Tuesday, 14 May 2013

Failed targets OR personality?

So the Mancini bashers have already started to come out. Not even a mere 24 hours have past, which, we’re told, is now the new “1 week [is a long time] in football”.

Already there’s talk of the…”real reason” he’s been sacked. Although, strangely, there are no names to these so-called quotes. Perhaps it’s the real Invisible Man…

So let’s have it right…


…Roberto was sacked because he failed to hit his pre-set targets; who was it really, as I’ve said before, who was to blame?

Mancini, like all good Managers, told the Club’s “people” who he wanted to sign last summer and, to put it bluntly, they failed to get them! We all know Mancini wanted Hazard. We all know he wanted De Rossi. Failing De Rossi we know he wanted Javi Martinez. Failing all of THOSE, do you really think that he wanted just…whoever…to fill a pair of boots?

Do we REALLY believe that Roberto wanted Javi Garcia as de Jong’s replacement?

Do we REALLY believe that he wanted last-minute-buy Scott Sinclair?

As much as we might feel sorry for the ex-Chelsea & Swansea City lad – and we didn’t see what he could do in fairness - we were trying to build on our previous year’s success. And if, as I suspect, Mancini was handed Scott like a pair of socks and a tea towel all wrapped up in shiny Christmas paper, then the answer as to why Roberto didn’t play him is there for you on a plate.

If, as I say, Roberto was sacked because he didn’t hit his targets then either the ‘negotiating team’ and/or ‘the purse string team’ should take the bullet and not the Italian – simple as that.

However, if…

...Roberto was sacked because he wasn’t getting on with a whole lot of City players, back-room staff and other personnel at City then why isn’t Khaldoon and the City Board brave enough to issue something like,

“Relations between the Manager and the players had broken down to the point where it became unworkable”.

I can’t recall specifics but I’m sure I’ve heard that said by other clubs before without any huge fallout…

It happens in life. It happens in a lot of places of work. And IF this is the case then I can more understand the decision to remove him. Anyone with decent insight could see that he had one public face and could be a bit of a cold-hearted sod with his players behind the scenes. We saw glimpses of it when his Italian passion over-spilt; when Hart, Kompany, Richards and others got it in the neck. That was neither professional nor nice of Roberto to do.

If THIS is the reason – and it was, perhaps, much worse than I’ve just alluded to – then fair enough; get rid before it damages our future prospects of success even further.

However, if this is the reason then we should see the back of Kiddo and Platt too. In a place of work if your boss comes out and slates a member (or members) of staff without real good cause then it is the DUTY of a (good) Team Leader - Brian and David in this case - to later take those staff to one side and be the arm around the shoulder etc.

Hard task-master Malcolm Allison and Uncle Joe Mercer anyone?
It’s called a Management TEAM.

However, also circling is the lack of building and use of the youth system at City. Again, I’ve got to agree with this in part. He flirted with using some younger players from time to time; he, I’m sure, was even instrumental in signing a few decent-looking younger lads from abroad.

But he did very little with them – not even in the early rounds of the cups. Neither did he loan some of them to a team in a league where they could learn, blossom and return to us ready (or almost) for the first team.

But which is it?

Have the club muddied the waters by leaking several underlying side issues? Or is it the usual Internet chat-forums and ‘nothing better to do’ rumour mongerers out there?

One thing we can all agree on is that although other personnel will leave soon I’m sure (Jim Cassell and Paul Power have already been fired too), it’s Roberto who is left with all the blame firmly thrust in his direction, rightly or wrongly.

No comments:

Post a Comment