Well it did not come as a surprise to hear that Manchester City sacked Mark Hughes 2 hours after their narrow victory against Sunderland.
The statistics speak for themselves. With only two wins in their last eleven games in the league, Mark Hughes was not living up to the ambitious expectations of the fans and more importantly, the board. The board members must have been in a state of uncertainty for a lengthy period of time because looking at the results, Mark Hughes wasn’t losing. He wasn’t winning either.
8 draws in 17 matches isn’t good enough for a club that spent over £100 million on players during the summer transfer window, especially drawing seven games in a row. The results they have achieved so far this campaign does not match the caliber of attacking players they posses. Mark Hughes, arguably, had the richest attacking options at his disposal in the league. No other team possessed such talent in forward positions as Manchester City with the likes of Robinho, Bellamy, Adebayor, Santa Cruz, Tevez, Wright Phillips.
Currently they sit 6th in the table having played 17 games, one game less than most of their rivals. So in perspective, things really aren’t that bad for the club but again it goes back to the amount of money spent and the ambitions of the club.
Dec 21, 2009 @ 19:21:40
To be honest, Manchester City should have given Mark Hughes some more time to implement his ideas properly. His sacking only goes to show how the owners function, i.e., running the club like a cold and chilly business, rather than something that connects with the fans and the sport in general.
The Sky Blues may have drawn a fair amount of games, but as we speak, they’ve lost only two games in the Premiership – which is lesser than what any other club has lost. So in all fairness, ‘Sparky’ should have been given some more time…
Dec 22, 2009 @ 16:06:40