The mancityfans.net football forum

Dubaimancityfan wrote:Before the match, I thought we will probably play with our 2nd string/fringe players but then I had a hard time to think of anyone apart form Sinclair and Boyata (is Nasti still with us or is he loaned out ?). All the rest of the first squad have been highly involved this season ! All the better reason to involve some of our kids like Pozo. As it turned out, we played with our strongest team with no kids against a second string Newcastle which made the loss even more embarrassing ! Neither Sinclair nor any kid even made the bench. Did the Newcastle at Spuds weigh heavily on Pellers mind ?? Still no excuse and I was disappointed in his team selection for this match.
Still can't understand why Gudetti was loaned out especially after the departure of Negredo. I hear he's doing well with Celtic and he could have been an option for us and couldn't have done worse than Dzeko (on current form) !!

I think, disappointingly, they have just decided to let Guidetti go, without worrying whether he's any good or not in the future, just letting him get on with it, like with Micah Richards.

Ted Hughes wrote:

Dubaimancityfan wrote:Before the match, I thought we will probably play with our 2nd string/fringe players but then I had a hard time to think of anyone apart form Sinclair and Boyata (is Nasti still with us or is he loaned out ?). All the rest of the first squad have been highly involved this season ! All the better reason to involve some of our kids like Pozo. As it turned out, we played with our strongest team with no kids against a second string Newcastle which made the loss even more embarrassing ! Neither Sinclair nor any kid even made the bench. Did the Newcastle at Spuds weigh heavily on Pellers mind ?? Still no excuse and I was disappointed in his team selection for this match.
Still can't understand why Gudetti was loaned out especially after the departure of Negredo. I hear he's doing well with Celtic and he could have been an option for us and couldn't have done worse than Dzeko (on current form) !!

I think, disappointingly, they have just decided to let Guidetti go, without worrying whether he's any good or not in the future, just letting him get on with it, like with Micah Richards.

If true, that is a sad statement Ted. More importantly, what message does this give to any youngster thinking of joining City academies ? That he will never be able to break into the first team squad ! What's the use of all the state of the art academies and facilities that are being built if we fail to attract the really talented kids that are out there now ?

There comes a time when those tough decisions have to be made for the benefit of both the player and at times the club. Both Micah was deemed to be surplus to requirements and at best the 3rd choice right back whether you agree with that or not. Guidetti was/is considered maybe 5th choice striker so a loan to Celtic was a great move for him and will likely become permanent. He could have done a job for us in a couple of games a year maybe but long term isn't the answer for us.

Huws was let go for similar reasons.The current midfield players are Bytyqi,Byrne,Fofana.Bryan with Celina coming along and of course Barker as a wide option.Of course any of them could be thrown in to save Silva and Yaya playing at all but they all weaken the team.Hindsight says so what we were shite anyway.The surprise to me is that Sinclair wasn't involved as he is ok and has a point to prove but the bigger surprise is that he is still with us.

Hindsight is 20/20 vision and we can all be wise after the event. Sadly, the planning for the N'Castle game was all done pre-match.

For all our £multi-millions Academy investment and long term planning. the weakness comes when the time comes to ask the kids the question at 1st team level. Mancini, Pellegrini or anyone who follows is a short term factor in a long term plan. Cheeky has already clearly and publicly stated that his expectancy for a manager's reign is around 3 yrs.

The media are already sharpening the knives ready for MP's back and their is growing disquiet in the stands. A long term plan, doesn't fit easily with a short term management plan, short term media and impatient fans.

MP has to consider (pre-match) whether to play kids and increase the chances of a loss, epecially following CSKA and WHU, or to play a strong side and increase the chances of winning.

Can any manager at City risk himself to the negative media and fans' pressure by deliberately playing a weakened side.

Should MP risk the kids, and should they develop, he probably be well gone by then anyway.

Jus a thought

You're bang on there John but therein lies the problem I have. Why have a short term manager looking after a long term plan? To me it seems that two areas of the business strategy are contradicting each other.

It's been said many times before but if we're not prepared to take risks with the kids in the lowest profile competition we compete in then when will the risk be taken?

Foreverinbluedreams wrote:You're bang on there John but therein lies the problem I have. Why have a short term manager looking after a long term plan? To me it seems that two areas of the business strategy are contradicting each other.

It's been said many times before but if we're not prepared to take risks with the kids in the lowest profile competition we compete in then when will the risk be taken?

There were 2 factors favouring Taggart when he brought through his kids. The 1st was necessity.He had little else to play with in his early daysand later,he was so all powerful within the rags that it was never a risk to his job or reputation.

With lesser clubs, there are lesser expectations and lower resources. Less risk and much less choice about bringing kids through.

We had the same under Swales. No money, few expectations and suddenly a whole generation of kids were thrown in Redmond, Lake, White, 2 x Brightwells, Hinchcliffe etc.

