Hughes sacked?

[The Baron]

The joke is replacing him with someone who was Sven's understudy and only won the Italian league due to the match fixing scandal!

lol ok, couldn't be more wrong.

How so? He wasn't close to winning a thing before the Serie A scandal.

[The Baron]

The thing with Man City is that they had all this money to spend, but the really, really good players, the ones who always give 100% are already at genuinely good teams and won't want to go to a team like Man City.

Therefore the players Man City ended up with are the ones whose heads are turned more by ££££ than by winning things - the lazy ones.

There's not much a manager can do to motivate these guys because they're only really interested in the money.

This. Excellent point.

+1

In the grand scheme of things it is another worrying example for English football.

Turn the tables around and ask this question. If Mark Hughes is one of the best young English managers in the game would he have a chance of taking over at a big Italian club should they sack their manager?

All that has happened here is that Man City have swopped a promising young English manager with a promising young Italian manager, the trend seems to be widespread in our game now and English managers dont get the credit they deserve and overseas managers get some kind of reverence before they have really proven anything in our game.

Well he's Welsh for a start.

And perhaps English managers would be held in higher regard if any of them actually bothered to try an be great at management,most of them just rely on getting jobs off the back of what they did in their playing careers.

Very few English players or managers have got the balls or foresight to go and play/manage abroad to expand their horizons and benefit from different footballing cultures,noooooo sure the footballing world begins and ends with the premiership doesn't it 

Agree 100%.

[bobby1]

The thing with Man City is that they had all this money to spend, but the really, really good players, the ones who always give 100% are already at genuinely good teams and won't want to go to a team like Man City.

Therefore the players Man City ended up with are the ones whose heads are turned more by ££££ than by winning things - the lazy ones.

There's not much a manager can do to motivate these guys because they're only really interested in the money.

This. Excellent point.

+1

In the grand scheme of things it is another worrying example for English football.

Turn the tables around and ask this question. If Mark Hughes is one of the best young English managers in the game would he have a chance of taking over at a big Italian club should they sack their manager?

All that has happened here is that Man City have swopped a promising young English manager with a promising young Italian manager, the trend seems to be widespread in our game now and English managers dont get the credit they deserve and overseas managers get some kind of reverence before they have really proven anything in our game.

Well he's Welsh for a start.

And perhaps English managers would be held in higher regard if any of them actually bothered to try an be great at management,most of them just rely on getting jobs off the back of what they did in their playing careers.

Very few English players or managers have got the balls or foresight to go and play/manage abroad to expand their horizons and benefit from different footballing cultures,noooooo sure the footballing world begins and ends with the premiership doesn't it 

My bad, English based managers would have been a better phrase.

So, how do you reckon Mancini got his first managerial job??

and you are actually backing up my point, why do you think English based managers don't get overseas jobs but in this case an Italian manager with a lower level of experience in world football gets his job instead?

[The Baron]

The thing with Man City is that they had all this money to spend, but the really, really good players, the ones who always give 100% are already at genuinely good teams and won't want to go to a team like Man City.

Therefore the players Man City ended up with are the ones whose heads are turned more by ££££ than by winning things - the lazy ones.

There's not much a manager can do to motivate these guys because they're only really interested in the money.

This. Excellent point.

+1

In the grand scheme of things it is another worrying example for English football.

Turn the tables around and ask this question. If Mark Hughes is one of the best young English managers in the game would he have a chance of taking over at a big Italian club should they sack their manager?

All that has happened here is that Man City have swopped a promising young English manager with a promising young Italian manager, the trend seems to be widespread in our game now and English managers dont get the credit they deserve and overseas managers get some kind of reverence before they have really proven anything in our game.

Well he's Welsh for a start.

And perhaps English managers would be held in higher regard if any of them actually bothered to try an be great at management,most of them just rely on getting jobs off the back of what they did in their playing careers.

Very few English players or managers have got the balls or foresight to go and play/manage abroad to expand their horizons and benefit from different footballing cultures,noooooo sure the footballing world begins and ends with the premiership doesn't it 

My bad, English based managers would have been a better phrase.

So, how do you reckon Mancini got his first managerial job??

and you are actually backing up my point, why do you think English based managers don't get overseas jobs but in this case an Italian manager with a lower level of experience in world football gets his job instead?

Well Mancini did his time as a coach, then assistant, then manager.

English managers don't apply for overseas jobs though. Coleman got one based on a reference from his fellow Welshman John Toshak (who is rated in Spain) and unless you count Steve Nicol in the states who else is there? I mean Hodgson aside who has tried to manage abroad? This is the very reason English managers are tactially inferior to their European counterparts. Everyone knows the EPL is more about having strength and pace than great tactics. It's why having Capello as England manager is the best thing to have happened in years.

