those failings if it resulted in what they set out to achieve. Ultimately I agree, it is his failing. I don't know if it makes him a bad manager. It showed bad management for sure. But bad managers are those who repeatedly make the same mistakes. I have always learned to fail early. I guess he showed too much blind faith to 'Super' Mario.

Also, he has been heavily reliant on Silva and Toure. Their lack of form in the second half of the year has seen them play some shockingly bad football.
 
haha ive seen many an attacking team also receive boos from the oh so knowledgeable crowd at WHL

you know there are Spurs fans on this very board who cant stand the tippy tappy football of Barcelona. Very interesting

This club has a tradition of playing attacking football and we have a tradition of digging out managers who don't deliver it. Mancini would be no different, if he set out a Spurs team to play for a point.

Who doesn't enjoy watching Barcelona?
 
This club has a tradition of playing attacking football and we have a tradition of digging out managers who don't deliver it. Mancini would be no different, if he set out a Spurs team to play for a point.

Who doesn't enjoy watching Barcelona?

I think people love to hate. They get tired of teams who are continually successful. This Barca side remain the best club side I've yet to come across in my view. Anyway, thats for a different thread.

I agree, we as a club are very quick to turn on managers who don't take us forward. But who isn't?
 
out of curiosity, why? how did you feel about harry?

I don't think that Hodgson is the right man for the job. I think that the way he sets his teams out is better suited to the underdog. That said he is a student of the game, very knowledgeable and has a wealth of experience.

I thought that Harry was the right man to stop us getting relegated but the wrong man to take the club forward. I was wrong.
 
Identifying players and managing ego's isn't an easy task. It's difficult to judge, as it's a fairly unique position. I guess you could liken it to Mourinho's failure to win La Liga in his first year (although this is Mancini's 2nd/3rd year), despite spending massive money.

I really do think it's bigger than just buying players, coaching them to success. The mindset is such a huge factor for me. We are seeing 2 perennial under achievers in City and Spurs throwing away fantastic leads over their rivals. You have to wonder just how much psychology of the past seasons will have played in this all.

I agree that he has done well in the transfer market. A lot better than Hughes ever did, however having an almost endless amount of money available makes that less impressive. Would he be able to identify targets with the kind of money Harry has had available, I'm not so sure. I think someone like Rodgers who has picked up Caulker and Sigurdsson on loan without spending any money deserves more credit for identifying targets.

Managing egos certainly isn't easy. And by the nature of being a buying team his group of players is probably harder to control than ours for example. He hasn't done anything outstanding in this area either though, average at best.

Mourinho had (and has) to compete with a team many talked of as one of the greatest team ever, a team that bent the United side City have to compete with over a chair and spanked. Of course Mourinho had a better team to start out with than Mancini, but I still think the comparison is a bit off. How would City under Mourinho do in La Liga? Somewhere around Valencia? Perhaps even a bit behind Valencia?

I have seen very little to be impressed by, and failing to instill the right mindset into his players, despite being able to buy almost whatever players he wanted, is just another average at best quality of his in my opinion.
 
I agree that he has done well in the transfer market. A lot better than Hughes ever did, however having an almost endless amount of money available makes that less impressive. Would he be able to identify targets with the kind of money Harry has had available, I'm not so sure. I think someone like Rodgers who has picked up Caulker and Sigurdsson on loan without spending any money deserves more credit for identifying targets.

Managing egos certainly isn't easy. And by the nature of being a buying team his group of players is probably harder to control than ours for example. He hasn't done anything outstanding in this area either though, average at best.

Mourinho had (and has) to compete with a team many talked of as one of the greatest team ever, a team that bent the United side City have to compete with over a chair and spanked. Of course Mourinho had a better team to start out with than Mancini, but I still think the comparison is a bit off. How would City under Mourinho do in La Liga? Somewhere around Valencia? Perhaps even a bit behind Valencia?

I have seen very little to be impressed by, and failing to instill the right mindset into his players, despite being able to buy almost whatever players he wanted, is just another average at best quality of his in my opinion.

Most people would agree that he has so far failed overall at City. That for me doesn't make him a terrible coach.
 
Emirates Marketing Project would have won the league this season, if they were managed by Mourinho or Ferguson.
 
This club has a tradition of playing attacking football and we have a tradition of digging out managers who don't deliver it. Mancini would be no different, if he set out a Spurs team to play for a point.

Who doesn't enjoy watching Barcelona?

pop on by here when its CL final night and Barca are playing either Real or Bayern. Then you'll experience the full vitriol of hate towards Barca from a section of Spurs fans. But yeah, thats for another thread

I dont think Mancini necessarily sets his team out to play for a point, its more a case of setting them out not to lose first and then to build from that. From this point of view Redknapp and his coaches display the same tactics. on Saturday away at Sunderland was a little example. From what you say Mancini would have been murdered for playing two defensive midfielders in Sandro and Parker, and yet Redknapp seems to get away with it.

before he came to Tottenham, i wasnever that impressed with Redknapp teams. Im sure his Portsmouth team set a record of the consecutive number of games at home without scoring a goal. Redknapp teams have always been more pragmatic, with the odd moment of excitement. He certainly aint form the Ossie school of open free flowing football
 
Emirates Marketing Project would have won the league this season, if they were managed by Mourinho or Ferguson.

i think we wouldnt have been too far off either. They are the two best managers in the world though
 
From this point of view Redknapp and his coaches display the same tactics. on Saturday away at Sunderland was a little example. From what you say Mancini would have been murdered for playing two defensive midfielders in Sandro and Parker, and yet Redknapp seems to get away with it.

Redknapp only started with Parker and Sandro because we have another game tomorrow and Lennon isn't match fit.
 
Emirates Marketing Project would have won the league this season, if they were managed by Mourinho or Ferguson.

This guy's approach is unique. Love him or hate him, his ability to take any criticism solely on his shoulders and management to turn the dislike for his sides in general into a siege mentality sets him apart. His ego is absolutely perfect for these type of roles. You could almost describe him as a specialist.

Fergie is probably one of the greatest coaches ever. I would have loved to have seen how he would have managed a side other than United (after United).
 
Most people would agree that he has so far failed overall at City. That for me doesn't make him a terrible coach.

This is true and I was obviously a bit overly dramatic in my first post in this thread. There is just nothing that excites me about Mancini. I would rather have someone with the potential to be great rather than someone who has proven themselves to be average. I know that might change, he might improve and get better, fit better at a different club, but he doesn't fill me with any kind of confidence that he will.
 
I think that it is different with us, the style of play is as important as the results.

at least his teams play a technical passing game. His sides are well coached, thats obvious. Yes the defensive side is important to him, but that doesnt mean his teams just defend and then constantly knock the ball long to the forwards Allardyce style.

hey, if Redknapp was allowed to get away with buying Crouch and us playing the hoof to Crouch and then working off his knockdowns, then surely we could cut Mancini a bit of slack for his emphasis on good defensive base. But maybe we cant, Mancini is a hot headed foreigner and not a cheeky chappy ****ney wide boy made good who everyone loves
 
This guy's approach is unique. Love him or hate him, his ability to take any criticism solely on his shoulders and management to turn the dislike for his sides in general into a siege mentality sets him apart. His ego is absolutely perfect for these type of roles. You could almost describe him as a specialist.

Fergie is probably one of the greatest coaches ever. I would have loved to have seen how he would have managed a side other than United (after United).

I agree with both of those comments but when you are manager of the richest club in the world then that is who you will be compared against. Mancini is looking increasingly like Emirates Marketing Project's Ranieri, a decent manager but short of what they need to achieve their goals.
 
Back