Roberto Mancini

Luis wrote:
1 European Cup
1 FA cup
A super cup
Another European final appearance
Best points total ever and 4 points from winning the league

Very debatable

Sacked after Liverpool slipped down the table wasn't he? I'm not denying he had some initial success though.

Kimbo wrote:

Luis wrote:
1 European Cup
1 FA cup
A super cup
Another European final appearance
Best points total ever and 4 points from winning the league

Very debatable

Sacked after Liverpool slipped down the table wasn't he? I'm not denying he had some initial success though.

Initial success? He was a success for 4 out his 5 years then we had to sell Alonso and Arbeloa soon to be followed by Mascherano and Torres to fund the debt the owners out our club into.

Admit it; if one manager achieved all the things listed above with Newcastle he'd be knighted and a giant statue of him would be built outside st James.

Rafa is ten times the coach Mancini is. Mancini won the league last year because we bottled it. Even with all those resources he has, he can't make a true champion team. Rafa's Liverpool would destroy this City team. Well most likely it would end in 0-0. But Liverpool would be better.

Fey wrote:Rafa is ten times the coach Mancini is. Mancini won the league last year because we bottled it. Even with all those resources he has, he can't make a true champion team. Rafa's Liverpool would destroy this City team. Well most likely it would end in 0-0. But Liverpool would be better.

Most seasons when someone wins the league, there is a team or two who "bottled it". Mancini's City won the league, his Inter won 3. That's the only stat that matters.

I am not sure how you are so confident that Rafa's Liverpool would have "destroyed" this Mancini's City. A 2 game KO round, maybe Liverpool would have emerged victorious. Over a season, I seriously doubt Rafa's Liverpool would have finished above City last season.

Which one of them is better, I guess that's a matter of perspective. If you ask a Liverpool fan, you will get one answer. If you ask an Inter fan, you will probably get another. One thing I will say is that Rafa has been a coach for 18 years, Mancini for just 11. Rafa is currently unemployed, while Mancini is coaching the champions of England.

bluenine wrote:

Fey wrote:Rafa is ten times the coach Mancini is. Mancini won the league last year because we bottled it. Even with all those resources he has, he can't make a true champion team. Rafa's Liverpool would destroy this City team. Well most likely it would end in 0-0. But Liverpool would be better.

Most seasons when someone wins the league, there is a team or two who "bottled it". Mancini's City won the league, his Inter won 3. That's the only stat that matters.

I am not sure how you are so confident that Rafa's Liverpool would have "destroyed" this Mancini's City. A 2 game KO round, maybe Liverpool would have emerged victorious. Over a season, I seriously doubt Rafa's Liverpool would have finished above City last season.

Which one of them is better, I guess that's a matter of perspective. If you ask a Liverpool fan, you will get one answer. If you ask an Inter fan, you will probably get another. One thing I will say is that Rafa has been a coach for 18 years, Mancini for just 11. Rafa is currently unemployed, while Mancini is coaching the champions of England.

You don't think that Calciopoli contributed to that at all? The first of his titles came with Calciopoli giving third place Inter the title. The second came with Inter pretty much the only contender not docked points. By the third Inter was top dog. What did Mancini do for Lazio or Fiorentina as a coach? Jury still very much out on Mancini in my opinion.

Benitez is biding his time - not a bad choice after the debacle at Inter. He could get work, but why bother to take the wrong job, especially after what happened at Inter.

By the way what do people think of Diego Simeone as a coach?

EMP wrote:

bluenine wrote:

Fey wrote:Rafa is ten times the coach Mancini is. Mancini won the league last year because we bottled it. Even with all those resources he has, he can't make a true champion team. Rafa's Liverpool would destroy this City team. Well most likely it would end in 0-0. But Liverpool would be better.

Most seasons when someone wins the league, there is a team or two who "bottled it". Mancini's City won the league, his Inter won 3. That's the only stat that matters.

I am not sure how you are so confident that Rafa's Liverpool would have "destroyed" this Mancini's City. A 2 game KO round, maybe Liverpool would have emerged victorious. Over a season, I seriously doubt Rafa's Liverpool would have finished above City last season.

Which one of them is better, I guess that's a matter of perspective. If you ask a Liverpool fan, you will get one answer. If you ask an Inter fan, you will probably get another. One thing I will say is that Rafa has been a coach for 18 years, Mancini for just 11. Rafa is currently unemployed, while Mancini is coaching the champions of England.

You don't think that Calciopoli contributed to that at all? The first of his titles came with Calciopoli giving third place Inter the title. The second came with Inter pretty much the only contender not docked points. By the third Inter was top dog. What did Mancini do for Lazio or Fiorentina as a coach? Jury still very much out on Mancini in my opinion.

