Should\Will Mancini be sacked after spending squillions and winning nowt this season?

Sgt Pepper 64 · 26-03-2012 1:54pm #1

Should\Will Mancini be sacked after spending squillions and winning nowt this season?

Yes, I am assuming that Utd will win the league but its not that unlikely at this stage.

Other points against him
The Tevez affair, the ongoing Balo saga and moaning about lack of transfer funds, the early exit from the CL, havent exactly covered him or the club in glory.

So, it will be very interesting to see how Citys owners react.
Hughes was sacked for failing to reach the top four, so I think its likely that he will go, especially if Mourinho does actually leave RM

GavRedKing · 26-03-2012 1:58pm

No he shouldnt be sacked but will he? I'm not sure.

This City team isnt far from winning the league and if they dont do it this year they certainly will have more hunger to do it next year.

Mourhino could be thrown stupid to take over but lets not forget hes already on €150,000 a week at Real Madrid.

sReq | uTeK · 26-03-2012 1:59pm

He won't be sacked, he's done well, it's rediculous to expect a league winning side in 1 1/2 seasons. give him time he's doing well just poor away form.

Xavi6 · 26-03-2012 2:01pm

Thread title - you're doing it wrong.

Leiva · 26-03-2012 2:03pm

Out of the two teams spending "sqillions" then Mancini is doing a job compared to the Chelsea Circus .

MUSEIST · 26-03-2012 2:10pm

mixednuts wrote: »

Out of the two teams spending "sqillions" then Mancini is doing a job compared to the Chelsea Circus .

Chelsea won the league in the second season of having a billionaire owner, man city have spenthuge on wages and transfers and have done so for three seasons now, still no premier league to show for it.

If city don't win the league this season and given the money they have to spend then its a monumental disaster for city and mancini will have failed big time. There is no other way of looking at that.

MickySticks · 26-03-2012 2:14pm

Nowt???

Chucky the tree · 26-03-2012 2:14pm

MUSEIST wrote: »

Chelsea won the league in the second season of having a billionaire owner, man city have spenthuge on wages and transfers and have done so for three seasons now, still no premier league to show for it.

If city don't win the league this season and given the money they have to spend then its a monumental disaster for city and mancini will have failed big time. There is no other way of looking at that.

Roman become Chelsea owner in 2003, they didn't win their first title until 2007.

willmunny1990 · 26-03-2012 2:15pm

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Roman become Chelsea owner in 2003, they didn't win their first title until 2007.

2005, we won the title.

MUSEIST · 26-03-2012 2:15pm

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Roman become Chelsea owner in 2003, they didn't win their first title until 2007.

Check the aul facts again

The first season raneiri was in charge, he was sacked after a second place finish and champions league semi defeat to monaco. Porto won the champs league and mourinho took over. Chelsea won the league in his first 2 seasons. So chelsea won the league 2 times in romans first 3 seasons at the club. Then roman started to interfere and sign sheva and ballack and things went down hill for a few seasons before the double winning season.

Sgt Pepper 64 · 26-03-2012 2:17pm

mixednuts wrote: »

Out of the two teams spending "sqillions" then Mancini is doing a job compared to the Chelsea Circus .

that wasnt the question though - and manager already sacked

Sgt Pepper 64 · 26-03-2012 2:18pm

MickySticks wrote: »

Nowt???

Northern English a dialect word for nothing

Sugarlumps · 26-03-2012 2:18pm

I really like Macini, I think he’s done a marvellous job at City. Seems a very likeable character who’s not afraid to dodge a difficult question thrown at him.

I hope he stays as he’s refreshing for the Premiership, it’s only a matter of time before they start winning titles and trophies under him.

willmunny1990 · 26-03-2012 2:20pm

the key with City is that theyve improved alot on last season so they are obviously going in the right direction overall under Mancini which is why he shouldnt be sacked.

The only way I can see it is if Mourinho becomes available and is willing to manage City, as the lure of guaranteed success might prove too much for the sheikhs.

gustavo · 26-03-2012 2:20pm

Sgt Pepper 64 wrote: »

Northern English a dialect word for nothing

Eeeee by eck I reckon he should then

Chucky the tree · 26-03-2012 2:20pm

MUSEIST wrote: »

Check the aul facts again

The first season raneiri was in charge, he was sacked after a second place finish and champions league semi defeat to monaco. Porto won the champs league and mourinho took over. Chelsea won the league in his first 2 seasons. So chelsea won the league 2 times in romans first 3 seasons at the club. Then roman started to interfere and sign sheva and ballack and things went down hill for a few seasons before the double winning season.