[bobby1]

The thing with Man City is that they had all this money to spend, but the really, really good players, the ones who always give 100% are already at genuinely good teams and won't want to go to a team like Man City.

Therefore the players Man City ended up with are the ones whose heads are turned more by ££££ than by winning things - the lazy ones.

There's not much a manager can do to motivate these guys because they're only really interested in the money.

This. Excellent point.

+1

In the grand scheme of things it is another worrying example for English football.

Turn the tables around and ask this question. If Mark Hughes is one of the best young English managers in the game would he have a chance of taking over at a big Italian club should they sack their manager?

All that has happened here is that Man City have swopped a promising young English manager with a promising young Italian manager, the trend seems to be widespread in our game now and English managers dont get the credit they deserve and overseas managers get some kind of reverence before they have really proven anything in our game.

Well he's Welsh for a start.

And perhaps English managers would be held in higher regard if any of them actually bothered to try an be great at management,most of them just rely on getting jobs off the back of what they did in their playing careers.

Very few English players or managers have got the balls or foresight to go and play/manage abroad to expand their horizons and benefit from different footballing cultures,noooooo sure the footballing world begins and ends with the premiership doesn't it 

My bad, English based managers would have been a better phrase.

So, how do you reckon Mancini got his first managerial job??

and you are actually backing up my point, why do you think English based managers don't get overseas jobs but in this case an Italian manager with a lower level of experience in world football gets his job instead?

Well Mancini did his time as a coach, then assistant, then manager.

English managers don't apply for overseas jobs though. Coleman got one based on a reference from his fellow Welshman John Toshak (who is rated in Spain) and unless you count Steve Nicol in the states who else is there? I mean Hodgson aside who has tried to manage abroad? This is the very reason English managers are tactially inferior to their European counterparts. Everyone knows the EPL is more about having strength and pace than great tactics. It's why having Capello as England manager is the best thing to have happened in years.

All good points Baron but again, what has Mancini ever done to warrant getting a job with one of the top ten English clubs that Hughes hasn't dont to get a job with a top ten Italian team. The only difference is it is chic now for English football clubs to get overseas managers because they are for some reason rated higher.

[Murph1984]

The thing with Man City is that they had all this money to spend, but the really, really good players, the ones who always give 100% are already at genuinely good teams and won't want to go to a team like Man City.

Therefore the players Man City ended up with are the ones whose heads are turned more by ££££ than by winning things - the lazy ones.

There's not much a manager can do to motivate these guys because they're only really interested in the money.

This. Excellent point.

+1

In the grand scheme of things it is another worrying example for English football.

Turn the tables around and ask this question. If Mark Hughes is one of the best young English managers in the game would he have a chance of taking over at a big Italian club should they sack their manager?

All that has happened here is that Man City have swopped a promising young English manager with a promising young Italian manager, the trend seems to be widespread in our game now and English managers dont get the credit they deserve and overseas managers get some kind of reverence before they have really proven anything in our game.

Well he's Welsh for a start.

And perhaps English managers would be held in higher regard if any of them actually bothered to try an be great at management,most of them just rely on getting jobs off the back of what they did in their playing careers.

Very few English players or managers have got the balls or foresight to go and play/manage abroad to expand their horizons and benefit from different footballing cultures,noooooo sure the footballing world begins and ends with the premiership doesn't it 

My bad, English based managers would have been a better phrase.

So, how do you reckon Mancini got his first managerial job??

and you are actually backing up my point, why do you think English based managers don't get overseas jobs but in this case an Italian manager with a lower level of experience in world football gets his job instead?

Because of the reputation other Italians before him have forged,helped by the fact that there are much more stringent rules and processes in Italy in order to obtain the qualifications to be a coach or manager,so they are always better qualified to begin with.

And in general just a willingess and eagerness to sample football in a different country,Mancini even came to Leicester City to experience English football first hand.

[The Baron]

The thing with Man City is that they had all this money to spend, but the really, really good players, the ones who always give 100% are already at genuinely good teams and won't want to go to a team like Man City.

Therefore the players Man City ended up with are the ones whose heads are turned more by ££££ than by winning things - the lazy ones.

There's not much a manager can do to motivate these guys because they're only really interested in the money.

This. Excellent point.

+1

In the grand scheme of things it is another worrying example for English football.

Turn the tables around and ask this question. If Mark Hughes is one of the best young English managers in the game would he have a chance of taking over at a big Italian club should they sack their manager?

