Mancini sacked

DazMarz

I wouldn't say "fail", to be fair to the man. He succeeded in endeavours in the League and the FA Cup, but for the sheer amount of money spent by City, 2 trophies is not a good return at all.

But it was on the European stage where City fell terribly, terribly short. Crashing out at the group stages twice in a row, with one of them having them propping up the group. Yes, the second year was the ultimate group of death, but at the same time with the players City had, they should have at the very least finished third in the group.

I think it was a horrible move by the City board to sack Mancini before the end of the season. What harm would it have done to let him see out the season? None. But instead he suffers the ignominy of being in London for the final game of the season and being told "Well done, thank you, but sorry, old boy, everything you've done for us wasn't good enough."

Pepe LeFrits

Letting the story leak before the FA Cup final was a huge screw up on the part of City's executives.

I can't say I disagree with them getting rid of him though. I don't think Mancini is an elite manager; Pellegrini is a step up and is more likely to win City the title next season. If he joins City, I'd have them down as favourites next season before any transfer dealings are done.

wandatowell

I liked his style












of clothing

Copper_pipe

David Platt has quit also

Wasn't a fan, good riddance IMO, lets see if his next club allow him to splash the cash like it was smarties.

Xavi6

Still wearing the scarf as he leaves

DoctorGonzo08

Just as a matter of interest to all those delievering the backhand comments to Mancini. You all believe Pellegrini is head and shoulders above Mancini in terms of ability. Why? What has he actually done? Is this based on the fact that nobody actually knows alot about him apart from the media hype?

Side by side, Mancini has nearly a 20% better win rate than Pellegrini, better haul of league titles, and both have been exposed to vast sums of money. Pellegrini has performed better in Europe, but nothing that impressive in fairness. Mancini has 12 trophies in 12 years as manager, Pellegrini has 7 trophies in 18 years.

Pellegrini is not going to improve City in any way. As someone else had mentioned, I would far sooner Benitez for all his troubles. He has proven he can be a winner. Pellegrini is far down the pecking order IMO.

LuckyLloyd

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

Just as a matter of interest to all those delievering the backhand comments to Mancini. You all believe Pellegrini is head and shoulders above Mancini in terms of ability. Why? What has he actually done? Is this based on the fact that nobody actually knows alot about him apart from the media hype?

Side by side, Mancini has nearly a 20% better win rate than Pellegrini, better haul of league titles, and both have been exposed to vast sums of money. Pellegrini has performed better in Europe, but nothing that impressive in fairness. Mancini has 12 trophies in 12 years as manager, Pellegrini has 7 trophies in 18 years.

Pellegrini is not going to improve City in any way. As someone else had mentioned, I would far sooner Benitez for all his troubles. He has proven he can be a winner. Pellegrini is far down the pecking order IMO.

The challenges faced by Pellegrini at Villareal and Malaga dwarfed the difficulty of getting Inter to win a weakened Seria A or City to win the league given the level of investment.

DoctorGonzo08

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The challenges faced by Pellegrini at Villareal and Malaga dwarfed the difficulty of getting Inter to win a weakened Seria A or City to win the league given the level of investment.

He also has a huge level of investment in both Madrid and Malaga which didn't return any silverware. Situations aside, Mancini still delievered. 1 bad season isn't enough to brandish mancini a failure as many have, nor does it put Pellegrini miles ahead in terms of ability. From what i can see there are far better managers out there, problem being they are not available, with the exception of Benitez who should be at the end of the season.

Xavi6

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

He also has a huge level of investment in both Madrid and Malaga which didn't return any silverware. Situations aside, Mancini still delievered. 1 bad season isn't enough to brandish mancini a failure as many have, nor does it put Pellegrini miles ahead in terms of ability. From what i can see there are far better managers out there, problem being they are not available, with the exception of Benitez who should be at the end of the season.

Who? Of those not available you've got Klopp and Guardiola. Mourinho hasn't inked anything either way yet so can't be fully ruled out just yet.

Pellegrini seems a good candidate from everything I've read/listened to over the past few days (which is a lot!), and better options are few and far between, available or otherwise.

ush

This City saga isn't gonna end happily.

DoctorGonzo08

Xavi6 wrote: »

Who? Of those not available you've got Klopp and Guardiola. Mourinho hasn't inked anything either way yet so can't be fully ruled out just yet.

Pellegrini seems a good candidate from everything I've read/listened to over the past few days (which is a lot!), and better options are few and far between, available or otherwise.

Klopp would be one, Ancelotti another. I'm sorry but I don't think Guardiola would have the impact that would be expected. Harsh, possibly but I'd want to see how he got on somewhere else. That being said I still think he is better than Pellegrini. I've taken it as a given that Mourinho is moving to Chelsea, so haven't included him.

What I was saying is that Pellegrini may be a good canditate from what's available, but that doesn't mean he is a definite step up from Mancini, as many are saying.

Francie Barrett

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

Pellegrini is not going to improve City in any way. As someone else had mentioned, I would far sooner Benitez for all his troubles. He has proven he can be a winner. Pellegrini is far down the pecking order IMO.