Which kids should have been playing or been on the bench?

Any 2 from about 10 could have been on the bench imo. I probably wouldn't have started with any but if I did, Pozo, Kean Bryan or Fofana could possibly have played instead of Yaya or Silva, with one of them on the bench. Or Milner could have played in the centre with Barker or Ambrose out wide.

It would have lifted the atmosphere.

This kid Aarons, 18, is causing the scousers all manner of shit & did vs City. He wouldn't of been on our bench for either game.

Not right.

Ted Hughes wrote:This kid Aarons, 18, is causing the scousers all manner of shit & did vs City. He wouldn't of been on our bench for either game.

Not right.

But the point as John said and I said earlier in the thread is that the Count set up a side with the highest percentage chance to win logically. He took no chances.

Taking a chance after the start to the season isn't a liberty he probably feels he has.

Pardew has been on the ropes. If he doesn't try something different he will surely be sacked.

If you were a manager who had our talent you'd be hard pressed to take risks on unproven kids just yet.

On the bench you say...yeah maybe that's a good point but we don't have the kind of structure that gives a "coach" the liberty to be that footloose.

If pep comes in eventually he will be the one manager who will feel comfy doing whatever and not fearing his short window gets shorter if he spits the bit before Xmas and has fucked up his season.

Cheers

DoomMerchant wrote:

Ted Hughes wrote:This kid Aarons, 18, is causing the scousers all manner of shit & did vs City. He wouldn't of been on our bench for either game.

Not right.

But the point as John said and I said earlier in the thread is that the Count set up a side with the highest percentage chance to win logically. He took no chances.

Taking a chance after the start to the season isn't a liberty he probably feels he has.

Pardew has been on the ropes. If he doesn't try something different he will surely be sacked.

If you were a manager who had our talent you'd be hard pressed to take risks on unproven kids just yet.

On the bench you say...yeah maybe that's a good point but we don't have the kind of structure that gives a "coach" the liberty to be that footloose.

If pep comes in eventually he will be the one manager who will feel comfy doing whatever and not fearing his short window gets shorter if he spits the bit before Xmas and has fucked up his season.

Cheers

Would we really be taking such a huge risk putting Barker on the bench rather than Navas ?

Would we really be taking such a huge risk putting Barker on the bench rather than Navas ?[/quote]

There'd be no harm whatsoever and in the past he has put kids on the bench.
So then why didn't he??
My guess is he gave the senior squad an almighty bollocking after the last game and told them it was down to them to put it right.

Fat lot of good it did

Ted Hughes wrote:

DoomMerchant wrote:

Ted Hughes wrote:This kid Aarons, 18, is causing the scousers all manner of shit & did vs City. He wouldn't of been on our bench for either game.

Not right.

But the point as John said and I said earlier in the thread is that the Count set up a side with the highest percentage chance to win logically. He took no chances.

Taking a chance after the start to the season isn't a liberty he probably feels he has.

Pardew has been on the ropes. If he doesn't try something different he will surely be sacked.

If you were a manager who had our talent you'd be hard pressed to take risks on unproven kids just yet.

On the bench you say...yeah maybe that's a good point but we don't have the kind of structure that gives a "coach" the liberty to be that footloose.

If pep comes in eventually he will be the one manager who will feel comfy doing whatever and not fearing his short window gets shorter if he spits the bit before Xmas and has fucked up his season.

Cheers

Would we really be taking such a huge risk putting Barker on the bench rather than Navas ?

The risk is simply playing him. If the count knows he won't play him and would want experience what good does the kid get to sit on the bench? The matchday "experience"?

Cheers

When in the season do we think the title has gone and introduce some of these lads?

10pts behind at new year?
10pts behind at easter?
When its mathmatically impossible to win?

I know when Bacon or Wenger would have done

Interview by Micah

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/30248456

Micah Richards: Young Man City players will not get a chance
Fiorentina full-back Micah Richards is one of only a handful of British players and managers plying their trade abroad.

The 26-year-old England international is on loan from Manchester City and enjoying life in the historic city of Florence.

In an interview with BBC's Football Focus, he reveals why he had to leave City - a club he joined at 14 and represented for 12 years - after manager Manuel Pellegrini "lost a bit of faith" in him.

Settling into the Italian way of life?

Richards: "It has been easy. The lads have been great with me. There are two players here (Stefan Savic and David Pizarro) who were at City and they have taken me under their wing. Off the field, it is a beautiful city, so it has been easy to settle in."

Richards says Pablo Zabaleta is a "machine" Micah Richards lost his right-back position at Manchester City to Pablo Zabaleta

Has Mario Balotelli been in contact?

Richards: "He texts, but when he texts me it is English. I keep telling him to text me in Italian, so I can learn."