All that has happened here is that Man City have swopped a promising young English manager with a promising young Italian manager, the trend seems to be widespread in our game now and English managers dont get the credit they deserve and overseas managers get some kind of reverence before they have really proven anything in our game.

Well he's Welsh for a start.

And perhaps English managers would be held in higher regard if any of them actually bothered to try an be great at management,most of them just rely on getting jobs off the back of what they did in their playing careers.

Very few English players or managers have got the balls or foresight to go and play/manage abroad to expand their horizons and benefit from different footballing cultures,noooooo sure the footballing world begins and ends with the premiership doesn't it 

My bad, English based managers would have been a better phrase.

So, how do you reckon Mancini got his first managerial job??

and you are actually backing up my point, why do you think English based managers don't get overseas jobs but in this case an Italian manager with a lower level of experience in world football gets his job instead?

Well Mancini did his time as a coach, then assistant, then manager.

English managers don't apply for overseas jobs though. Coleman got one based on a reference from his fellow Welshman John Toshak (who is rated in Spain) and unless you count Steve Nicol in the states who else is there? I mean Hodgson aside who has tried to manage abroad? This is the very reason English managers are tactially inferior to their European counterparts. Everyone knows the EPL is more about having strength and pace than great tactics. It's why having Capello as England manager is the best thing to have happened in years.

All good points Baron but again, what has Mancini ever done to warrant getting a job with one of the top ten English clubs that Hughes hasn't dont to get a job with a top ten Italian team. The only difference is it is chic now for English football clubs to get overseas managers because they are for some reason rated higher.

I do agree to an extent. And I do think we're killing our management potential with decisions like this.

Mancini's record isn't one i'm a huge an of exactly, I think it's a joke decision tbh creating this drama partway through their most successful season to date, and surely only interim as a fix, but he has won trophies with every club he's managed - I think it's harsh to say they're at the same level reputationally as managers.

[TightEnd]

The Times tomorrow after that press conference today


A good read




At least Garry Cook had the decency to show up. The same cannot be said of Khaldoon al-Mubarak, the Manchester City chairman, who left his hapless chief executive to take the flak. Nice that, but then Mark Hughes probably wouldn’t be surprised.

An extraordinary press conference at the City of Manchester Stadium yesterday, where Roberto Mancini was presented as the club’s new manager, told us three things: one, Mancini is cool and composed under pressure, which he will need to be working for this bunch; two, Cook is not; and three, these owners are not as honourable as they would like us all to believe.

This was the most humiliating experience of Cook’s 18-month tenure at City, which is saying something. This, after all, is the man who infamously declared that Thaksin Shinawatra, the disgraced former Thai Prime Minister and City owner, was a “great guy to play golf with”, who accused AC Milan of “bottling it” over the collapse of City’s world record £103 million bid to sign Kaká and who mistakenly inducted Uwe Rösler into the Manchester United hall of fame on the night he was being lauded as a City legend.

More recently, he said “comedy has always been at the heart of what City is all about”. At least he got that right, although now we can add economy with the truth, too.

Cook was asking for trouble by insisting that he would not answer any questions about Hughes’s dismissal but instead read only from a statement. Regrettably for him and his superiors, it was not very carefully written.

Having stressed in his statement that City had approached Mancini only after the 3-0 defeat by Tottenham Hotspur last Wednesday, Cook was forced into the most embarrassing of climbdowns when the former Inter Milan coach admitted that he had met al-Mubarak and Sheikh Mansour, the club’s billionaire owner, a fortnight ago. Oops. Cook at that point went crimson and, squirming in his seat, had little choice but to correct his original claims.

As such, his statement that “I think it is important for people to know that Roberto was only offered the job after the Spurs game; we negotiated on Thursday and finalised his agreement on Friday” became this: “Two weeks ago Roberto met with Khaldoon,” Cook said. “After the Spurs game, there were further discussions on a more serious level.

“The [original] discussions were general. They were about football. We were considering our managerial options at the time. It [the manager’s job] was discussed in general terms.”

It was one of the most remarkable examples of someone slitting their own throat in modern football.

If he survives this, he can survive anything. On the other hand, maybe he should just be sacked for using phrases like “the trajectory of recent results”, which apparently was “below the requirement” of 70 points.

People with a knowledge of football don’t use such terms. Manchester United’s “trajectory of results” did not look too good in February 1996 when they trailed Newcastle United by 12 points but come the end of the season they had won the title.

Of course, it is unfair to only shoot the messenger. What about Sheikh Mansour and al-Mubarak, men who made such a huge play about being different, about being patient and understanding, about having a long-term vision with Hughes, who, let us not forget, was “absolutely integral” to their plans, at the helm.