Yea you're correct. Was looking at the runners up section.

GavRedKing · 26-03-2012 2:22pm

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Roman become Chelsea owner in 2003, they didn't win their first title until 2007.

2003-2004 : 2nd, Ranirei sacked
2004-2005 : Mourhino hired, ££££££ spent, 1st league title won.

I still dont think Mancini should be sacked, hes done a good job so far, and once they go to the UCLwith more experience and avoid a gripu like the got they last time they'll should make the round of 16 at the very least.

leggit · 26-03-2012 2:22pm

Sugarlumps wrote: »

I really like Macini, I think he’s done a marvellous job at City. Seems a very likeable character who’s not afraid to dodge a difficult question thrown at him.

I hope he stays as he’s refreshing for the Premiership, it’s only a matter of time before they start winning titles and trophies under him.

But will the owners pull an Abramovich and not give him the time, that's the real question.

I think he'll get another season at least, they seem to be constantly improving under Mancini and I'll stick a few bob on them to win the title next year if theres a decent price floating about

CSF · 26-03-2012 2:22pm

This shouldn't even be a thread, not a hope of it.

GLaDOS · 26-03-2012 2:24pm

MUSEIST wrote: »

Chelsea won the league in the second season of having a billionaire owner, man city have spenthuge on wages and transfers and have done so for three seasons now, still no premier league to show for it.

If city don't win the league this season and given the money they have to spend then its a monumental disaster for city and mancini will have failed big time. There is no other way of looking at that.

Chelsea already had CL football though, which was key for getting top players to join. City only had that this seasn for the first time.

Re. the question, no he shouldn't be sacked. Stability is always preferable.

GavRedKing · 26-03-2012 2:27pm

leggit wrote: »

But will the owners pull an Abramovich and not give him the time, that's the real question.

I think he'll get another season at least, they seem to be constantly improving under Mancini and I'll stick a few bob on them to win the title next year if theres a decent price floating about

As a Chelsea fan it pains me to say this but I think at City there is less " yes " men around Roman, less advisors that dont know there arse from there elbow.

True, Roman wants a certain style and wants it achieved alongside victories but at Chelsea, people like Gourlay and Emenalo, individuals with less then stellar creditinals who have a huge say when it comes to Roman and his ultimate decision making.

Mancini is probably safer now then the next Chelsea manager is before he steps into his role.

Manicni will be given another year I reckon.

plasmaguy · 26-03-2012 2:30pm

If he is sacked, Mourinho or Guardiola are dead certs for the job, two best coaches in the world, Man City owners will pay them anything, up to 10 million a year.

You heard it here first.

stovelid · 26-03-2012 2:35pm

Do you mean win nothing?

Sgt Pepper 64 · 26-03-2012 2:35pm

CSF wrote: »

This shouldn't even be a thread, not a hope of it.

Nonsense, perfectly legit question, especially when you consider there is a Wenger and Dalglish thread.

The man has spent a lot of money and been in charge long enough to win something this season, so why wouldnt questions be asked?
Especially as they have been ahead in the league most of the season

NIMAN · 26-03-2012 2:36pm

I say yes.

Paying crazy money in transfers and wages, and about to throw away the EPL to another porr Utd team. And were pretty average in Europe too.

Get him out.

Sgt Pepper 64 · 26-03-2012 2:40pm

stovelid wrote: »

Do you mean win nothing?

yes - Northern English dialect word for nothing

You win "owt with nowt"

stovelid · 26-03-2012 2:43pm

Sgt Pepper 64 wrote: »

yes - Northern English dialect word for nothing

You win "owt with nowt"

Thanks. I was lost there for a bit.

I think only Coronation Street script-writers use it these days.

stovelid · 26-03-2012 2:48pm

Seriously though, IF united win the title, City would be mad to fire Mancini for coming just short.

LuckyLloyd · 26-03-2012 2:49pm

No, he obviously shouldn't be sacked.

SM01 · 26-03-2012 2:55pm

There's been continual improvement, the squad is fantastic and they're running United very close so progress has been made. Mancini seems to be well liked by the squad and appears to have a good relationship with the owners and fans. Why throw a spanner in the works?

stovelid · 26-03-2012 2:59pm

Imagine City opted for the revolutonary approach of not sacking a manager that has mostly managed to keep a big money squad happy (one serial troublemaker notwithstanding) and may come just short to one of the best managers of all time. City can afford to keep the squad together to learn from this season and add what's needed.

Saying that they have lost the league at this stage is ridiculous though.

Should\Will Mancini be sacked after spending squillions and winning nowt this season?

Comments