Warnock sacked
- Thread starter FTM
- Start date
No doubt it is all Carlos Tevez fault he was sacked
Seriously though, i think he is a decent manager and is a bit of a character, so would like to see him do well.........maybe not somewhere where he does a lot of interviews though.
I probably would have expected QPR to go down tbh, they are really out of form and I think they look the weakest of the promoted sides(though obviously they have the money to remedy it). I can understand the board wanting to change things now though, whilst there is still plenty of the window left.
Seriously though, i think he is a decent manager and is a bit of a character, so would like to see him do well.........maybe not somewhere where he does a lot of interviews though.
I probably would have expected QPR to go down tbh, they are really out of form and I think they look the weakest of the promoted sides(though obviously they have the money to remedy it). I can understand the board wanting to change things now though, whilst there is still plenty of the window left.
Are they in the relegation zone at the time of him being sacked? Didn't think so.
You're right but judging by past history it was clear that would have been the case. There's a reason he was sacked. He just can't keep teams up. He has never ever been successful at it. Good championship manager and an awful PL one.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
To be fair he was hired to get the team to the premier league, I don't think they really wanted him to be in charge when he got them there as he's pretty much proven he can't keep a team in the prem league. There was loads of talk of him being fired in the summer, if anything I think they rather threw him a bone by rewarding his promotion with a half season chance at keeping them up.
Thing is new teams very often do very well right after promotion you ride promotion form, but once the losses start piling up and the confidence built from playing weaker teams in a lower league is gone, thats when he needed to earn his right to stay in the job. December had more games than any other month and QPR were rock bottom of the form stats.
Pretty much his entire career would suggest he couldn't turn it around and giving him money would prove to be a waste. Look at the super prolific SWP he brought in, likely on a huge fee(in terms of wages), rubbish, completely rubbish.
Now, Hughes seemed to both do very well at Fulham, and Zamora leaving rumours are pretty strong with everything pointing to him and Jol not getting on in the slightest. I can see Hughes trying to nab him and Dembele but don't think Fulham would let both go.
Thing is new teams very often do very well right after promotion you ride promotion form, but once the losses start piling up and the confidence built from playing weaker teams in a lower league is gone, thats when he needed to earn his right to stay in the job. December had more games than any other month and QPR were rock bottom of the form stats.
Pretty much his entire career would suggest he couldn't turn it around and giving him money would prove to be a waste. Look at the super prolific SWP he brought in, likely on a huge fee(in terms of wages), rubbish, completely rubbish.
Now, Hughes seemed to both do very well at Fulham, and Zamora leaving rumours are pretty strong with everything pointing to him and Jol not getting on in the slightest. I can see Hughes trying to nab him and Dembele but don't think Fulham would let both go.
I thought that he was (wrongly) under the impression that he'd walk into the Villa job
You are agreeing with me right?
and out of all the players he signed there are some that admittedly are key now but just some of the rubbish he bought out weighs them
I thought that he was (wrongly) under the impression that he'd walk into the Villa job
This, well to expand a bit he could have had the Villa job had he wanted it but refused due to the lack of money to spend
You are agreeing with me right?
and out of all the players he signed there are some that admittedly are key now but just some of the rubbish he bought out weighs them
Hughes gets far too much undue stick for his time at City, he was in charge at the beginning of your long term project. At that time City weren't able to attract the likes of Silva and Aguero, what Hughes did do though was lay the foundations to what Mancini walked in to. No one will ever know how Hughes would have done had he been given more time conversely no one will ever know how Mancini would have done had he not had the likes of Kompany & Tevez there to begin with.
He had us playing some dire dire football though, 9 draws in a row? Not acceptable when you spend the money he did. Harsh but true.
We will never know but would he have have spent better than Mancini has i personally don't think he would have.
Again though the level of football/results were early on in your 'resurgence'. It could have been worse you could have lost 9 in a row. Also tbf up until this season you've hardly played fantastic football with Mancini at the helm either did you?