Benitez is biding his time - not a bad choice after the debacle at Inter. He could get work, but why bother to take the wrong job, especially after what happened at Inter.

By the way what do people think of Diego Simeone as a coach?

Surely, you are kidding? From what I remember, Mancio did quite well at Fiorentina and Lazio, specially under the circumstances. Fiorentina were in shambles when Mancio took over, selling all their top players, they were like a Serie B outfit. He won Coppa with a relegation level side. But it was at Lazio where he really showed his coaching potential. Lazio were in financial shite, starting to rebuild with no funds. He took that club to a Coppa title, UEFA semis, and even a CL spot. If I was to draw parallels with the current EPL, its like he won the FA Cup with the QPR, and then reached Europa semis, won FA Cup again, and achieved CL qualification with someone like Fulham or Newcastle. There were reasons why Moratti passed up on Capello, and instead brought in Mancio as Inter coach... one reason was that Moratti is intrinsically daft, but the other was that Mancio's coaching potential was undeniable after Lazio.

You can belittle anyone's achievement, but the fact is that winning titles is the best proof of a top manager's ability. Look at Serie A this year, Milan are shite, Inter are rebuilding. It would be very easy to belittle Juve's potential scudetto (if they win it). But they still have to play, beat everyone, and win the scudetto - and if they do it, IMO that would be a great achievement for Conte. IMO Inter's competition in 2006-07 was no less than what Juve face this season, even with Milan docked 8 points. Spaletti's Roma were better than today's Napoli, Rossi's Lazio were brilliant, Ancelotti's Milan won the Champions League that year, then there was Palermo and Prandelli's Fiorentina. And Inter won that title in style, record points with an amazing 17 game winning run. IMO, of the 6 titles Inter have won since I have followed them, the 2006-07 was our best.

Sure, the jury is still out on Mancini. But only regarding European success. The fact that he is a top manager with a winning mentality is beyond doubt.

bluenine wrote:

EMP wrote:

bluenine wrote:

Fey wrote:Rafa is ten times the coach Mancini is. Mancini won the league last year because we bottled it. Even with all those resources he has, he can't make a true champion team. Rafa's Liverpool would destroy this City team. Well most likely it would end in 0-0. But Liverpool would be better.

Most seasons when someone wins the league, there is a team or two who "bottled it". Mancini's City won the league, his Inter won 3. That's the only stat that matters.

I am not sure how you are so confident that Rafa's Liverpool would have "destroyed" this Mancini's City. A 2 game KO round, maybe Liverpool would have emerged victorious. Over a season, I seriously doubt Rafa's Liverpool would have finished above City last season.

Which one of them is better, I guess that's a matter of perspective. If you ask a Liverpool fan, you will get one answer. If you ask an Inter fan, you will probably get another. One thing I will say is that Rafa has been a coach for 18 years, Mancini for just 11. Rafa is currently unemployed, while Mancini is coaching the champions of England.

You don't think that Calciopoli contributed to that at all? The first of his titles came with Calciopoli giving third place Inter the title. The second came with Inter pretty much the only contender not docked points. By the third Inter was top dog. What did Mancini do for Lazio or Fiorentina as a coach? Jury still very much out on Mancini in my opinion.

Benitez is biding his time - not a bad choice after the debacle at Inter. He could get work, but why bother to take the wrong job, especially after what happened at Inter.

By the way what do people think of Diego Simeone as a coach?

Sure, the jury is still out on Mancini. But only regarding European success. The fact that he is a top manager with a winning mentality is beyond doubt.

Only?

Mancini has had a crack at Champions League with top teams, and he has delivered a big fat zero. On top of that he is very unlikable (unlike Strama). There is also no excuse now surely to be pasted by Ajax? Two coaching seasons in Europe with the absolute cream of world football, and underwhelming doesn't begin to describe it.

His accomplishments at Inter will always be tempered by the landscape of Serie A during that time. I personally think it's a bit harsh to judge him like that, but it is what it is.

I agree Mancini has a winning mentality. I would hope any coach of a professional football team does. Is he a winner? The jury's out.

WHY ISNT HE SACKED YET

Fey wrote:WHY ISNT HE SACKED YET

because he has an contract until 2017

Fey wrote:WHY ISNT HE SACKED YET

Only unbeaten team in the Premier League, top of the table, and defending champions. Sack him, sack him!

bluenine wrote:

Fey wrote:WHY ISNT HE SACKED YET

Only unbeaten team in the Premier League, top of the table, and defending champions. Sack him, sack him!

And in the Champion's League?

