IS Bobby Mancini THE MAN?

[Original Dub]

Nope you can't and people will read into things what they want to read. Right now in the 'Were you happy with the game' thread its working nicely up to the point where Portsmouth had 4 gilt edged chances which any other team would have taken and we would/should have lost and by god we were truly shite and so, so lucky etc etc. Give it another week and people will swear blind we actually lost the game.

There is no point in arguing anymore than there was trying to convince me that Hughes could manage a football team. I am not saying that Mancini is the answer because it really is too soon to tell unless of course you have made your mind up already which some people have no matter how diplomatically they put it. 'Mancini has my full backing - for now' means I'll support him but the first real f**k up and I'll ride his arse for the rest of the season. And f**k up really means signing one defensive midfielder too many it seems :)

LMAO!!!


So true!!

Awh stop mate, it was one of the funniest posts I've ever read on here!

And of course, as you say - SO ACCURATE!

1. People who say they thought our performance against Pompey was liking watching paint dry will swear next week that we lost?
2. There's no point in trying to tell this gentleman that Mark Hughes is a football manager, he knows he isn't.
3. Anyone who questions Mancini's transfer policy is merely starting a campaign against him.

Have you stopped laughing yet Edge?

I haven't.

[edge275]

Nope you can't and people will read into things what they want to read. Right now in the 'Were you happy with the game' thread its working nicely up to the point where Portsmouth had 4 gilt edged chances which any other team would have taken and we would/should have lost and by god we were truly shite and so, so lucky etc etc. Give it another week and people will swear blind we actually lost the game.

There is no point in arguing anymore than there was trying to convince me that Hughes could manage a football team. I am not saying that Mancini is the answer because it really is too soon to tell unless of course you have made your mind up already which some people have no matter how diplomatically they put it. 'Mancini has my full backing - for now' means I'll support him but the first real f**k up and I'll ride his arse for the rest of the season. And f**k up really means signing one defensive midfielder too many it seems :)

LMAO!!!


So true!!

Awh stop mate, it was one of the funniest posts I've ever read on here!

And of course, as you say - SO ACCURATE!

1. People who say they thought our performance against Pompey was liking watching paint dry will swear next week that we lost?
2. There's no point in trying to tell this gentleman that Mark Hughes is a football manager, he knows he isn't.
3. Anyone who questions Mancini's transfer policy is merely starting a campaign against him.

Have you stopped laughing yet Edge?

I haven't.

No mate, I haven't stopped laughing yet.

[ronk]

Thats just it CARL, I think everyone knows you just say it as you see it. If there's an element that you aren't happy with you say so. Therefore I don't think you fall into the category DHTP is referring to.

HOWEVER, there are some who haven't mentioned ONE negative about performance, tactics or transfer policy since Mancini took over and they had so much to say on each of these subjects before.

Edge is extremely positive of late.
NQDP is "happy" the whole time
Socrates has already stated he is delighted that he was "proved to be right" with the sacking of hughes and Mancini's subsequent success.

Can't think of anymore off the top of my head, but I'm sure there's a few. But these people (and others) blamed the last guy for pretty much everything that was wrong with the club - from the medicals, to last minute goals, to not being able to handle Robinho, to playing players out of position, to not taking full responsibility after a defeat... and lots more...

Now, I am positive about the future and I really really hope Mancini is the man, but not a hell of a lot that I have listed has changed one bit, yet these folk are absolutely fine with it.

And it fucking stinks of hypocrisy mate.

It isn't hypocrisy. Its all about not liking Hughes and liking Mancini. Its all about trusting Mancini's judgement and not trusting Hughes. If you trust someones judgement and they say I need to park Robbie's arse on a beach in Brazil for the rest of the season we go ok, not overly happy about it but I'll trust your judgement. Equally if Hughes said I need to park said arse on said beach we go are you out of your f**king mind you idiot and then demand a second opinion. This is not hypocrisy. Its about having faith in one man's judgement over anothers. It may be unfair but its not exactly uncommon.

Besides there are people on here who distrust Mancini's judgement from tactics to players and are openly freting that Portsmouth is an omen of things to come despite the players and Mancini himself saying they were not happy with the performance. The only hypocritical thing would be to suggest that it doesn't work both ways. It does and as Roberto would say 'it is normal'

Most of the time people are hypocritical (when they're being hypocritical) without actively thinking they're being hypocritical, that's just in general though.