You really don't get it, do you?

Pellegrini is the current flavour of the day, just like Bielsa was last season (what'ya mean, who?!). That's all that matters to fans, previous history is irrelevent, what a player or manager did last season is all that matters!

DoctorGonzo08

Francie Barrett wrote: »

You really don't get it, do you?

Pellegrini is the current flavour of the day, just like Bielsa was last season (what'ya mean, who?!). That's all that matters to fans, previous history is irrelevent, what a player or manager did last season is all that matters!

This is what I said originally:

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

You all believe Pellegrini is head and shoulders above Mancini in terms of ability. Why? What has he actually done? Is this based on the fact that nobody actually knows alot about him apart from the media hype?

Just wanted to see could anyone actually back up an argument why Mancini would be brandish a failure, or not a 'proper' manager as has been said.

Xavi6

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

Klopp would be one, Ancelotti another. I'm sorry but I don't think Guardiola would have the impact that would be expected. Harsh, possibly but I'd want to see how he got on somewhere else. That being said I still think he is better than Pellegrini. I've taken it as a given that Mourinho is moving to Chelsea, so haven't included him.

What I was saying is that Pellegrini may be a good canditate from what's available, but that doesn't mean he is a definite step up from Mancini, as many are saying.

I'm not saying he is either, but at the same time I'm not going to denounce his record. He has done well in the Champions League with smaller clubs so if that competition is a big priority for the owners, which it seems to be, then he's an obvious, very good candidate.

I agree on Guardiola btw.

DoctorGonzo08

Xavi6 wrote: »

I'm not saying he is either, but at the same time I'm not going to denounce his record. He has done well in the Champions League with smaller clubs so if that competition is a big priority for the owners, which it seems to be, then he's an obvious, very good candidate.

I agree on Guardiola btw.

I know you're not. I was directing it at those who were posting the backhand comments.

I can see the appeal of the European record against Mancini, but you'd have to ask is a 3rd place finish and Quarter final better than a 2nd place finish and cup final? I wouldn't see that as an improvement.

If the owners had backed Mancini for another year, I would have believed he could win back the league and improve in Europe (at least first round of the Champions League).

I would consider another league title to be the priority rather than an extra game or two in Europe. You have to build a strong domestic pressence beofre properly competiting on both stages.

If it is the CL that is a priority, it sounds like we will def go down the Chelsea route.

Xavi6

Malaga press are reporting that Pellegrini is done, two year deal to be announced once their Europa League spot is sealed.

So Google translate tells me anyway.

http://www.malagahoy.es/article/malagacf/1523607/pellegrini/y/malaga/acuerdan/su/salida/julio.html

Cantona's Collars

Xavi6 wrote: »

Malaga press are reporting that Pellegrini is done, two year deal to be announced once their Europa League spot is sealed.

So Google translate tells me anyway.

http://www.malagahoy.es/article/malagacf/1523607/pellegrini/y/malaga/acuerdan/su/salida/julio.html

Just spotted it as breaking news on another site.

jmayo

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

[/LIST]I have FYP to just highlight your points. Mainly because the tought process is a bit all over the place.

Firstly, by saying 'proper manager' are you implying somehow that Mancini is not actually a manager? TO be the 4th highest win rate for a manager in the Premier League is quite an achievement for somebody who isn't really a manager.

He had a squad valued by Forbes at £489 million.
AFAIK over €400 million was spent during his reign and his net transfer amounts were:
in 2010/2011 -£125,000,000
in 2011/2012 -£57,000,000
in 2012/2013 -£15,000,000

He would want to have been winning bloody matches with that kind of money.

I don't rate him as a great manager, he isn't bad but I don't think he is at the top tier.

If anything I think Mancini's best achievements were with Fiorentina and Lazio where he won cups (although Fiorentina got relegated) and got UEFA cup runs, even though the clubs were affectively broke and in turmoil.
In fact those situations would be comparable to Pellegrini's with Malaga.

His time at Inter conincided with two of their biggest rivals being screwed for their misdemeanours.

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

Right, first point, both Chelsea and Liverpool spent more money in transfers in the same period as Mancini. (Excluding Net Spend of course, which thus excludes Liverpool from the high sums paid).

Ehh Chelsea had one of the world best managers who had won the double, but they then decided to fire him.
They then brought in a young talented manager who they then dumped to be replaced by a so so manager who it appears got on with the old guard better.
He was then fired, after a drop in form, even though he had won the CL the season before.
Then they hire a guy that is despised by the fans, wth the explicit media release that he is not considered good enough to be kept after the season ends.
With managerial changes like that at the whim of the owner, it wouldn't matter how much they spent since the players haven't a clue what is going on.

Liverpool were run by a so so journey man manager who never quiet got it, then by a former club legend who it appears had forgotten a lot of his footballing knowledge during the years he was out of the game.
Oh and the NET part in the transfers is important.
They may have vastly overpaid for one player, but on the plus side they got another club to vastly overpay for one of theirs.