EMP wrote:

bluenine wrote:

Fey wrote:WHY ISNT HE SACKED YET

Only unbeaten team in the Premier League, top of the table, and defending champions. Sack him, sack him!

And in the Champion's League?

Should Juventus sack Conte too then?

bluenine wrote:

EMP wrote:

bluenine wrote:

Fey wrote:WHY ISNT HE SACKED YET

Only unbeaten team in the Premier League, top of the table, and defending champions. Sack him, sack him!

And in the Champion's League?

Should Juventus sack Conte too then?

Manchester City's performances in the Champion's League have been abject or naive at best. Mancini has had far more CL experience than Conte as a coach. He should get it by now. Conte deserves more time. Mancini should be judged on results by now, shouldn't he? Conte went through the League unbeaten last year with far less resources. He has earned at least a year. Clock ticking hard on Mancini and I'm not saying Mancini should be sacked. I'm saying his performance in the Champion's League which you left out is poor.

Problem with Mancini is when there isn't such a gap in the quality of players such as in the CL, and it is up to the manager to use tactics, he is found wanting. Man city are bottom of their group deservedly. They can't point to having outplayed teams, missed a lot of chances, bad refereeing decisions etc which might say they were unlucky.

If man city only want to win the EPL, then having the best squad and a decent manager is enough. Over the course of 38 games the best squad usually wins. If they want to win the CL, they need a better manager.

110% wrote:Problem with Mancini is when there isn't such a gap in the quality of players such as in the CL, and it is up to the manager to use tactics, he is found wanting. Man city are bottom of their group deservedly. They can't point to having outplayed teams, missed a lot of chances, bad refereeing decisions etc which might say they were unlucky.

If man city only want to win the EPL, then having the best squad and a decent manager is enough. Over the course of 38 games the best squad usually wins. If they want to win the CL, they need a better manager.

Not arguments there. But I think its not just Mancini's tactical limitations that's letting City down in the CL. I think winning big trophies is also about mentality & experience of players. There is a reason why it took so long after Roman's millions at Chelsea to win a CL. Mancini's squad does not have the confidence in the CL. Its something that can take time. Whether Mancini is the man to lead them to a CL trophy or not, perhaps not. But if I were a City fan, I would be content with domestic domination for a few years, and only if Mancini continues to underwhelm in the CL for 3-4 season should the question of sacking come up.

I know SAF did not have the luxury of almost limitless funds at that time, but even he was tactically limited in the CL for a while in the 90s. It took him a good few years to develop his tactical skills to mount a serious challenge in the continent.

I believe people are a bit too quick to judge managers and sack them these days. Everyone can have a few bad games, and City's performances this season in the CL have been piss poor, but if that deserves a sacking when he is doing well domestically, then I think its a bit silly.

Also, credit has to be given to Mancini for building this winning squad - a lot of Hughes crazy signings were useless and a large part of this squad has Mancini's stamp on it. Mancini built this championship winning squad, yet in the last 3 seasons, City have spent (£196m) less in net transfer fees than Chelsea (£225m), the other club with limit less funds. A lot of people forget that. I think the key here was managerial & tactical stability at City over the last 3 years, and that's a price of sacking the manager that City should not want to pay in a hurry.

Thats why I believe the calls for Mancio's sacking a very premature. Luckily for City fans, their owners seem more mature than Roman.

Juventus' performance last night was more impressive than anything I've seen City offer under Mancini. This despite having a weaker team, and Conte being new to the Champions league.

The "net" spend figure is inaccurate, as Chelsea's net spend is over a far greater period. And Ranieri's performances with a squad that was less stable than Mancini's and a far poorer squad, was more impressive than Mancini's. That's not to mention Mourinho's efforts.

The mid 90s premier league sides were a bit shit. Being tactically naive might not have helped them, but having inferior players to their European counterparts really was the nail in the coffin. Again, not a parallel that can be drawn with Mancini's city team.

Reasonably, his displays in the league have bought him some time, but Mancini's record at City and as a manager will always be marred by his perpetual failings in Europe.

Could tonight be the end for:

Thing with Mancini is that he seems to go backwards after a short while.
Inter 2004-2006 was a lesser team but played a better brand of football than the league crushing version.
At Man City he did a great job IMHO bringing the team to the top domestically, starting from the back, building confidence, and ending up with a team that showed great brilliance in the first half of last season. Then their form dipped, which can happen, but they still managed to win the league in a very awesome way, which you'd expect it'd have boosted their enthusiasm and confidence for the next season. But now they struggle with both solidity and brilliance.

Even his track record in CL, for what it's worth given the varying circumstances, has a backward track:
QF, QF, 1st Ko, 1st Ko with Inter; 3rd in the group and now possibly 4th with City.