For example, it would be hypocritical to say that Robinho leaving on loan is evidence of Mancini's strong man-management and willingness to remove a disruptive element if you would have been quite to say the exact opposite about Hughes: namely, that it was evidence that we wasn't up to the job and wasn't able to handle star egos.

None of this is unexpected (to me). There were times on here when Hughes was so blindly hated anything could be twisted against him. The new guy was always going to get some love simply by virtue of not having been a rag bastard.

Just as I was tempted to instantly dismiss any comments from someone who hated Hughes that much that they weren't capable of objective analysis, similarly, I have no interest in hearing completely one sided points from people looking for success in Mancini to validate their own hatred of Hughes (or vice-versa).

Hughes was flawed but a decent manager, Mancini is flawed but a decent manager. So far, I reckon Mancini is doing a better job and is an improvement on Hughes, but I don't think he's perfect (nor am I looking for that in a manager). Hughes certainly left the club in a stronger position than where he started -- not just in terms of player quality -- we're a more professional outfit.

But it doesn't really help Mancini or the team to continuously focus on Hughes and 2nd guess what he would have done (but that works both ways).

[mcfc1632]

OD - you seem do be trying to get people to see things from an objective point of view and be able self-analyse - self-critique.

I wish you luck but feel it is a wasted cause - and anyway what is done is done - Hughes has left, Mancini is our manager - so forward with Mancini!!

For what it it is worth, I think it must be obvious to everyone on here - apart from the extremists themselves - that all this trying to use performances since the change to somehow vindicate their previous vitriol is just the bleating of people who have a need to always think that they are right - but there are many of those in all walks of life - just ask yourself if you have ever REALLY seen posts from said people admitting they were wrong about anything of substance (not just trite little things - substantial subjects).

Whilst being a Hughes neutral I also occasionally tried to pick up the torch of objectivity and get through to them - but when minds are completely closed.......

I think that suggesting that people are showing hypocrisy though is wrong - for that to be the case there has to be a 'concious pretence' - I do not think that is the case here - it is much more pre-disposition / prejudice / bigotry.

You find all sorts on here:

1/ People that were genuinely quite happy with Hughes and wanted him to continue because they thought he would make it
2/ People genuinely concerned about Hughes but were more concerned about ill-thought through change - so wanted the season or at least THE change - i.e. for some Jose, for others Guus
3/ People that gave Hughes a chance - then gave up on him and wanted the change - for a recognised manager - e.g. Mancini
4/ People who simple ran him down at each and every opportunity no matter how silly and biased they sounded - which they were blind to

I actually think that there were very few in group 1 - it just suited the extremists in group 4 to categorise people - remember 'happy-clappers' - 'Hughes-lickers' etc - actually quite sad and childish wasn't it - but you see that - people unable to persuade through objective dialogue just SHOUT LOUDER - that is why the subject was dominated by posts from a handful of members - a couple no longer here

I think that the majority were in groups 2 & 3

I for example was in group 2 - as an example I would put Carl in group 3? (not seeking to speak on your behalf Carl - just an example)

Those in group 4 - are the ones you now see trying to justify their previous positions - why?? they got what they wanted - nove on you would think.

Problem is when you are that pre-disposed a person you are probably someone needing the 'reassurance' of being right - even if it is only in your own mind

I only submit this to point out to you that the extremists always were a minority - but on this subject were zealots - do you really think that you will change their point of view? - and them using the new era to try and justify their positions - well at least you can be confident that it is so obviously bollocks and lacking evidence that the majority (IMO) must see straight through it

[Niall Quinns Discopants]

OD - you seem do be trying to get people to see things from an objective point of view and be able self-analyse - self-critique.

I wish you luck but feel it is a wasted cause - and anyway what is done is done - Hughes has left, Mancini is our manager - so forward with Mancini!!

For what it it is worth, I think it must be obvious to everyone on here - apart from the extremists themselves - that all this trying to use performances since the change to somehow vindicate their previous vitriol is just the bleating of people who have a need to always think that they are right - but there are many of those in all walks of life - just ask yourself if you have ever REALLY seen posts from said people admitting they were wrong about anything of substance (not just trite little things - substantial subjects).

Whilst being a Hughes neutral I also occasionally tried to pick up the torch of objectivity and get through to them - but when minds are completely closed.......

