Probably because it led to bugger all else to talk about, the goalless draw in the week’s headline fixture has provoked some ferocious attacks on Roberto Mancini. The
Mancini applauds another nil-nil
Manchester City manager has come under fire for perceived negativity in his side’s dour 0-0 draw with city rivals United, but I think a lot of the criticism is unjustified.
First of all, while there may have been granules of truth in Sir Alex Ferguson’s claims that United were the only side trying to win on the night, it certainly isn’t Mancini’s responsibility to help Manchester United score. City played four games against United last season and lost three of them to last minute goals; ask any City fan whether they are happier with the 0-0 draw than after any of those late suckerpunches, and the response will be unanimous. The draw is a point gained for Manchester City, for whom forming a solid defence to build from is a sensible strategy while their more mercurial forward players struggle to find harmony.
The Guardian’s usually excellent Barry Glendenning has been particularly scathing about Mancini’s approach, suggesting the Italian should be fired for mis-using £600msworth of talent, and describing City’s week-in week-out performances as “turgid crud”, but while watching City play these days is enough to make anyone cry tears of blood, the realist in me would point to City’s aim this season, and to their current league position.
If we have learned anything from the Sugardaddy era of Premier League football, its’ that no matter how much money you spend on a team, you can’t expect instant success. After Roman Abramovich’s arrival, big spending could only take Claudio Ranieri’s Chelsea from 4th to 2nd. It was only when Ranieri was replaced by José Mourinho, who fostered that indomitable winners’ mentality which remains at Stamford Bridge to this day, that Chelsea moved up that final place on the league table. Roberto Mancini’s task is all the tougher as he took over a side in sixth-place. The jump from Europa League to Champions League is huge, not least when you have to work with a squad full of ill-judged Mark Hughes signings. That isn’t to say that Roque Santa Cruz, Emmanuel Adebayor, Kolo Touré, Joleon Lescott and Shaun Wright-Phillips might not make positive contributions this season, but let’s not assume Mancini would have gone anywhere near them had he been in charge of the club at the time.
I see the supposed negativity as pragmatism. City might not be entertaining, but they are fourth in the league. Mark Hughes’s side scored and shipped goals in enthralling manner, but they were too naive and disorganised to threaten the status quo. A lot of the Italian’s focus in training is on team shape, and as his side become truly his own, the 0-0s will become 1-0s. It’s about having a strong foundation to build from. While they’re failing to fire further up the pitch, at least they aren’t losing. There’s not much here for the neutral, but it is sensible.
In winning three consecutive Serie A titles with Inter, Mancini’s success was built on the strength and discipline of his defence, and the brilliance of the likes of Zlatan Ibrahimovic up front. Entertaining? No. With eleven men on the pitch this season, City have played six hours of football against the traditional ‘Big Four’, and last season’s triumphant challengers Tottenham, and have yet to concede a single goal. Removing Mancini from his position when he is poised to bring success, however cautiously, would be destroy the fledgling team’s progress and force them to start again.
