The mancityfans.net football forum

Let me start by saying that I don't like 'onest 'arry and don't want him at our club.

However, if you look at the 2 squads from last night's game it would be difficult to deny that we should have murdered Spurs. How many of their team would get into ours?

Redknapp gives his players the self-belief that they are one of the best players in the world and that they can beat anybody. In return they play at the top of their game and give 100% for him.

He also uses his players to the team's best advantage, his tactics are usually spot on (as they were last night) and, when they are, they can look like world beaters.

Yep, Harry Redknapp is a good manager IMO.

Conversely Mark Hughes

Now he is a bad manager

there. End of debate I guess

ant london wrote:Conversely Mark Hughes

Now he is a bad manager

there. End of debate I guess

Well he sure is if he can't understand we needed more width and change the team according to that.

Of course Redders is a good manager he always has been,BUT he would never have come to City we are not a club for him neither is he a manager for us.

There is only two out there to replace Hughes and we all know who they are and if we cant get them we should stick.

ant london wrote:Conversely Mark Hughes

Now he is a bad manager

there. End of debate I guess

Like you say, that should be end of debate but I would just like to say I agree with what you say there.

I agree with you here mate I always said this a good manager gets 100% out of his players. Hughes cannot get that out of our players I don't remember one game this season (even the arsenal/Chelsea match) where they have played 100%. They fight against each other and constantly blame each other for mistakes. He says it's good for the team but it's all down to bad tactics and bad management at the end of the day. The only reason we are on par with spurs is we are getting 60%-70% out of a superior team. Which is clearly not a good thing. Martin O'Neill is another manager who can do the same with his players as well.

However can Harry do it with the big names? I don't know.. I think that's the real problem here. I reckon with Spurs Hughes could do the job also as you havn't got the big names and egos to go with them. Only a few manager can do what 'Arry and O'Neill do with the big names and one of them is of course the chosen one José Mourinho. He I think is one of the few managers on the planet who can get 100% out of our players. I don't blame Hughes 100% for not being able to do it I don't think any English manager for a long time has been able to do it. It's a skill only foreign managers have I think.

Rednapp was a bad manager on Saturday.

He also has a great eye for a player. Krankjar at around £2.5Mil goes down as one of the buys of the season. Some of his buys at Pompey were also top drawer.

I hope I'm proved wrong long term but at the moment, the capture of Toure, RSC, Ade and Lescott at around £76 Mil looks far from shrewd.

You can't take anything away from 'nap. Won an FA cup with pompy and turned a laughing stock into genuine Chumps league finish contenders. As said, he's a bent bastard and I wouldn't want him at City, but he is a damn good manager.

lets all have a disco wrote:Of course Redders is a good manager he always has been,BUT he would never have come to City we are not a club for him neither is he a manager for us.

There is only two out there to replace Hughes and we all know who they are and if we cant get them we should stick.

funny, I can think of at least 5...

I'm sure Hughes would've been a "good manager" after losing at home to Wolves ..right?

Socrates wrote:

lets all have a disco wrote:Of course Redders is a good manager he always has been,BUT he would never have come to City we are not a club for him neither is he a manager for us.

There is only two out there to replace Hughes and we all know who they are and if we cant get them we should stick.

funny, I can think of at least 5...

Who?

Im serious,i can only think of two top names.

Im not a Hughes licker,im a fence dweller just need the names.

Bingo Lewis wrote:You can't take anything away from 'nap. Won an FA cup with pompy and turned a laughing stock into genuine Chumps league finish contenders. As said, he's a bent bastard and I wouldn't want him at City, but he is a damn good manager.

In truth, the "laughing stock" already had a very good squad that had just won a trophy but were struggling for consistency because their managers were not allowed to manage. Their success now has as much to do with the director of football leaving as the change of manager.

Harry is a good manager.

Harry is not good enough for City.

Harry is Better than Leslie...

sandman wrote:Harry is a good manager.

Harry is not good enough for City.

Harry is Better than Leslie...

Perfectly put my good man.

john@staustell wrote:Rednapp was a bad manager on Saturday.

Spot on.

I blame the players (hughes is a tit but that's another story). Players have to step up

Socrates wrote:

lets all have a disco wrote:Of course Redders is a good manager he always has been,BUT he would never have come to City we are not a club for him neither is he a manager for us.

There is only two out there to replace Hughes and we all know who they are and if we cant get them we should stick.

funny, I can think of at least 5...

You always can....

Most of them turn out to be WANK as everyone on this board knows, so I think we'll take recommendations from someone else if that's ok?

Thanks.

Original Dub wrote:

Socrates wrote:

lets all have a disco wrote:Of course Redders is a good manager he always has been,BUT he would never have come to City we are not a club for him neither is he a manager for us.

There is only two out there to replace Hughes and we all know who they are and if we cant get them we should stick.

funny, I can think of at least 5...

You always can....

Most of them turn out to be WANK as everyone on this board knows, so I think we'll take recommendations from someone else if that's ok?

Thanks.

Do you honestly think that there aren't five better managerial candidates than Hughes out there?

CityGer wrote:

Original Dub wrote:

Socrates wrote:

lets all have a disco wrote:Of course Redders is a good manager he always has been,BUT he would never have come to City we are not a club for him neither is he a manager for us.

There is only two out there to replace Hughes and we all know who they are and if we cant get them we should stick.

funny, I can think of at least 5...

You always can....

Most of them turn out to be WANK as everyone on this board knows, so I think we'll take recommendations from someone else if that's ok?

Thanks.

Do you honestly think that there aren't five better managerial candidates than Hughes out there?

of course there are

but what the hell is the point in even discussing the ones we have no chance of landing

Have Spuds beaten the Arse since he's been manager? No
Did they lose to Bolton and Wolves? Yes.

We'd hate him just as much as Leslie.