I think that suggesting that people are showing hypocrisy though is wrong - for that to be the case there has to be a 'concious pretence' - I do not think that is the case here - it is much more pre-disposition / prejudice / bigotry.

You find all sorts on here:

1/ People that were genuinely quite happy with Hughes and wanted him to continue because they thought he would make it
2/ People genuinely concerned about Hughes but were more concerned about ill-thought through change - so wanted the season or at least THE change - i.e. for some Jose, for others Guus
3/ People that gave Hughes a chance - then gave up on him and wanted the change - for a recognised manager - e.g. Mancini
4/ People who simple ran him down at each and every opportunity no matter how silly and biased they sounded - which they were blind to

I actually think that there were very few in group 1 - it just suited the extremists in group 4 to categorise people - remember 'happy-clappers' - 'Hughes-lickers' etc - actually quite sad and childish wasn't it - but you see that - people unable to persuade through objective dialogue just SHOUT LOUDER - that is why the subject was dominated by posts from a handful of members - a couple no longer here

I think that the majority were in groups 2 & 3

I for example was in group 2 - as an example I would put Carl in group 3? (not seeking to speak on your behalf Carl - just an example)

Those in group 4 - are the ones you now see trying to justify their previous positions - why?? they got what they wanted - nove on you would think.

Problem is when you are that pre-disposed a person you are probably someone needing the 'reassurance' of being right - even if it is only in your own mind

I only submit this to point out to you that the extremists always were a minority - but on this subject were zealots - do you really think that you will change their point of view? - and them using the new era to try and justify their positions - well at least you can be confident that it is so obviously bollocks and lacking evidence that the majority (IMO) must see straight through it

Hughes is long gone now. Get over it. Instead of trying to repeat stuff about him in thread about our new manager.

If you people were even remotely as objecive as you pretend to be, you wouldn't be harping on about Hughes anymore. At least I'm open about the way I see them.

[mcfc1632]

Classic irony

[Niall Quinns Discopants]

Classic irony

Meaning what? I'm trying to move on. I really am. I'm tired of arguing about man who has fuck all to do with this club anymore.

[BobKowalski]

OD - you seem do be trying to get people to see things from an objective point of view and be able self-analyse - self-critique.

Funny I kind of got the impression he is trying to get people to see things from his point of view.

His point of view being that because certain people blamed Hughes for everything from the halftime oranges to global warming ("you f**king bastard Hughes think of the polar bears you selfish git") and said people do not blame Mancini for global warming or even for playing Petrov on the right (has there been a worse crime?) then this is manifestly unjust, wrong and 'stinks of hypocrisy'

And this is all very true but as I said it overlooks one important point that when factored into the debate totally changes the dynamic; namely that Hughes was a total tit when it came to football management. A man who in a decade of trying won nothing and whose best moments were 'nearly' qualifying for the Euro Champs/WC (I forget which) and 'nearly' getting to a final in the CC.

Now yes I know. Harsh. But I do have proof. Step forward Francis Lee. At the time of Frank taking over Mr Lee went on the telly to say Frank should appoint the 'best young British manager' in the PL. One Mark Hughes. Francis was adament that in his opinion Hughes was the best man for the job.

Just consider that for a moment and let the implication sink in. Francis Lee who had to be the worst judge of a football manager in the history of the modern game thought that Mark Hughes was the best man for the job. Getting Francis Lee's endorement is akin to getting a peck on the cheek whilst admiring the flowers in the Garden of Gethsemane.

And lo it came to pass when some 12 months later we did appoint Hughes (our target is a top 6 finish no excuses) who led us to the dizzy heights of tenth amidst a flurry of excuses.

Ah well we cannot say we were not forewarned.

So yes some of us could not stand Hughes. Just as some will feel the same way about Mancini and no doubt the manager after him. The song remains the same its just the band members that change.

[mcfc1632]

Classic irony

Meaning what? I'm trying to move on. I really am. I'm tired of arguing about man who has fuck all to do with this club anymore.

Of course by replying to you I am only doing the sort of vain attempt to reason with someone unable to take on board comments that I am suggesting the OD does not waste his efforts on - but OK I will have a brief go:

Your post that I referred to as 'classic irony' stated:

"Hughes is long gone now. Get over it. Instead of trying to repeat stuff about him in thread about our new manager.

