Mancini Speaks Out

Today, people who are still interested in this year's English Premier League can watch Manchester United - Manchester City.

This match is certainly not a big thing, however, because even if City ridiculed United today they would still be twelve points behind Ferguson's team. And the title would still be virtually decided.

So, this fixture will certainly be somewhat boring and unexciting, no matter what the outcome.

But what's interesting on this day is what City's Roberto Mancini said, prior to the game.

He said too many teams roll over for United.
Good! Somebody from an important position sees it, too, and is talking about it.

Teams lose too easily to Manchester United. Yeah! That's exactly what I've been saying.

Mancini, though, going into more details about his affirmation, said he thinks most teams are just afraid of Alex Ferguson's United.

I believe, however, that Ferguson and his people succeeded, not only in creating fear of his team, but basically a system whereby United gets the wins it needs no matter what the means. Most likely, intimidation and money are involved, outside of the strict legalities of the Man. U. footballing payroll.

And I'm quite sure Ferguson is a master at these kind of things. Because he's certainly not a master when it comes to actual coaching, and how could a so-so coach have stayed where Ferguson is for so long?

Really, one has to look at United's record in the other competitions, the ones United was not expected to win (or did not desperately need to win) this year, to see that there's something weird about their performance in the league.

They have 25 wins, 2 draws and 3 losses, from 30 matches, in the EPL. That's the kind of record that teams like Barcelona get. (But Barcelona has roughly the same record in all competitions in which they take part, not just the one.)
However, United's records in the Champions League and the FA Cup are: 4 wins 1 draw and 3 losses, and 3 wins 2 draws and 1 loss, respectively.

How come a team that wins only about half of their fair matches, against honest opponents, and no more, can pull off five times more wins than draws or losses in the PL?
I say the fix is in. Quite often.

If Manchester United was to play opponents they found out about just 2 weeks to 2 months prior, like they do in the elimination competitions, would they win trophies anymore?

So, I believe Mancini is not far from the truth, indeed, but his is still a naive view. Either that, or he knows he can't say more, so has to do with exposing the bare minimum.

Fire the Loser!

Roberto Mancini is still the manager, at Man. City?

Even after that sorry display, this afternoon?

Wow!

For the life of me, I can't understand why...
(I can only speculate that they're trying to go for an Alex-ferguson kind of management deal. That's stupid! Look at Arsenal and Wenger. That kind of attempt only works for a specific kind of team. Keeping the same manager forever is dumb, unless that manager has many, many political kind of relations going on. And he can look down on referees and officials, and such. You know, like Ferguson. Mancini is nowhere near that kind of status.)

So, getting back to regular managers:
In my opinion, whenever a big team messes up a derby in such a pathetic way, at home, going down early, and suffering the entire match, and ending up losing almost right at the final whistle, the manager has got to go! (Right then and there. No more second chances!)
There's no two ways about it.

If I had that power, I wouldn't even think twice: I would show that coach the door and rip his contract right after the final whistle.
Because if you're not going to perform, against your biggest rival, at home, in one of the biggest match of the year, and maybe of your career, too, you're just not good enough.

Mancini proved good enough last year, but this year...

Very much like Roberto Di Matteo, Roberto Mancini forgot that his team needs reinforcements over the summer, before a new season. Proper reinforcements, not second-rate newcomers like Hazard/Zabaleta, Oscar/Maicon or Moses/Nastasic.
You can't just get some little-known players and expect the best results.
Hasn't the case of Arsenal's downfall already showed that if one is a cheap bastard one will not win anything anymore, in English football?

Also, just like Di Matteo's Chelsea, Mancini's Man. City lost its first match of the season against the team they needed to beat the most. Exactly like Chelsea, if they cannot rise to the challenge in the most important encounter of the battle for the league supremacy, then something is rotten to the core.
The one(s) who cannot fix that rot has(/have) got to go first, and then somebody who can fix it should step in.

Now, the title chase is probably over. It's United's to lose, really.

Stupid English title challengers, with their Christmas-losers mentality! They did it again.

And, thus, another league loses its appeal. No more EPL for a while. (The difference between first and second teams in the standings is bigger than 5 points.)

By the way, from a neutral standpoint, you, no matter who you are, gotta admit: Any league in which second and third in the standings lose to first in the standings, at home, messing up their unbeaten records in the process, too, is shit.
That season in that league has all the makings to turn out to be garbage. Thinking ahead, it's probable that Man. U. will win the home games, too. And nobody wants to see a season in which a team wins the title by more than 10 points, except for the fans of that team, right?

And, finally, to bash Man. City even more, which is what they deserve right now, it needs to be admitted:
Seeing Manchester City falling down 0-2, to a couple of the shittiest goals that Man. U. ever scored, and seeing how their supposed best just wasn't enough in the most important match they played this fall, I realized that it was no accident that City was eliminated from European competitions, altogether, already.
They have no good forward, and their defence is leaking terribly.
And just how the hell have they come to rely now on a no-name like Zabaleta?
Last season, they had that incredible run of fourteen games, and still they needed luck and goal difference to take the title!... This year, I'd be surprised if they come within ten points of it!

City Still Doesn't Know

As a member of the Manchester City experts, how can you not know that you have to bring your best game to defeat Everton?

The season before the one City won, their title hopes were dashed, again at the Stadium of Light, by Everton. They beat Man. City, on that day (- 20 December 2010 -), 2-1, with 2 goals scored in the first 19 minutes, and effectively took Mancini's team out of real contention.
(Everton's previous and next result, flanking that famous win, were 0-0 at home against Wigan and 1-1 at home against West Ham. One can easily see, therefore, that Everton really gave its best to trouble Man. City. And it doesn't take a genius to see that it was all for the benefit of Man. U. But that's another story.)

If Mancini is a somewhat smart individual, he should have known that it would be just as tough to defeat Everton as it would probably be to defeat Man. U. (if the referee does not throw some blatant help to Man. U., like mark clattenburg did in the match Chelsea - Man. u., in which case beating United might be slightly harder).
Maybe he did know that, but the players certainly did not act as if they knew.

Even though they scored the equalizer relatively quickly, they were just not incisive enough to prevent an Everton team playing very good football from stopping the EPL champions from getting the win.

So, these were two huge dropped points by City.

And I'm sure Everton and Manchester United people were both celebrating. Maybe some of them even together.

But, getting back to yet another title contender not named Man. U. faltering in December, what else is new? Such title contenders are now notorious for shooting themselves in the foot, hard, come holiday time.
It's a great time to be a manchester United fan, isn't it? It's beginning to look a lot like Christmas...