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

Second point, I believe Mourinho has managed other teams than Inter. But as you mention it, he did inherit titles as Mancini had won 3 of the last 4 Serie A titles before him. As was mentioned in the City forum, the points deduction has played a large part in that and Mourinho also benefited from that.

Inter won the 2005/2006 Seria A after Juve and Milan were penalised for match fixing.
That counts as one of his titles.
In 2006/2007 Inter won ahead of Roma, Lazio and Milan.
In 2007/2008 Inter won ahead of Roma, Juventus and Fiorentina.

Did the points deductions 3 years previous or the previous titles benefit Mourinho in the CL win ?
He did inherit a half decent side thanks to Mancini, but the thing is he was able to push them over the line in the CL.
Mancini was not.

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

Third point, as above, he has also managed Chelsea, and also Madrid, where he has sppent a vast fortune bringing in some of the worlds top talent.

Last point, you are mixing up clubs again. Mancini reached the quarter finals and first round twice with Inter. He failed to qualify from the group with City. Not a great achievment by any means, but at least it is true.

I accept that he did get past the first round in the CL with Inter.
In 2005/2006 they finished ahead of Rangers, Artmedia and Porto, then beat Ajax and lost to Villareal managed by Pellegrini.
In 2006/2007 they finished second to Bayern and ahead of Spartak Moscow and Sporting Lisbon.
They then lost to Valencia.
In 2007/2008 they finished ahead of Fenerbahçe, CSKA Moscow and PSV, and then lost to Liverpool.

The one thing that list tells me is that when they met other big teams they couldn't get past them.

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

Tbh, you obviously think highly of the Moyes appointment if you consider his main stumbling block is the appointment of other managers. Surely it would be his own performance.

I beleive if City and Chelsea are not managed by top managers then it gives Moyes breathing space to settle into the job.
After all they would be the main competition.
With the reources that City and Chelsea have then they should be pushing for titles.

DoctorGonzo08

@jmayo. Read your first post, then read your reply.

You started off by brandishing Mancini as an absolute joke and not a proper manager. In your reply you have tried to save face but have backtracked immensley. I wanted to point out your first post was poor, and your reply has backed it up. At least you made an effort in the second.

Nuri Sahin

AdamD wrote: »

The fact that the 2 signings he was linked 2 and moaned about not getting were RVP and De Rossi says a lot for me. That squad certainly didn't need another striker and holding midfielder, it needed wingers. I don't buy this lack of CL experience ****e as an excuse either. Teams like Malaga/Dortmund/Spurs have all done absolutely fine in the CL without qualifying for it year on year. Its a terrible excuse for failing miserably in the competition.

Wingers aren't needed if you have willing and able full backs who can run the wide areas. Maicon was brought in to do this on the right side in my opinion. But Bale went all Shang Tsung on his ass.

De Rossi would've been a brilliant signing after De Jong leaving namely. Looking back at how Mancini messed around with the 3-5-2 formation on occasion, De Rossi could have slotted into the defence as well as he showed during Euro 2012.

Francie Barrett wrote: »

You really don't get it, do you?

Pellegrini is the current flavour of the day, just like Bielsa was last season (what'ya mean, who?!). That's all that matters to fans, previous history is irrelevent, what a player or manager did last season is all that matters!

Flavour of the day, really?

Pellegrini has been well respected for years throughout football after what he achieved at Villarreal and Real Madrid. Anybody who has inkling about football knows this.

Bielsa has been well thought of since World Cup 2010. He is potentially one of the best around but there is no doubt he has a screw loose in him, and for that alone he might not get a job with top, top club in football be it internationally or at club level. His disdain for England and English football as a whole narrows down the list of big leagues/clubs he'd go to as well which doesn't help. I said as much last season when Bilbao put United to the sword and there was a lot of hype around him amongst.

kraggy

Super-Rush wrote: »

I bet Moyes is raging he didn't wait another few days :pac:

I know you're only joking but Moyes is going to be getting almost twice what City are reportedly offering Pellegrini.

eagle eye

Francie Barrett wrote: »

You really don't get it, do you?

Pellegrini is the current flavour of the day, just like Bielsa was last season (what'ya mean, who?!). That's all that matters to fans, previous history is irrelevent, what a player or manager did last season is all that matters!

'Flavour of the day'? Absolute nonsense.

Pellegrini has managed a big club albeit for only one season. He managed to get his side to amass the biggest points total ever by a La Liga team that didn't win the title.

Before that he spent 5 years at Villareal reaching the semi-finals and quarter-finals of the Champion's League and finishing second in La Liga with them.

People have been talking about this man for years. His recent exploits at Malaga have just confirmed that he will do an excellent job no matter where he goes.

And I won't even mention his achievements in South America because you will just say something ludicrous like 'its a lot easier over there'.

Nuri Sahin

Al Jazeera saying Mancini is in Istanbul for talks over taking over at Galatasaray.

CSF

Delighted for him. This may mean I might have to like Galatasaray though which doesn't work at all.

Oranage2

Likable guy, very unlikable football