Mancini: City not good enough to win Champions League

Roberto Mancini plays down Man City's Champions League chances

Manchester City boss Roberto Mancini says his side are not good enough to win the Champions League this season.

City's 2-1 midweek loss at Napoli means they must beat Bayern Munich and hope Villarreal at least draw against the Italians for them to make the last 16.

"We should be realistic," said Mancini. "I do not think we have a team to win the Champions League this season.

"Real Madrid, Bayern Munich, Barcelona and Inter Milan all have more experience than us."

Mancini's comments slightly backtrack from his earlier suggestion that City were on a par with the best teams in Europe.

City went into Wednesday's match in Italy knowing a win would have secured their progress from Group A. Defeat though has handed the initiative to the Italians.

Mancini, though, remains hopeful that his side can progress.

"We hope we can stay in the Champions League," he said. "We hope we can beat Bayern Munich and Villarreal can get a draw with Napoli."

However, Mancini refused to discuss the topic of wantaway striker Carlos Tevez.

Tevez's advisor Kia Joorabchian is known to have met AC Milan officials in the hope of sorting out a permanent transfer for the Argentine, who is currently not training with City, but for no reason that has been explained.

City have said they are willing to negotiate a permanent transfer for Tevez to leave the club, but not a loan deal.

"I do not want to speak about Carlos Tevez," said Mancini. "I will answer no questions about him."

They will lose against Bayern anyway and Napoli will beat Villareal. Goodbye City

I Andy I wrote:They will lose against Bayern anyway and Napoli will beat Villareal. Goodbye City

They will then proceed to smash the Europa League

Zlatan wrote:

I Andy I wrote:They will lose against Bayern anyway and Napoli will beat Villareal. Goodbye City

They will then proceed to smash the Europa League

They will get knocked out by Chelsea.

I Andy I wrote:

Zlatan wrote:

They will then proceed to smash the Europa League

They will get knocked out by Tottenham Reserves.

Fixed

oh here comes another £500m spending spree in the summer

this retard should learn to manage a team before buying player after player to cover his idiocy

ViVaRooney wrote:oh here comes another £500m spending spree in the summer

this retard should learn to manage a team before buying player after player to cover his idiocy

They're currently bossing the PL, so this comment is fucking stupid. His team thrashed Man United 6-1 at their own place.

but being outclassed in CL.

Premier league the ridiculous amount of buys is whats kept his team top. nothing he has done, with that squad any retard would be winning games

yet he still has the nerve to complain about his squad

And Man United are setting the CL alight aren't they?

City had a really tough group.

ViVaRooney wrote:oh here comes another £500m spending spree in the summer

this retard should learn to manage a team before buying player after player to cover his idiocy

____

Saying that, Mancini doesn't have a very good Europe record.

we have been in the final 3 times in the last 4 years

"Real Madrid, Bayern Munich, Barcelona and Inter Milan all have more experience than us."

And Napoli? Blaming this on lack of experience is quite pathetic from Mancini. Almost every single player in his squad has played in the Champions League before. They weren't good enough in the Champions League this year because he made some shocking decisions.

Mentioning Inter

BladeGunner14 wrote:

"Real Madrid, Bayern Munich, Barcelona and Inter Milan all have more experience than us."

And Napoli? Blaming this on lack of experience is quite pathetic from Mancini. Almost every single player in his squad has played in the Champions League before. They weren't good enough in the Champions League this year because he made some shocking decisions.

+ 1

Mancini is the one that isn't good enough to win the Champions League.

It's quite honest from him, but it's true to an extent. If City were to come up against Barcelona and Real Madrid, they really would struggle to compete. They may eventually win the Champions League, however they have a very long way to go before they can see themselves as genuine contenders.

cheesy wrote:It's quite honest from him, but it's true to an extent. If City were to come up against Barcelona and Real Madrid, they really would struggle to compete. They may eventually win the Champions League, however they have a very long way to go before they can see themselves as genuine contenders.

No, they don't. They just need a competent manager in order to become genuine contenders. Chelsea reached the semi-finals in their first season with Abrahomovic as owner and Tottenham reached the quarter-finals in their first ever season in the Champions League. City's squad is more than good enough. Mancini, however, is not.

Good enough to go undefeated, not good enough to make the last 16 in CLs.

Their squad is definitely good enough.

We made the fucking final last season with a worse squad.

Clearly he's right because we're going out in the group stages.

BladeGunner14 wrote:

cheesy wrote:It's quite honest from him, but it's true to an extent. If City were to come up against Barcelona and Real Madrid, they really would struggle to compete. They may eventually win the Champions League, however they have a very long way to go before they can see themselves as genuine contenders.

No, they don't. They just need a competent manager in order to become genuine contenders. Chelsea reached the semi-finals in their first season with Abrahomovic as owner and Tottenham reached the quarter-finals in their first ever season in the Champions League. City's squad is more than good enough. Mancini, however, is not.

Mancini led Inter to their best season for about 30 years and is absolutely raping the EPL this year, he clearly is a good manager.

ViVaRooney wrote:but being outclassed in CL.

Premier league the ridiculous amount of buys is whats kept his team top. nothing he has done, with that squad any retard would be winning games

yet he still has the nerve to complain about his squad

You make it sound like being a football manager is the easiest job in the world if you have about £300m to spend.

