Welcome
to another day in sports today its all about the job of Manuel Pellegrini. It is
now new fashion that we all have to accept in soccer a poor season with your
club and you are fired as a manager. Manuel Pellegrini is believed to on the red
card side of the city owners either he gets till the end of the season is what
we are all looking forward to seeing. Sunday’s defeat at anfield means the
coach has to secure his job by winning a trophy, well lets not look into the
possibility of him doing that.
If Manuel Pellegrini get
sacked, Pep Guardiola would be the main target, ahead of Carlo Ancelotti and
Diego Simeone.
Of
course, should the Catalan actually become available, it becomes much less of a
debate. Guardiola is the closest thing to a guarantee of success in the
managerial game along with Jose Mourinho, and is really the kind of coach that
should warrant all clubs doing what Southampton did with Nigel Adkins. They
should instantly trade up.
If they
can get Guardiola, City should do it.
If they
can’t, though, it does get a little bit more complicated.
This is
the big dilemma for City, and to some extent clubs like Paris Saint-Germain
too. They have the cash and the ambition to aim for a true peak coach, but the
problem is that there aren’t that many around.
As it
is, they have to go to the rung below, which is where managers like Pellegrini
reside; and where there is nothing close to such guarantees.
It also
makes every single appointment from that rung feel like a stop-gap - and this
is especially relevant with Ancelotti - until they can get the type of grand
long-term figure they really want.
That
raises questions about how defining any failure should be for their managers,
and what City actually want right now.
This is
not to say that Pellegrini’s season has been acceptable. It might even be said
that it ended on 1 March, as they lost 2-1 away to Liverpool to make the title
look an even more distant prospect.
Their
all-round defence of the trophy has been so abject, almost as bad as the last
time in 2012-13 under Roberto Mancini.
That
was so deeply compounded by the nature of the Champions League first-leg defeat
to Barcelona, which felt like one of those nights when the truth about someone
at that kind of level was finally and fully revealed.
It was
not just that Barca so convincingly beat them, illustrating such a huge
difference in standard in the first half especially. It was that Pellegrini so
naively and clumsily played into the feet of the Catalans, with the kind of
baffling formation that only added to so many questions about his tactical
acumen.
It was
damning and, given what the competition has come to represent for City's
hierarchy, it might even be put forth as a reason to sack him on its own. But
should it be?
Even
with both of these failures there are caveats.
Pellegrini
is actually among a pretty ample group to fail to retain the title, and to fail
badly. It says much that only six managers have achieved that feat since the
second world war, indicating how difficult a challenge it is.
The
Barca result meanwhile seemed all the worst because City had been so desperate
to make a stride, to prove their credentials in Europe. It is possible that in
itself played into Pellegrini’s ludicrously open formation, and should not be
forgotten that represented a regression from the previous season, when City set
up much more cleverly against Barca until they were undone by a red card.
As
such, it’s also possible the Champions League defeat was exaggerated by
circumstance; that it doesn’t necessarily indicate Pellegrini is a lost cause
in such vaunted ties.
This
may just be a bad season, and even a master at retaining the title like Sir
Alex Ferguson suffered those. Look at 2004-05.
Ultimately,
has Pellegrini really become a worse manager than the man City appointed in
summer 2013?
It was
known then that his technical approach was good at facilitating entertaining
attacking football from talented forwards, and that he had a respectable record
in knock-outs, but that he lacked the truly competitive hard edge of a Mourinho
or Simeone.
This is
as true now as it was then, and he would still seem more suited to the club’s
famous “holistic” attitude than an abrasive coach like the brilliant Simeone.
City
might argue they need to freshen something up, but that is likely to happen
with the pending overhaul of the first team, especially given its high average
age.
Again,
this is not to say that City should not sack Pellegrini. It is that there is
cause for thought, that it should be hugely dependent on the type of
replacement they can get.
There
is a danger of the club endlessly repeating this scenario over and over, fating
themselves to the same familiar situation over and over again.