Cook said al-Mubarak was adamant he did not want to sack Hughes by “telephone, fax or e-mail” but surely that would have been better than to allow the Welshman to take charge of the game at home to Sunderland last Saturday knowing full well that he was wearing a dead man’s shoes?

Would yesterday have been handled any better had al-Mubarak taken charge? Who knows? The decision to allow Cook to bear the brunt of the audience’s disgust, though, was gutless. Cook may have come across as a coward for not having the decency to come out straightaway and admit talks were held with Mancini two weeks ago but al-Mubarak was an even bigger one. Of course, officials will make out that he had something far more important to attend to, although City supporters might not see it that way.

Hughes seemed to insinuate that the goalposts had been moved during the season. Cook insisted Hughes and his playing staff were made clear the “new target” was 70 points. By my reckoning, though, City would appear to be roughly on course for that with 29 points from 17 matches so far. So did Cook really mean to say “the new target” was fourth, or was that another thing they failed to communicate properly to Hughes?

“The chairman has been nothing but transparent with Mark throughout his tenure and he had communicated with him regularly over the last several weeks,” Cook said. Except in the past two weeks ago when he was busily working behind the former Blackburn Rovers manager’s back.

Cook would not respond when he was asked, ironically, if he had “bottled it” by refusing to answer questions.

Nor would he respond when asked if his position was “untenable”. Or when asked to explain what patience constitutes when a manager is sacked after 18 months with his team six points off fourth place with a game in hand and in their first semi-final of a leading cup competition for 28 years. Sure, Hughes had failings as a manager — and they have been well-documented on these pages — but were his results so bad that he deserved to be sacked, and humiliated in the process?

“I’m going to say something here,” Cook said. “It seems to me there’s an overwhelming theory that there is a conspiracy. That’s not what was happening.

“The owner, the board, the management team made a decision. We moved quickly as was expected. Any business would have a plan and we moved to work on that plan. There is no conspiracy theory.”

The only problem was that Mancini’s admission proved there had been.

[Josedinho]

Daft sacking but it's a daft club and things like this happen when there is big money involved. It wasn't long ago that Hughes was happy saying that Kaka for £100mil made financial sense. That statement is just as silly as the sacking.

[The Baron]

Daft sacking but it's a daft club and things like this happen when there is big money involved. It wasn't long ago that Hughes was happy saying that Kaka for £100mil made financial sense. That statement is just as silly as the sacking.

But havn't Real more or less proved that the purchase of Ronaldo was worth 80 million just a few months on?

[Scottish Dave]

Daft sacking but it's a daft club and things like this happen when there is big money involved. It wasn't long ago that Hughes was happy saying that Kaka for £100mil made financial sense. That statement is just as silly as the sacking.

But havn't Real more or less proved that the purchase of Ronaldo was worth 80 million just a few months on?

He had been injured for 2 month's, and it didn't really affect the team till Kaka got in injured along side him.

Don't get me wrong, i think he is the 4th best player in football just now, I don't think he is worth the 80M and will never justify it tho. I don't think anyone could justify 80M TBH

[The Baron]

Daft sacking but it's a daft club and things like this happen when there is big money involved. It wasn't long ago that Hughes was happy saying that Kaka for £100mil made financial sense. That statement is just as silly as the sacking.

But havn't Real more or less proved that the purchase of Ronaldo was worth 80 million just a few months on?

He had been injured for 2 month's, and it didn't really affect the team till Kaka got in injured along side him.

Don't get me wrong, i think he is the 4th best player in football just now, I don't think he is worth the 80M and will never justify it tho. I don't think anyone could justify 80M TBH

Agree on injuries etc but purely financially speaking he's estimated to have recouped the club 35m+ already. I'm sure Rod would know a bit more on it but by all accounts the 80m would be well paid for by the time his primary contract is up.

[bolt pp]

It was strange that the defence let him down, i thought he'd have trouble getting the really good players performing up front and probs wouldnt get near the big four because of that not because they let in 3 goals every game, he made such a solid defence at blackburn

[Josedinho]

Well I think Ronaldo's absence has a bigger impact on the team than Kaka's. I don't know if he's going to justify 80mil AND all his wages but I'm confident that Kaka at a club the size of Man City would not justify 100mil.

[The Baron]

It was strange that the defence let him down, i thought he'd have trouble getting the really good players performing up front and probs wouldnt get near the big four because of that not because they let in 3 goals every game, he made such a solid defence at blackburn

Yeah true.

Richards is overrated though and Lescott worth 24m? He bought the wrong centre half from Everton.