And don't think you realise how unlucky City were with their UCL draw, they got the group of death.

Mancini is a fantastic manager

Kuled wrote:Mancini is a fantastic manager

Kuled wrote:Mancini is a fantastic manager

This.

Zzonked wrote:

BladeGunner14 wrote:

No, they don't. They just need a competent manager in order to become genuine contenders. Chelsea reached the semi-finals in their first season with Abrahomovic as owner and Tottenham reached the quarter-finals in their first ever season in the Champions League. City's squad is more than good enough. Mancini, however, is not.

Mancini led Inter to their best season for about 30 years and is absolutely raping the EPL this year, he clearly is a good manager.

He led Inter to a such a successful season because the league was weakened from the effects of Calciopoli.

Mancini is way too cautious and tactically naive when approaching crucial Champions League matches. He proved that at Inter.

ilJuventino wrote:

Zzonked wrote:


Mancini led Inter to their best season for about 30 years and is absolutely raping the EPL this year, he clearly is a good manager.

He led Inter to a such a successful season because the league was weakened from the effects of Calciopoli.

Mancini is way too cautious and tactically naive when approaching crucial Champions League matches. He proved that at Inter.

Exactly this. He's spent an absolute fortune to get where he's at with City too. Compare where City are now and where Mourinho's Chelsea were during 2004-06. His record is comparatively awful.

BladeGunner14 wrote:

ilJuventino wrote:

Zzonked wrote:


Mancini led Inter to their best season for about 30 years and is absolutely raping the EPL this year, he clearly is a good manager.

He led Inter to a such a successful season because the league was weakened from the effects of Calciopoli.

Mancini is way too cautious and tactically naive when approaching crucial Champions League matches. He proved that at Inter.

Exactly this. He's spent an absolute fortune to get where he's at with City too. Compare where City are now and where Mourinho's Chelsea were during 2004-06. His record is comparatively awful.

Why do you take context into account with the 'calciopoli' thing but not the Chelsea thing? Before Chelsea won the league with Mourinho they already came second the year before. They already had a solid base where we didn't. Last year we established ourselves where Chelsea were before Mourinho came, now this year would be as if it was Mou's first year. Now compare them.

Zzonked wrote:

BladeGunner14 wrote:

Exactly this. He's spent an absolute fortune to get where he's at with City too. Compare where City are now and where Mourinho's Chelsea were during 2004-06. His record is comparatively awful.

Why do you take context into account with the 'calciopoli' thing but not the Chelsea thing? Before Chelsea won the league with Mourinho they already came second the year before. They already had a solid base where we didn't. Last year we established ourselves where Chelsea were before Mourinho came, now this year would be as if it was Mou's first year. Now compare them.

Why wouldn't you take Calciopoli into account if you're speaking in regards to that particular season? One of your biggest rivals is relegated and is forced to sell you Ibrahimovic and Viera. Milan, Fiorentina, and Lazio were also all docked points that year. Mancini's managerial prowess didn't have as much to do with the success of that "record-breaking" season as you're giving him credit for. They were able to build a foundation for success from 2006/07 onwards.

ilJuventino wrote:

Zzonked wrote:

BladeGunner14 wrote:

Exactly this. He's spent an absolute fortune to get where he's at with City too. Compare where City are now and where Mourinho's Chelsea were during 2004-06. His record is comparatively awful.

Why do you take context into account with the 'calciopoli' thing but not the Chelsea thing? Before Chelsea won the league with Mourinho they already came second the year before. They already had a solid base where we didn't. Last year we established ourselves where Chelsea were before Mourinho came, now this year would be as if it was Mou's first year. Now compare them.

Why wouldn't you take Calciopoli into account? One of your biggest rivals is relegated and is forced to sell you Ibrahimovic and Viera. Milan, Fiorentina, and Lazio were all docked points that year. His managerial prowess had nothing to do with the success of that "record-breaking" season. They were able to build a foundation for success from 2006/07 onwards.

I'm not saying ignore that, I'm saying don't ignore the difference between where we started and where Chelsea started. Bladegunner was selective with the context he viewed, I'm saying be consistent and view both in the context.

My quote about Mancini at Inter was based off my anecdotal knowledge of Serie A. I didn't know that was happening then because I don't really follow the league. I accept that the weakening of the league makes it less of an achievement.

Zzonked wrote:

BladeGunner14 wrote:

Exactly this. He's spent an absolute fortune to get where he's at with City too. Compare where City are now and where Mourinho's Chelsea were during 2004-06. His record is comparatively awful.

Why do you take context into account with the 'calciopoli' thing but not the Chelsea thing? Before Chelsea won the league with Mourinho they already came second the year before. They already had a solid base where we didn't. Last year we established ourselves where Chelsea were before Mourinho came, now this year would be as if it was Mou's first year. Now compare them.

Manchester City should have become an established side in 2009/10 when they finished within touching distance of the final Champions League spot. Last season should be the one we compare to Mourinho's first season. Mancini fails significantly in comparison there despite Mourinho having a much more difficult job as he competed against a side that had finished the previous season unbeaten as he attempted to break what had previously been a duopoly of the Premier League while having to simultaneously partake in the Champions League (where they reached the semi-finals). Mancini, on the other hand, was mostly focused on the league where he finished third. I only see one winner here.