ESPN Soccernet - Correspondents - Manchester City- The Mancini Press Introduction

Posted by Wallace Poulter on 12/22/2009

Oh dear. Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse City senior management showed an incredible lack of judgment and produced Garry Cook at yesterday's press unveiling of Roberto Mancini. Don't these people get basic media training?

Garry Cook shouldn't have been within a mile of the Roberto Mancini press conference. That he was shows an appalling lack of media savvy by the person that made the decision. The only way to get ahead of the story that has been mismanaged from the start was that Cook should have given his own independent news conference Monday morning where he gave a statement and then answered questions. It would have been brutal, but a necessary distraction due to the utter incompetence shown around the departure of Mark Hughes by City's Three Stooges, messers Marwood, Cook and Al Mubarak.

This would have left Mancini relatively free in the afternoon to talk about his plans. By dumping Cook into the Mancini announcement conference all that City did was create the opportunity for the assembled press to tee off on Cook and the complete pigs breakfast that City's senior executives made of the managerial change... and surprise surprise the media did.

Amateur hour and a thorough embarrassment to all concerned.

And then once we got to Mancini it got, if anything, more silly. Apparently the club intends to win the Premier League next year. Please! That there is a potential opportunity this year to qualify for the Champions League I will acknowledge. And should that happen it will be a useful spring board to challenging for such a position each year and ultimately the Premier League Championship.

Money has bought the club the opportunity to compete, nothing more. Money does not buy championships and it most certainly does not buy class. This is City and with due respect to Sheikh Mansour there is a right way to do this and a wrong way.

Comments

Posted by Leander on 12/22/2009

Exactly what I was thinking. Absolutely, although I have much more faith in Khaldoon al Mubarak than in Garry Cook. What a shambles - what a sty that man is. Abysmal. Embarrassing. Etc... Mancini deserves our full support, however. He deserves no less.

Posted by Martin Nazimek on 12/22/2009

Wallace,
If you want the best might as well shoot for the best. I totally agree with Mancini and targeting the championship next season. With Hughes there was no chance, but Mancini it is a possibility. With the right players his system works on the highest levels. He won with Lazio. Lets me repeat that, he won with LAZIO. Now he has amazing facilities and cash backing from the owner. I dont see how this isnt the goal. I agree with him and for the 1st time I can see city going to the top. He is a great manager and can do great things at city. CTID

Wallace Reply In principal I agree. The issue I have is that having won nothing in more than a few years and never finished in the top four in the Premier League we should show a little class and at least do one of those before we start suggesting that we can win what is quite simply the toughest task in Football. Certainly I love that this is what Mancini wants to do.

Posted by Francisco Silva on 12/22/2009

Mancini never won Serie A with Lazio as a coach, when he did, he was a player.
He won the Italian Cup.
He won Seria A with Inter on 3 occasions:
1st. Juve won it, but the calciopoli saw them relegated and the title awarded to Inter.
2nd. They won it when Juve was in Serie B and AC Milan was deducted points.
3rd. He won it after Juve and AC Milan were back, only with no cash due to no Champions League income.
He was fired because after "dominating" Serie A he couldn't break into the last 8 of the champions league and was unable to attract top players to the team.
Of course, he is smart, he is buying his way into the hearts of the fans of City by telling that he wants to win the title. Everybody wants the title, but he is just saying what people want to hear, he should be in politics.
I am so dissapointed that nobody can see through this and also that this is the best coach the mega millions can buy.

Posted by Stan on 12/22/2009

Since Mancini doesn't speak English, who will do the translating for him? I keep hearing Ramos' lack of English skills was a major element in his failure at Tottenham. How big an issue might this be for Mancini?

I can't believe it would be that significant a factor, but I could be wrong.

This transition has been about as ham-handed as it gets. City is showing it needs to upgrade some media relations areas as well.

Wallace Reply It's been poor although Cook's interview with Harry Harris here on Soccernet is a good start in getting things back on message.

Posted by A on 12/22/2009

People say Hughes's sacking was a disgrace and badly handled. I am not quite sure how you can sack someone gracefully in such a high profile job.
Should we feel sorry for him. Er... no.
He had to go.

Posted by Joel on 12/23/2009

Not to drag things off subject, but I'd like to pick your brain on some musings.

With all the speculation swirling over how Mancini will approach solving City's defensive woes, I realized something. A key error of Hughes was his inability to settle on a strategy - including defensive sets. For instance - Micah Richards has just now started coming into his own at RB (once he gets over tick-tack injuries), and Bridge was starting to come around with his defense at LB as well as showing some great abilities supporting the offense and linking up with Bellamy and Robinho (something Sylvinho *sucks* at). Add in the fact that Lescott and Toure haven't gotten that much playing time together, I come to the conclusion that City's back 4 just haven't gotten that much time to play together.

Obviously players need to be brought in-see Onhua,Bridge,Lescott injuries and toure to Africa- but is it worth spending big money when we have yet to see what these four can do given consistent opportunity

Wallace Reply It is rare that defensive partnerships or indeed entire defensive lines come together immediately. Watch Chelsea for example and regularly whenever John Terry goes to head a ball in defence, Carvalho will drift back behind him to cover if there is a miscue. It's that kind of subtle support which takes time for players to do without conscious thought. As such it is entirely possible that Richards, Toure, Lescott and Bridge will gel given time.

With the injuries to Bridge and Lescott and the African Nations Cup departure of Toure this is one of the reasons I'd like to see the Hamburg defensive duo of Joris Mathijsen and Marcell Jansen specifically because they have played with Vincent Kompany and Nigel de Jong in the past.

Alas I feel that we are more likely to see veterans of the Italian league join the City ranks and while they will be excellent players the issue of how quickly they will work together will be the first raised.

Posted by Philip Ng on 12/28/2009

The difference between Mancini and Hughes is their style to manage naughty player. In hughes's era, nobody were punished and there are no discipline anywhere, hughes's never scream and make strict training policy in training camps.
hughes is too soft, when Mancini comes, i think the players would now serious to training, they are spoiled by Hughes, in Ferguson or capello, these things would never existed, for man city, they need a team that really serious to training, games and teams, they need to be obeyed by the coaches, not the coaches obey the player, this is the weakness of Hughes, and Mancini, he would change the environment in the locker room and changing room, if they dont discipline and spoil, their fail would come soon

Post your comment

Name:

Email Address:

Comments:

characters left