If you people were even remotely as objecive as you pretend to be, you wouldn't be harping on about Hughes anymore. At least I'm open about the way I see them."

and now you ask why I suggested that was 'classic irony'???

1/ In this thread you have made 36 posts - of these 14 have nothing to do with Mancini or Hughes - leaving 22
2/ of the 22 - in 13 you are directly going on about Hughes - sometimes in a really 'possessed' way

an example is one where you respond to a post highlighting in bold:

...whereas under Hughes I would be shaking my head zero faith in his ability to manage the team.

and replying:

Exactly how I feel about the situation......

3/ Leaving 9 (25%) of your posts being about the thread subject - actually some of them were boderline
4/ This during a period when we are playing the scum in 2 semi-finals
5/ All your latests posts have been referring to Hughes - to the extent that OD, whilst trying to discuss Mancini, was moved to post this to you:

You are spending you whole time trying to keep divisions on this board and you made a fucking disgrace out of yourself spending the whole day trying to do so the other day.

If you want to do that, fire away, but I'm sick of you trying to put me in a box and give me labels, when the only "lover" or "licker" I am is for Manchester City.

So I'm asking you now to please stop doing that. Have a bit of respect for the fact that we are all City fans for fuck sake and let Mark Hughes go.

You've caused enough bollox on this board and it hasn't stoped since he left

And then you pop up as if you are some born-again objectivity saint - do me a favour - what were your words"...at least I am open.." - classic irony!!

You can respond all you like with your comments that stroke your ego - but they do not fool anyone - apart from yourself - but if it makes you feel good - get on with it - no point me (or OD) trying to use discussion / reason / objectivity on an internet forum with someone unable (on some topics) to interact - I know I have just wasted 10mins of my life typing this - but I can afford it

P.s

6/ ..... and all this from the guy who was been so roundly criticised (exposed actually) for his continuous harping on about Hughes during the 1st half of January - that he ran for cover and started the Mancini or Hughes poll on the 17th - and guess what happened - even more people told him he was a dick and he should let it go

[Original Dub]

OD - you seem do be trying to get people to see things from an objective point of view and be able self-analyse - self-critique.

Funny I kind of got the impression he is trying to get people to see things from his point of view.

His point of view being that because certain people blamed Hughes for everything from the halftime oranges to global warming ("you f**king bastard Hughes think of the polar bears you selfish git") and said people do not blame Mancini for global warming or even for playing Petrov on the right (has there been a worse crime?) then this is manifestly unjust, wrong and 'stinks of hypocrisy'

And this is all very true but as I said it overlooks one important point that when factored into the debate totally changes the dynamic; namely that Hughes was a total tit when it came to football management. A man who in a decade of trying won nothing and whose best moments were 'nearly' qualifying for the Euro Champs/WC (I forget which) and 'nearly' getting to a final in the CC.

Now yes I know. Harsh. But I do have proof. Step forward Francis Lee. At the time of Frank taking over Mr Lee went on the telly to say Frank should appoint the 'best young British manager' in the PL. One Mark Hughes. Francis was adament that in his opinion Hughes was the best man for the job.

Just consider that for a moment and let the implication sink in. Francis Lee who had to be the worst judge of a football manager in the history of the modern game thought that Mark Hughes was the best man for the job. Getting Francis Lee's endorement is akin to getting a peck on the cheek whilst admiring the flowers in the Garden of Gethsemane.

And lo it came to pass when some 12 months later we did appoint Hughes (our target is a top 6 finish no excuses) who led us to the dizzy heights of tenth amidst a flurry of excuses.

Ah well we cannot say we were not forewarned.

So yes some of us could not stand Hughes. Just as some will feel the same way about Mancini and no doubt the manager after him. The song remains the same its just the band members that change.

You talk a good talk my friend but at the end of the day if Peter and Paul do the exact same thing only Peter gets crucified and Paul gets cannonised something stinks of shit.

[MaineRoadMemories]

Impressive hughes-post history research mcfc1632!

How much does it cost to hire you to stalk someone on Facebook for me ;-)

[Niall Quinns Discopants]

Classic irony

Meaning what? I'm trying to move on. I really am. I'm tired of arguing about man who has fuck all to do with this club anymore.

Of course my replying to you I am only doing the sort of vain attempt to reason with someone unable to take on board comments that I am suggesting the OD does not waste his efforts on - but OK I will have a brief go:

Your port that I referred to as 'classic irony' stated:

"Hughes is long gone now. Get over it. Instead of trying to repeat stuff about him in thread about our new manager.

