sheblue wrote:Never changed from satisfied.
Looks like he will be staying on which is good.
Lets hope he has learned a lot from this season.
If there is a bad start in August, how long is he getting?
Im_Spartacus wrote:sheblue wrote:Never changed from satisfied.
Looks like he will be staying on which is good.
Lets hope he has learned a lot from this season.
If there is a bad start in August, how long is he getting?
If we work on an assumption that we are appointing Guardiola the summer after, we may as well give Pellegrini the season as there would be nobody else decent who would come in for just half a season. This is the quandry we've caught ourselves in at the moment, because if we appoint Vieira on an interim basis until the end of the season and he does well, we can hardly brig another manager in without losing Vieira then.
Wonderwall wrote:Im_Spartacus wrote:sheblue wrote:Never changed from satisfied.
Looks like he will be staying on which is good.
Lets hope he has learned a lot from this season.
If there is a bad start in August, how long is he getting?
If we work on an assumption that we are appointing Guardiola the summer after, we may as well give Pellegrini the season as there would be nobody else decent who would come in for just half a season. This is the quandry we've caught ourselves in at the moment, because if we appoint Vieira on an interim basis until the end of the season and he does well, we can hardly brig another manager in without losing Vieira then.
afer watching a lot of the EDS games, I really wouldnt go anywhere near Vieira at the moment. His tactical nous needs some serious work
Dameerto wrote:Wonderwall wrote:Im_Spartacus wrote:sheblue wrote:Never changed from satisfied.
Looks like he will be staying on which is good.
Lets hope he has learned a lot from this season.
If there is a bad start in August, how long is he getting?
If we work on an assumption that we are appointing Guardiola the summer after, we may as well give Pellegrini the season as there would be nobody else decent who would come in for just half a season. This is the quandry we've caught ourselves in at the moment, because if we appoint Vieira on an interim basis until the end of the season and he does well, we can hardly brig another manager in without losing Vieira then.
afer watching a lot of the EDS games, I really wouldnt go anywhere near Vieira at the moment. His tactical nous needs some serious work
Is he trying to win matches or develop players though?
Wooders wrote:No kids again yesterday - a fine opportunity not taken, shame.
Herb wrote:Wooders wrote:No kids again yesterday - a fine opportunity not taken, shame.
It's a shame in one way but it would've been immoral if it had happened because Southampton were in the running for an early round Europa League place . . we had nothing to play for except pride and the statistics but Southampton were in competition for a result that would've been worth millions to them. As they lost to us, Liverpool got 6th place and Southampton stayed in 7th. That's how it should be, everyone playing their strongest side in the best league in the world.
We wouldn't want it any other way, would we?
Herb wrote:Wooders wrote:No kids again yesterday - a fine opportunity not taken, shame.
It's a shame in one way but it would've been immoral if it had happened because Southampton were in the running for an early round Europa League place . . we had nothing to play for except pride and the statistics but Southampton were in competition for a result that would've been worth millions to them. As they lost to us, Liverpool got 6th place and Southampton stayed in 7th. That's how it should be, everyone playing their strongest side in the best league in the world.
We wouldn't want it any other way, would we?
Wooders wrote:Why though? What do we owe them?
We should only have one priority - what's best for manchester city football club, its none of our concern what happens with other teams league position.
We had a good chance to play a couple of the more prominent youngsters, I'm not talking about putting out the whole eds team here - but what would have been wrong with bringing a couple off the bench for a bit of game time?
Wooders wrote:Why though? What do we owe them?
We should only have one priority - what's best for manchester city football club, its none of our concern what happens with other teams league position.
We had a good chance to play a couple of the more prominent youngsters, I'm not talking about putting out the whole eds team here - but what would have been wrong with bringing a couple off the bench for a bit of game time?
Wooders wrote:I'd be annoyed but would retain the view it isn't their problem. My original post was spurred by the dissapointnent that we didn't bring anyone off the bench when the job was done.
Peter Doherty (AGAIG) wrote:Wooders wrote:Why though? What do we owe them?
We should only have one priority - what's best for manchester city football club, its none of our concern what happens with other teams league position.
We had a good chance to play a couple of the more prominent youngsters, I'm not talking about putting out the whole eds team here - but what would have been wrong with bringing a couple off the bench for a bit of game time?
It's for the integrity of the competition. If we needed Sunderland to get a point at Chelsea in the last game (for us to win the league) and Sunderland send out a team full of kids we'd be fuming and the competition would be devalued.
Return to The Maine Football forum
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], ian494 and 211 guests