Blue, building confidence in CL takes time, sure, but it'll take forever if the results end up subtracting confidence every year.
Sacking Mancini now would be stupid, I agree, and I think he should finish the season unless there's some spectacular blunder or players' revolt.
But I'd be very surprised if he still hangs around at City next year.

bluenine wrote:

110% wrote:Problem with Mancini is when there isn't such a gap in the quality of players such as in the CL, and it is up to the manager to use tactics, he is found wanting. Man city are bottom of their group deservedly. They can't point to having outplayed teams, missed a lot of chances, bad refereeing decisions etc which might say they were unlucky.

If man city only want to win the EPL, then having the best squad and a decent manager is enough. Over the course of 38 games the best squad usually wins. If they want to win the CL, they need a better manager.

Not arguments there. But I think its not just Mancini's tactical limitations that's letting City down in the CL. I think winning big trophies is also about mentality & experience of players. There is a reason why it took so long after Roman's millions at Chelsea to win a CL. Mancini's squad does not have the confidence in the CL. Its something that can take time. Whether Mancini is the man to lead them to a CL trophy or not, perhaps not. But if I were a City fan, I would be content with domestic domination for a few years, and only if Mancini continues to underwhelm in the CL for 3-4 season should the question of sacking come up.

I know SAF did not have the luxury of almost limitless funds at that time, but even he was tactically limited in the CL for a while in the 90s. It took him a good few years to develop his tactical skills to mount a serious challenge in the continent.

I believe people are a bit too quick to judge managers and sack them these days. Everyone can have a few bad games, and City's performances this season in the CL have been piss poor, but if that deserves a sacking when he is doing well domestically, then I think its a bit silly.

Also, credit has to be given to Mancini for building this winning squad - a lot of Hughes crazy signings were useless and a large part of this squad has Mancini's stamp on it. Mancini built this championship winning squad, yet in the last 3 seasons, City have spent (£196m) less in net transfer fees than Chelsea (£225m), the other club with limit less funds. A lot of people forget that. I think the key here was managerial & tactical stability at City over the last 3 years, and that's a price of sacking the manager that City should not want to pay in a hurry.

Thats why I believe the calls for Mancio's sacking a very premature. Luckily for City fans, their owners seem more mature than Roman.

The annoying thing is that city have been so utterly underwhelming. If they had a go in Europe with more attacking verve and flair,like they can do in the league, there would be far less criticism. Fact is, they are veering on a national embarrassment.

abundance wrote:Thing with Mancini is that he seems to go backwards after a short while.
Inter 2004-2006 was a lesser team but played a better brand of football than the league crushing version.
At Man City he did a great job IMHO bringing the team to the top domestically, starting from the back, building confidence, and ending up with a team that showed great brilliance in the first half of last season. Then their form dipped, which can happen, but they still managed to win the league in a very awesome way, which you'd expect it'd have boosted their enthusiasm and confidence for the next season. But now they struggle with both solidity and brilliance.

Even his track record in CL, for what it's worth given the varying circumstances, has a backward track:
QF, QF, 1st Ko, 1st Ko with Inter; 3rd in the group and now possibly 4th with City.

Blue, building confidence in CL takes time, sure, but it'll take forever if the results end up subtracting confidence every year.
Sacking Mancini now would be stupid, I agree, and I think he should finish the season unless there's some spectacular blunder or players' revolt.
But I'd be very surprised if he still hangs around at City next year.

Interesting observations there, abundance.

I personally thought we played the best brand of football in the 2006-07 season, but there is merit in your point. Specially in the last season at Inter, it did seem like Mancio had taken a step backwards.

Maybe City will sack him at the end of this season. But if I were in their shoes, I would give him at least another year. There is no guarantee that Pep will bring more success to a very Mancio-isque squad at City. And with the FFP kicking in, it remains to be seen how much financial flexibility cash rich clubs will have. City might to better with someone like Mourinho...

110% wrote:Problem with Mancini is when there isn't such a gap in the quality of players such as in the CL, and it is up to the manager to use tactics, he is found wanting. Man city are bottom of their group deservedly. They can't point to having outplayed teams, missed a lot of chances, bad refereeing decisions etc which might say they were unlucky.

If man city only want to win the EPL, then having the best squad and a decent manager is enough. Over the course of 38 games the best squad usually wins. If they want to win the CL, they need a better manager.

I have decided that Mancini is not even a decent manager. He has now decide to motivate his players by blaming them, even though he has assembled such a poor squad that he had to bring on milner (facking runner), kolarov (kicker from american football) and maicon (retired ex-footballer)