Mancini accuses players after City suffer severe blow to title hopes

Manchester City manager Roberto Mancini shows his frustration during Saturday's defeat to Southampton at St Marys Stadium, Southampton. photograph: getty images

Manchester City manager Roberto Mancini shows his frustration during Saturday's defeat to Southampton at St Marys Stadium, Southampton. photograph: getty images

Mon, Feb 11, 2013, 00:00

Southampton 3 Manchester City 1:Failure on this scale implicates everyone at Manchester City. After that it is just a question of degree. Does most of the blame for this sorry nonperformance and the seeming disintegration of City’s Premier League title defence lie with the players, the manager or the owners? Or should they share it equally?

City are 10 points worse off than they were at this stage last season and looking incapable of overhauling Manchester United again. Indeed, if the dismal manner of their defeat at Southampton is an indication of things to come, even their qualification for the Champions League could be in danger.

“If they play like this, they should stay at home,” said Roberto Mancini of his team following the St Mary’s debacle. The manager has no doubt where the fault lies – unsurprisingly, he says it is not with him. “When you are a top player you should take responsibility always,” Mancini said. “It is not always the fault of the manager, the players should take the responsibility if they have big balls. If not, they can’t play in a top team.”

It must be acknowledged Mancini has a point. How could players not be held liable after Joe Hart gifted Steven Davis a goal by dropping a humdrum shot at his feet and Gareth Barry contributed to Jason Puncheon’s strike by tackling him with all the venom of a chocolate souffle before hurling a pie in his own team’s face with the most clownish own goal of the season? Those were merely the most flagrant symptoms of the mysterious malaise afflicting this team. Too many players have been below par this season. Yaya Toure was billed as the man to lift City against Southampton following his return from the Africa Cup of Nations but instead he served up a sluggish display. Ditto for David Silva, Sergio Aguero and Samir Nasri.

Carlos Tevez was absent against Southampton owing to a “personal problem” that Mancini declined to explain.

Counterattack

Edin Dzeko pulled a goal back at St Mary’s thanks to a fine counterattack but for most of this campaign City have lacked inspiration, mustering 19 goals fewer in the league than by this stage last season. More alarmingly, at Southampton they seemed to lack motivation.

Mancini accused most of his players of complacency and, again, that looked a fair criticism. But why were they complacent? Mancini has been grumbling all season about a lack of competition for places and on Saturday he again lamented “mistakes made in the summer, when we didn’t improve our team”. The manager had demanded high-grade recruits such as Robin van Persie and Eden Hazard but was forced to settle for prospects such as Scott Sinclair and Jack Rodwell.

Some players – Nasri and Toure saunter to mind – have looked far too comfortable in the knowledge that there is no adequate alternative. There is no worthy stand-in for the injured Vincent Kompany.

Mancini claims that he enjoys a good relationship with the chairman, Khaldoon al-Mubarak, but it does not appear to be good enough to get what he believes he needs. If there are differences of opinion, the likelihood is that they will either be resolved by next summer or result in divorce.

The outcome could depend on how City fare in the run-in. While Mancini is entitled to complain that the club’s recruitment has left him rather constrained, his employers would be entitled to argue that he still should be getting more out of the squad at his disposal. If a player’s mindset is wrong, the manager must bear at least some of the blame.

It was hard not to wonder after the performance at Southampton whether the reason the champions were out-fought by Mauricio Pochettino’s team was not solely down to complacency but also because one group of players believed fervently in their manager’s methods while the other was beset by doubts. There was a disjointedness about City that recalled, for instance, their dishevelled display at Ajax in the Champions League last October, after which Micah Richards said the team was not particularly well versed in the manager’s new formation.

At Southampton it again seemed there were square pegs in round holes - the decision to deploy Javier Garcia out of position at centre-back backfired badly and the manager’s substitutions did nothing to make City a more cogent proposition. There is also the question of whether some members of the squad have been turned off by Mancini’s man-management - his severity with some and perceived indulgence of Balotelli before the striker’s departure.

Mancini has lambasted his players but do his players care enough about his view to respond in the way he hopes? “We have a methodology and a philosophy and the players have shown a great willingness and capacity to accept them.” That was Pochettino speaking. Who would believe Mancini if he said the same?

Guardian Service

Sign In

Forgot Password?

Sign Up

The name that will appear beside your comments.

Have an account? Sign In

Forgot Password?

Please enter your email address so we can send you a link to reset your password.

Sign In or Sign Up

Thank you

You should receive instructions for resetting your password. When you have reset your password, you can Sign In.

Hello, .

Please choose a screen name. This name will appear beside any comments you post. Your screen name should follow the standards set out in our community standards.

Thank you for registering. Please check your email to verify your account.

We reserve the right to remove any content at any time from this Community, including without limitation if it violates the Community Standards. We ask that you report content that you in good faith believe violates the above rules by clicking the Flag link next to the offending comment or by filling out this form. New comments are only accepted for 3 days from the date of publication.