Why City were right to sack 'limited' Hughes
metro
Why Manchester City were right to sack limited Mark Hughes when they did
Mark Hughes will this weekend come face to face with Manchester City for the first time since returning to football as manager of Stoke.
He was dismissed from his post at City in December 2009 after taking charge in what was a chaotic period that straddled the controversial Thaksin era and then the arrival of current owners ADUG.
Plenty has been written of Citys recent history, post-takeover, yet very little has focused on Hughes time at the club and the role he played in Citys subsequent fortunes.
His time in charge at City has in all likelihood also been viewed in light of his subsequent less-than-flattering comments about City, a sense of bitterness in Hughes hubristic and very public utterances indicative of the belief that he received a rough ride when it came to his dismissal.
It is easy, too, to forget that the fanbase was very much split at the time of the sacking, with many believing the decision to be a premature one given the upheaval at the club and the flurry of new signings that were integrating into the line up, some of whom have become key components at the club.
As much as the justification at the time of his sacking can appear harsh, in retrospect it is difficult to imagine Hughes would have delivered the success that Mancini did.
A Yaya Toure or a Sergio Aguero [would not] have been attracted by the prospect of working with Hughes
At Blackburn and Wales, Hughes was known for being tactically proficient, yet at City he struggled to put in place a system or ethos particularly from a defensive standpoint with a series of blown leads culminating in his departure.
Mancini too was undoubtedly also able admittedly aided by deep pockets to attract players of genuine world-class ability.
Hughes had an eye for bringing in and developing lesser-name players throughout his career, but it is hard to imagine a Yaya Toure or a Sergio Aguero arriving at the club having been attracted by the prospect of working with Hughes. Money, after all, can only bring so much.
Yet in many ways Hughes did help begin to shape what ultimately became the modern version of Manchester City.
The process of overhauling and moving away from the era of typical City began with him, shifting the lackadaisical culture under predecessor Sven-Goran Eriksson.
The fact remains though that as harsh as his sacking may have appeared at the time, in hindsight it was a decision based on the premise that for all Hughes had done and brought to City, his time had run its course and the club was ready for a new man and a new approach to come in and build on the work he had done.
Much, in many ways, as the case also became with Mancini himself.
Mark Hughes will this weekend come face to face with Manchester City for the first time since returning to football as manager of Stoke.
He was dismissed from his post at City in December 2009 after taking charge in what was a chaotic period that straddled the controversial Thaksin era and then the arrival of current owners ADUG.
Plenty has been written of Citys recent history, post-takeover, yet very little has focused on Hughes time at the club and the role he played in Citys subsequent fortunes.
His time in charge at City has in all likelihood also been viewed in light of his subsequent less-than-flattering comments about City, a sense of bitterness in Hughes hubristic and very public utterances indicative of the belief that he received a rough ride when it came to his dismissal.
It is easy, too, to forget that the fanbase was very much split at the time of the sacking, with many believing the decision to be a premature one given the upheaval at the club and the flurry of new signings that were integrating into the line up, some of whom have become key components at the club.
As much as the justification at the time of his sacking can appear harsh, in retrospect it is difficult to imagine Hughes would have delivered the success that Mancini did.
A Yaya Toure or a Sergio Aguero [would not] have been attracted by the prospect of working with Hughes
At Blackburn and Wales, Hughes was known for being tactically proficient, yet at City he struggled to put in place a system or ethos particularly from a defensive standpoint with a series of blown leads culminating in his departure.
Mancini too was undoubtedly also able admittedly aided by deep pockets to attract players of genuine world-class ability.
Hughes had an eye for bringing in and developing lesser-name players throughout his career, but it is hard to imagine a Yaya Toure or a Sergio Aguero arriving at the club having been attracted by the prospect of working with Hughes. Money, after all, can only bring so much.
Yet in many ways Hughes did help begin to shape what ultimately became the modern version of Manchester City.
The process of overhauling and moving away from the era of typical City began with him, shifting the lackadaisical culture under predecessor Sven-Goran Eriksson.
The fact remains though that as harsh as his sacking may have appeared at the time, in hindsight it was a decision based on the premise that for all Hughes had done and brought to City, his time had run its course and the club was ready for a new man and a new approach to come in and build on the work he had done.
Much, in many ways, as the case also became with Mancini himself.