If you people were even remotely as objecive as you pretend to be, you wouldn't be harping on about Hughes anymore. At least I'm open about the way I see them."

and now you ask why???

1/ In this thread you have made 36 posts - of these 14 have nothing to do with the subject or Hughes - leaving 22
2/ of the 22 - in 13 you are directly going on about Hughes - sometimes in a really 'possessed' way
3/ Leaving 9 (25%) of you posts being about the thread subject - actually some of them were boderline
4/ This during a period when we are playing the scum in 2 semi-finals
5/ All your latests posts have been referring to Hughes - to the extent that OD, whilst trying to discuss Mancini, was moved to post this to you:

You are spending you whole time trying to keep divisions on this board and you made a fucking disgrace out of yourself spending the whole day trying to do so the other day.

If you want to do that, fire away, but I'm sick of you trying to put me in a box and give me labels, when the only "lover" or "licker" I am is for Manchester City.

So I'm asking you now to please stop doing that. Have a bit of respect for the fact that we are all City fans for fuck sake and let Mark Hughes go.

You've caused enough bollox on this board and it hasn't stoped since he left

And then you pop up as if you are some born-again objectivity saint - do me a favour - what were your words"...at least I am open.." - classic irony!!

You can respond all you like with your comments that stroke your ego - but they do not fool anyone - apart from yourself - but if it makes you feel good - get on with it - not point me (or OD) trying to use discussion / reason / objectivity on an internet forum with someone unable (on some topics) to interact - I know I have just wasted 10mins of my life typing this - but I can afford it

P.s

6/ ..... and all this from the guy who was been so roundly criticised (exposed actually) for his continuous harping on about Hughes during the 1st half of January - that he ran for cover and started the Mancini or Hughes poll on the 17th - and guess what happened - even more people told him he was a dick and he should let it go

Like I said, I'm TRYING to let it go myself.

It's just that people like you feel need to bring your favourite rag up in every given chance.

The purpose of your post is nothing but try to wind me up into arguing with you but you've showed with your petty "you are a moderator here......boohoo" bullshit that you are not really worth it really. We have been trying to restore some peace and I'm doing my best and you feel like you want to go all over it again, BECAUSE OF RAG FUCK THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS CLUB ANYMORE.

[Alex Sapphire]

It's just that people like you feel need to bring your favourite rag up in every given chance.

The purpose of your post is nothing but try to wind me up into arguing with you but you've showed with your petty "you are a moderator here......boohoo" bullshit that you are not really worth it really. We have been trying to restore some peace and I'm doing my best and you feel like you want to go all over it again, BECAUSE OF RAG FUCK THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS CLUB ANYMORE.

mm "we" aren't trying very hard to restore peace are we?

[Niall Quinns Discopants]

It's just that people like you feel need to bring your favourite rag up in every given chance.

The purpose of your post is nothing but try to wind me up into arguing with you but you've showed with your petty "you are a moderator here......boohoo" bullshit that you are not really worth it really. We have been trying to restore some peace and I'm doing my best and you feel like you want to go all over it again, BECAUSE OF RAG FUCK THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS CLUB ANYMORE.

mm "we" aren't trying very hard to restore peace are we?

Like I said, I'm doing my best. Sometimes it's just not good enough.

But you are right, that was unnecessery wind up.

[BobKowalski]

OD - you seem do be trying to get people to see things from an objective point of view and be able self-analyse - self-critique.

Funny I kind of got the impression he is trying to get people to see things from his point of view.

His point of view being that because certain people blamed Hughes for everything from the halftime oranges to global warming ("you f**king bastard Hughes think of the polar bears you selfish git") and said people do not blame Mancini for global warming or even for playing Petrov on the right (has there been a worse crime?) then this is manifestly unjust, wrong and 'stinks of hypocrisy'

And this is all very true but as I said it overlooks one important point that when factored into the debate totally changes the dynamic; namely that Hughes was a total tit when it came to football management. A man who in a decade of trying won nothing and whose best moments were 'nearly' qualifying for the Euro Champs/WC (I forget which) and 'nearly' getting to a final in the CC.