As for Mancini's buys I don't think he's done amazingly in the transfer window in terms of bringing unknown talent to the club, everyone knew who Silva, Y.Toure & Aguero were so there's no reason to think Hughes wouldn't of targeted these players also.
If anything brining in Kompany probably goes down as your best signing to date simply because the once highly rated youngster was pretty much failing to live up to his billing at Hamburg (IIRC), Hughes signed him and now he's one of the best centre backs in the world and now living up to his early potential (not discounting Mancini's possible influence in his rise though you understand)
I understand that. Mancini didn't have us playing good football but it got results.
He hasn't done amazingly and i am not saying he has but i just think that the players he has brought in and got them playing together magnificently is testament to him. Would Hughes have got the same results we will never know.
Again you could say Mancini would have bought him had we had Mancini from the beginning because as you say he was a well known youngster and with the cash Mancini could afford to take a punt. It was an excellent piece of business by Hughes and so was signing the likes of Zaba, Tevez, NDJ and Kompany.
Its just signings like Bridge, RSC, Jo and Ben Haim which ruined his time at City.
Mancini's influence on Richards and Hart for example has been amazing. Again you cant say if Hughes would have had the same impact.
You are agreeing with me right?
and out of all the players he signed there are some that admittedly are key now but just some of the rubbish he bought out weighs them
Yes 100%
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Bridge was the only left back available at the time, the money and fee's were down to the owners(and Chelsea being stupid originally) not Hughes, he said he needed a left back they got who was available immediately, there isn't any more to the story.
As Tom said, firstly he took over a pretty much bottom half team, this was NOT a Chelsea situation where Mourinho took over the 2nd best side in the league, nor Ranieri who had a huge base of quality players and bought well being able to attract the best players in the league straight off.
Its funny because City fans were over the moon when SWP signed, I said back then it was a joke signing, even worse was after even longer being useless QPR have signed him on, afaik, a big wage and he's been even worse
As per usual Biz is talking rubbish, Richards was and has been brilliant for 4 years, he spent a year at CB which I was actually trying to remember when it was exactly but I assume probably in his time with Hughes, he was IMMENSE that year, he was great at right back.
The differences were, he was younger, he had the odd bad game, and he's been pretty injury prone in his time.
Neither Richards nor Hart look massively different to two years ago, only YOUR perception of them has changed. I remember plenty of people giving Richards stick for bombing down the wing, now when he does it everyone loves it. Same player, playing the same way, same quality, different perception.
As for dire football and drawing a bunch of games in a row, its funny because his points per game were basically better than Mancini while having all those draws... if you don't retardedly give Mancini credit for, IIRC a sunderland thrashing before he'd even taking a coaching session and give that win to Hughes which is entirely fair, then Hughes had a fractionally better first half to the season than Mancini did, and Mancini spent like a crazy man in the January window.
Hughes bought a lot of rubbish, which I and a bunch of CIty fans(and anyone else intelligent) said at the time was, who was available or short notice and who you could get, not who you wanted to end up with. Years later now you're looking at those buys in a COMPLETELY different light, as simply being rubbish rather than some of the better options available at the time.
Mancini has bought some utter tripe for some massively inflated prices, Korolov is defensively cack, Nasri was 15million too much and on a huge wage offering little to nothing. Milner, not a bad player but the price and wage still make him just as bad a buy as Hughes bad buys. Mancini's handling of Tevez has likely cost you a huge transfer fee and for a manager who has repeatedly complained of lack of options, quite probably points as well.
For me almost anyone could do what Mancini is doing, a almost top four side, loads of money and a couple years moving forwards, then buying every best player around. hughes took a bottom half team, got who he could, sorted out the spine or your team(and Ranieri did for Chelsea), took them to on the brink of champions league.
As Tom said, firstly he took over a pretty much bottom half team, this was NOT a Chelsea situation where Mourinho took over the 2nd best side in the league, nor Ranieri who had a huge base of quality players and bought well being able to attract the best players in the league straight off.