Why did you come to Fiorentina?

Richards: "Signing a new contract with City would have been the easy way out. It is the club closest to my heart. I would love to stay there. But ultimately it comes down to how much you play. After I got injured, Pablo Zabaleta established himself as the number one right-back. And I hold my hands up, he did well. But there comes a time in your career where you have to do what is best for you. Coming here was the right decision."

Richards says Mancini would try to get a reaction from players Richards says former boss Roberto Mancini would make media statements to get a reaction from players

When did you know the time had come to move on, that manager Manuel Pellegrini was perhaps not your biggest fan?

Richards: "He brought me off in the FA Cup against Watford. We were losing, I thought I was having a decent game. Not amazing. Not bad, but I wasn't the worst player on the pitch by any stretch. And he brought me off at half-time and brought a right-back, Pablo Zabaleta, on. No disrespect, a right-back isn't going to change the game. At that point, I thought maybe he has lost a bit of faith in me."

Did you feel you were a scapegoat by Pellegrini?

Richards: "There was a breakdown in communication. Before he was there, I was the number one right-back. I played the most. It wasn't like I was a young lad, I had eight years experience in the Premier League, I had won a Premier League, won an FA Cup."

Richards challenges Arjen Robben Richards was told to mark Arjen Robben on his England debut against Netherlands in November 2006

Did you feel like you represented the 'old City'?

Richards: "Definitely. I wanted to stay there so long to prove to people you don't need to go out and spend £30m on a defender because you have got it here. I feel a little bit sorry for the youngsters at City because they have got some really, really good youngsters. They are not going to get a chance because whoever is in the managerial role is under pressure to get results. The manager has to pick the best team that he see right for results, whether the players are English, Spanish, Portuguese."

What was your relationship like with Mancini?

Richards: "I wouldn't say it was a love-hate relationship but, if you weren't playing well, he wouldn't beat around the bush. He would just say: 'What's going on? Why are you not playing well? Come on.' I don't want to give away his tricks, but he said things to the media to get a reaction from his players. Some players like that and some people don't. But for sure, he was one of the managers, along with Stuart Pearce, Sven-Goran Eriksson, Steve McClaren, they all got the best out of me.

Richards (left) in action for Fiorentina Richards (left) says he would like to stay at Italian side Fiorentina once his loan move ends

Do you still look out for City's results?

Richards: "Yeah, of course. I followed Arsenal as a kid, but I always look out for City. I really do want them to do well. I know the people that are still there, who were there when I was. It means so much to them. I know there are a lot of new people who have come in. They think they know the club, they think they can take the club in the right direction. Some do, some don't. The people who have been there for a long time, when we were in the Second Division and still getting 30,000 fans, they are the true City supporters. The ones that come to the game and are moaning when we don't win 5-0 or 6-0, they aren't the true City fans."

Richards on Pablo Zabaleta
"He is rarely injured. He is like a machine. And even if he is injured, it isn't for long. I did my hamstring and was out for two weeks. He did his and within six days he was back playing."


Do you think you will ever play for City again?

Richards: "I would never say never but, if I am being realistic, I don't think I will. But I do believe I will work at the club in some capacity in the future."

That headline is not at all reflecting what Micah said.
I saw the interview on Saturday and thought it was a really good one.

mr_nool wrote:That headline is not at all reflecting what Micah said.
I saw the interview on Saturday and thought it was a really good one.

Whatever he means, if you say 'the kids won't get a chance' it's what they are going to use.

And tbf, if you look at the Newcastle game for instance, so far, he's right. We can't go on like that forever if we are true to the academy.

We had Pozo on the bench against Southampton too, but didn't use him - although it was still 0-1 with ten minutes to go so probably understandable.

Ted Hughes wrote:

mr_nool wrote:That headline is not at all reflecting what Micah said.
I saw the interview on Saturday and thought it was a really good one.

Whatever he means, if you say 'the kids won't get a chance' it's what they are going to use.

And tbf, if you look at the Newcastle game for instance, so far, he's right. We can't go on like that forever if we are true to the academy.

To be honest, the comment was reported quite well considering they could have spun it that Pellegrini was blocking youth. The situation as it stands is exactly as reported unfortunately, and Pellegrini is every bit as guilty as Mancini for not blooding players - but there is also the contractual threat of senior players ripping up the contract if not played, which also has to be at the back of a managers mind meaning the lesser senior players MUST be given appearances to the detriment of the kids.

It seems until a kid is actually good enough to hold down a senior squad place, its hard to see how we (or for that matter any club who wants to seriously challenge for trophies and by definition needs a decent sized squad) can actually play any kids to 'blood them'

I always see this thing about certain players being contracted to play every game mentioned yet i've absolutely no idea where its come from. What's it based on? Someone's mate's opinion at the pub?