Now yes I know. Harsh. But I do have proof. Step forward Francis Lee. At the time of Frank taking over Mr Lee went on the telly to say Frank should appoint the 'best young British manager' in the PL. One Mark Hughes. Francis was adament that in his opinion Hughes was the best man for the job.

Just consider that for a moment and let the implication sink in. Francis Lee who had to be the worst judge of a football manager in the history of the modern game thought that Mark Hughes was the best man for the job. Getting Francis Lee's endorement is akin to getting a peck on the cheek whilst admiring the flowers in the Garden of Gethsemane.

And lo it came to pass when some 12 months later we did appoint Hughes (our target is a top 6 finish no excuses) who led us to the dizzy heights of tenth amidst a flurry of excuses.

Ah well we cannot say we were not forewarned.

So yes some of us could not stand Hughes. Just as some will feel the same way about Mancini and no doubt the manager after him. The song remains the same its just the band members that change.

You talk a good talk my friend but at the end of the day if Peter and Paul do the exact same thing only Peter gets crucified and Paul gets cannonised something stinks of shit.

Some people get to suck on the end of life's shit stick and others don't. Besides we are a long way off cannonising Mancini and to be fair a lot of people cut Hughes a lot of slack so its natural there are people who will cut Mancini some too. The fact that some of the Mancini 'slackers' - our new name :) - were Hughes 'haters' no doubt gets on some peoples tits but thats the way it goes sometimes.

[Original Dub]

OD - you seem do be trying to get people to see things from an objective point of view and be able self-analyse - self-critique.

Funny I kind of got the impression he is trying to get people to see things from his point of view.

His point of view being that because certain people blamed Hughes for everything from the halftime oranges to global warming ("you f**king bastard Hughes think of the polar bears you selfish git") and said people do not blame Mancini for global warming or even for playing Petrov on the right (has there been a worse crime?) then this is manifestly unjust, wrong and 'stinks of hypocrisy'

And this is all very true but as I said it overlooks one important point that when factored into the debate totally changes the dynamic; namely that Hughes was a total tit when it came to football management. A man who in a decade of trying won nothing and whose best moments were 'nearly' qualifying for the Euro Champs/WC (I forget which) and 'nearly' getting to a final in the CC.

Now yes I know. Harsh. But I do have proof. Step forward Francis Lee. At the time of Frank taking over Mr Lee went on the telly to say Frank should appoint the 'best young British manager' in the PL. One Mark Hughes. Francis was adament that in his opinion Hughes was the best man for the job.

Just consider that for a moment and let the implication sink in. Francis Lee who had to be the worst judge of a football manager in the history of the modern game thought that Mark Hughes was the best man for the job. Getting Francis Lee's endorement is akin to getting a peck on the cheek whilst admiring the flowers in the Garden of Gethsemane.

And lo it came to pass when some 12 months later we did appoint Hughes (our target is a top 6 finish no excuses) who led us to the dizzy heights of tenth amidst a flurry of excuses.

Ah well we cannot say we were not forewarned.

So yes some of us could not stand Hughes. Just as some will feel the same way about Mancini and no doubt the manager after him. The song remains the same its just the band members that change.

You talk a good talk my friend but at the end of the day if Peter and Paul do the exact same thing only Peter gets crucified and Paul gets cannonised something stinks of shit.

Some people get to suck on the end of life's shit stick and others don't. Besides we are a long way off cannonising Mancini and to be fair a lot of people cut Hughes a lot of slack so its natural there are people who will cut Mancini some too. The fact that some of the Mancini 'slackers' - our new name :) - were Hughes 'haters' no doubt gets on some peoples tits but thats the way it goes sometimes.

I think we could be chasing our tails here chief!

I get the whole thing that some who hated hughes llike Mancini. I also get it that some who liked Hughes, like Mancini (I'd say pretty much everyone TBH). I also get that some who didn't like hughes, don't like mancini. I get the fact that people have different opinions.

What I don't like is that the reasons people gave for hating one guy are the same reasons they give for liking the new guy, or at least the things they ranted about such as shitty excuses for losing, transfer policy, management of Robinho, players out of position... countless other stuff.... is now swept under the rug or deemed to be ok.

Some people didn't like Mark Hughes. I know that. The thing is I spent a lot of time on here in countless debates seeing right through what was being used as an excuse to get at the last fella, such as the things I listed above. And whenever I pointed out that these reasons didn't justify a brand new ranting thread, there was holy blue murder.

