IAIN MACINTOSH: Sounds an awful lot like Chelsea
This is a club that has been to the bowels of the third division and returned to tell the tale. Just over 14 years ago, they were beaten at home by Wycombe as their push for promotion from the third division hit the skids. Who then would have thought they would ever sack a manager for coming second in the Premier League?
The response from Mancini’s detractors is that he won’t be sacked for coming second. He’s will be for a wholly unsatisfactory season and another failure in the Champions League because City believe themselves to be a world class club and Manuel Pellegrini is a world class manager. And none of these points can be argued.
It is also pointless to suggest City’s owners should show more loyalty to Mancini. Not only did he negotiate for this position in the shadows while his predecessor toiled in vain, but he was in talks with AS Monaco last year with a view to a tax-free future.
But if they sack Mancini, City will make two things clear. Firstly, that failure is not an option and secondly that the views of supporters mean little. And that’s a slippery slope.
It’s easy for fans of other clubs to take pot-shots at Mancini. After all, he has enjoyed seemingly limitless resources since arriving in 2009 and on Saturday evening his expensively assembled team were outplayed by Wigan Athletic. But what goes unnoticed from the sofa is the bond the City support built with their manager.
Mancini is the man who solidified the team, who repaired the mistakes of the Mark Hughes era and oversaw the transformation from chancers to contenders to champions. Vast amounts of money helped, of course, but real football isn’t like the video games.
Filling a dressing room with expensive footballers brings its own problems. Mancini has fought hard against greedy, selfish and complacent players, even more so this season when dormant arrogance was fuelled by fleeting success. The fans respected that.
Mancini is flawed, as most people are. Emotional and short-tempered, he had already alienated several members of his squad. And, even if the notion of a back three was hardly misguided, his efforts to bring tactical versatility to City were a failure. By the end, they didn’t even seem capable of performing in their favoured 4-2-3-1 shape.
But City had a chance this summer to make a statement about the way they would react to that failure. Would they, like their neighbours, accept that disappointing seasons were a fact of life and allow an established manager with authority to have another swing at it? Nope.
Instead, like Chelsea, they’re going to start all over again with a new face. That sends out a message. It allows journalists to freely speculate on the future of his replacement at the first sign of trouble. There can be no complaints. City have set the precedent. Only first place will do. Disappointment will not be tolerated. It’s that kind of fearful atmosphere that has seen Chelsea squander their financial advantage.
Whatever some of their supporters would have you believe, Roman Abramovich’s revolving door policy has not been a resounding success. They’ve lifted only one title since Jose Mourinho left and haven’t breached the 80-point mark in the last three seasons.
One extraordinary Champions League win does not vindicate the Russian’s practices. Obviously, City have a right to replace a member of staff with someone they think is better, but again, football isn’t always that simple.
Pellegrini is a fine manager and he excelled with Malaga this year, as he did with Villarreal earlier in his career (though not so much with Real Madrid, but that’s another story), but what if he doesn’t settle?
Tottenham had high hopes for Juande Ramos, Chelsea for Luiz Felipe Scolari. Sometimes a trophy-winning pedigree is no guarantee of success.
Make no mistake, there are few City fans who would consider this a successful campaign, but there are many who still would gladly sign up for another tilt at the title with Mancini in August.
You would think that this week, of all weeks, we might have learned something about the benefits of stability.