Its funny because City fans were over the moon when SWP signed, I said back then it was a joke signing, even worse was after even longer being useless QPR have signed him on, afaik, a big wage and he's been even worse
As per usual Biz is talking rubbish, Richards was and has been brilliant for 4 years, he spent a year at CB which I was actually trying to remember when it was exactly but I assume probably in his time with Hughes, he was IMMENSE that year, he was great at right back.
The differences were, he was younger, he had the odd bad game, and he's been pretty injury prone in his time.
Neither Richards nor Hart look massively different to two years ago, only YOUR perception of them has changed. I remember plenty of people giving Richards stick for bombing down the wing, now when he does it everyone loves it. Same player, playing the same way, same quality, different perception.
As for dire football and drawing a bunch of games in a row, its funny because his points per game were basically better than Mancini while having all those draws... if you don't retardedly give Mancini credit for, IIRC a sunderland thrashing before he'd even taking a coaching session and give that win to Hughes which is entirely fair, then Hughes had a fractionally better first half to the season than Mancini did, and Mancini spent like a crazy man in the January window.
Hughes bought a lot of rubbish, which I and a bunch of CIty fans(and anyone else intelligent) said at the time was, who was available or short notice and who you could get, not who you wanted to end up with. Years later now you're looking at those buys in a COMPLETELY different light, as simply being rubbish rather than some of the better options available at the time.
Mancini has bought some utter tripe for some massively inflated prices, Korolov is defensively cack, Nasri was 15million too much and on a huge wage offering little to nothing. Milner, not a bad player but the price and wage still make him just as bad a buy as Hughes bad buys. Mancini's handling of Tevez has likely cost you a huge transfer fee and for a manager who has repeatedly complained of lack of options, quite probably points as well.
For me almost anyone could do what Mancini is doing, a almost top four side, loads of money and a couple years moving forwards, then buying every best player around. hughes took a bottom half team, got who he could, sorted out the spine or your team(and Ranieri did for Chelsea), took them to on the brink of champions league.
Only LB available? What a load of rubbish. Why are you talking about Bridge? What about Santa Cruz? Ben Haim? Jo? Or are you dismissing them?
Of course City fans were, a living City legend who did ok in his comeback. We made a profit on the signing and we got to see him back playing football.
Pot kettle black, he hasn’t been brilliant for 4 years. He has said himself when he got a new contract when he burst onto the scene and it went to his head and he was no where near his performances now. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...ds-must-raise-his-game-or-miss-World-Cup.html
He got injured that season IIRC and also threw a tantrum when he got taken off, was most certainly not brilliant. Read any interview with Richards and he will tell you that. Mentioned it a few times on the City website also.
Yes they do, massively. Hart has vastly improved his all round game and Richards is back to what he was before.
So what if his points per game was basically the same during the 1st half of the season we were playing rubbish football and were 100% not going to get CL. Mancini is 100x the manager Hughes will ever be.
So buying Jo for 19m was good business? Paying 18M for RSC is good? 14m for Bridge is a bargain? 24m for Lescott is a steal?
This coming from the same man who criticized every one of City’s signings saying you should have signed Jagielka instead for 10m, should have signed XXXXX because he was cheaper and better.
Tripe? Lol
Kolarov for 18m wasn’t a bargain but he can play multiple positions, beast of a freekick which has won points on its own and can defend, has a few bad games which is understandable considering he is not now 1st choice and the games he seems to play in are the big games eg Bayern and utd etc.
Save judgement on Nasri until he has time to settle I would suggest.
I suppose you also though Silva was a bad buy when he was all over the place in his first 6 months.
Mancini’s handling of Tevez has been perfect according to everyone else apart from you. Ferguson backed him for example amongst plenty of other past managers and players, City fans backed him well in fact pretty much everyone apart from you.
What points has he cost us? a few bad substitutions here and there.
It’s all well and good taking us to the brink of CL whilst spending hundreds of millions but he was never going to get us the results City want. Hence why we sacked him and he now manages QPR lol after even Villa dismissed him.