Yet now, if one of these subjects is even touched upon, the first people to accuse us of not liking the new manager, or indeed question our motivation for pointing the issue out are the very people who swore blind that it was these issues and not the man himself that was the problem.

Maybe you were one fo the people who said you didn't like the cunt and you didn't rate him no mater what and that's fine. But others hid behind excuses like the ones listed above instead of just showing their true colours.

They are hypocrites.

And before some cock-licker jumps on and tells me to forget about Mark Hughes - take a 2 minute breathing session and then ask yourself "Is Dub showing his undying support for Mark hughes, or is he merely trying to point out that what's good for the goose HAS to be good for the gander?"

I want Mancini to succeed I really really do.

[BobKowalski]

I think we could be chasing our tails here chief!

I did wonder why I was getting dizzy

And yes I never rated Hughes. Before, during and after his time here.

Never once bitched about Hughes tactical decisions - no tell a lie. The Spurs game. I'm not one for great tactical analysis but even I could see Lennon against Sly on his lonesome was going to be carnage. I did bitch about his man management, leadership and motivational skills. No problem about players brought in except two. Bellers (I was wrong) and RSC who I do rate but the injuries are a joke. If we had him on a free and pay as you play then ok worth a punt otherwise its a bad buy.

And I swear this is my last ever comment on Hughes and his time here. No doubt this will bite me in the arse but I damn sick of going over old ground.

[Rag_hater]

I think we could be chasing our tails here chief!

I get the whole thing that some who hated hughes llike Mancini. I also get it that some who liked Hughes, like Mancini (I'd say pretty much everyone TBH). I also get that some who didn't like hughes, don't like mancini. I get the fact that people have different opinions.

What I don't like is that the reasons people gave for hating one guy are the same reasons they give for liking the new guy, or at least the things they ranted about such as shitty excuses for losing, transfer policy, management of Robinho, players out of position... countless other stuff.... is now swept under the rug or deemed to be ok.

Some people didn't like Mark Hughes. I know that. The thing is I spent a lot of time on here in countless debates seeing right through what was being used as an excuse to get at the last fella, such as the things I listed above. And whenever I pointed out that these reasons didn't justify a brand new ranting thread, there was holy blue murder.

Yet now, if one of these subjects is even touched upon, the first people to accuse us of not liking the new manager, or indeed question our motivation for pointing the issue out are the very people who swore blind that it was these issues and not the man himself that was the problem.

Maybe you were one fo the people who said you didn't like the cunt and you didn't rate him no mater what and that's fine. But others hid behind excuses like the ones listed above instead of just showing their true colours.

They are hypocrites.

And before some cock-licker jumps on and tells me to forget about Mark Hughes - take a 2 minute breathing session and then ask yourself "Is Dub showing his undying support for Mark hughes, or is he merely trying to point out that what's good for the goose HAS to be good for the gander?"

I want Mancini to succeed I really really do.[/quote]








I think to avoid the hypocrasy you mention i.e the same yardstick is being used to measure Mancini and Hughes and different conclusions being reached, I think a "Mancini Out", thread would have to be started.
I'm getting pretty close to it with his latest actions but am not quite there yet. As I am probably one of the most impatient people on here (in certain issues) and have said he has to win 6 of his first 10 games,he still has a little time and the hypocrasy you allude to is something I think will just have to be accepted.
It happens all the time.

[Original Dub]

Rag Hater, you defo not be accused of being a hypocrate.

You'res starting to dislike Mancini just as much as Hughes and so far, its for the same reasons it seems.

And there's fuck all wrong with that if that's your opinion.

I don't really know if this guy is the man, but I'm on the YES side for now - all we need is to show we can beat the big boys. So far, two opportunities, ulitmately, two fails (and that's counting Everton as a "big boy").

Still, its early doors and fourth spot, just like it was before Mancini came, is still very much there for the taking!

[ronk]

I
I think to avoid the hypocrasy you mention i.e the same yardstick is being used to measure Mancini and Hughes and different conclusions being reached, I think a "Mancini Out", thread would have to be started.
I'm getting pretty close to it with his latest actions but am not quite there yet. As I am probably one of the most impatient people on here (in certain issues) and have said he has to win 6 of his first 10 games,he still has a little time and the hypocrasy you allude to is something I think will just have to be accepted.
It happens all the time.

Mancini has won 7 out of 9 matches.