Articles tagged ‘Garry Cook’

Media watch: Guardian’s Daniel Taylor targets Garry Cook again

3rd February 2010

Following City’s failure to sign Fernando Gago, Madrid’s Jorge Valdano and the player’s agent have sought to point the finger of blame in City’s direction. At no point do they mention Garry Cook directly, yet it’s interesting to note how Daniel Taylor has ran another piece targetting the City chief executive.

Readers of The Guardian may well remember the “Robinho to quit City for Chelsea” articles penned by Taylor in the months following the Brazilian’s signing. Regardless of a lack of named sources these tedious articles continued to appear unremittingly through early 2009.

With Robinho having gone, the new target appears to be Garry Cook. Last week saw Taylor publish a piece saying Cook’s future was in doubt, while The Independent had an article stating how he had the backing of Sheikh Mansour and Khaldoon al Mubarak.

Cook has his critics, but he remains central to driving City forward, regardless of the odd slip of the tongue (and any journalist who takes notice of a bravura comment made at a supporters club meeting has clearly never attended such events). Ditching Cook at this time would be playing into the hands of those who want to see City fail in our ambitions.

With regard to the comments from Madrid, it makes sense for them to put some blame on City as they seek to build
bridges with an upset player. City were looking to sign Gago, who was unhappy at his lack of first team action,
earlier in January but were put off by Madrid’s astronomical valuation. It’s no secret that they’re looking to recoup some money following last summer’s transfer splash and their eyes appear to have lit up when City enquired about the Argentine.

If they hadn’t have been so greedy in the first place, the deal would have gone through, but Valdano naturally fails to mention this. It was only after failing to obtain Mariga’s work permit that City went back to Gago prepared to pay serious money, but time ran out with the 5pm deadline, even for a loan deal (which wouldn’t have satisfied Madrid’s desire for cash).

Gago’s agent doesn’t seem happy about missing out on a payday, having turned from blaming Madrid’s intransigence to City “using us”. Again, this blaming of City sounds like an attempt to appease his client.

Deadline day may not have been Football Administrator, Brian Marwood’s finest hour. Yet Taylor failed to give context, instead choosing to twist a few frustrated comments from Madrid into a piece seeking to criticise Cook. This perhaps tells us more about Daniel Taylor and who the next attempts to denigrate City are being aimed at.

Tags:
Posted in Features | 15 Comments »

Why Michel Platini and not a £92.6m loss is the cause for concern at City

7th January 2010

The release of the official accounts for the year to 31 May 2009 showed Sheikh Mansour has invested £395m in the club with £305m of loans now turned into shares. The £92.6m loss was the talk of the papers, but the real concern for the City project lies in UEFA’s upcoming financial rules.

Ploughing money into City in the early years was always part of the plan for Garry Cook’s “project”. The end result should be a leading football club on the global stage, and the cost should not be greater than that of buying an already established club.

Sheikh Mansour was rumoured to have looked at Arsenal and the shares bought by Alisher Usmanov this week values the Gunners at a whopping £900m. Buying Liverpool would be a little cheaper. A Real Madrid is said to be worth around £1 billion, but can’t be sold unless the club’s members vote for a change to the constition – which is highly unlikely.

The project which Garry Cook sold to Sheikh Mansour was to buy City, who were readily available, for a relatively cheap price, then invest in players and infrastructure in a similar way to Chelsea under the early years of Abramovich.

As a result, City are constantly compared to Chelsea, though the ultimate aim of Sheikh Mansour is likely to be closer to the model of Arsenal.

On the back of sustained on-field success Arsenal saw a 38,000 capacity Highbury become oversubscribed and have been able to move to the 60,000 capacity Emirates which they now fill. The huge match day revenues combine with Champions League money, Premier League money, and associated global commercial activities to make the club self-financing. This is also maintained by the emphasis on bringing through young players.

Abramovich is trying a similar policy with young players through the work of Frank Arnesen. It’s yet to bear fruit as the players haven’t been good enough, and he also has the problem of not being able to increase the capacity of Stamford Bridge.

Given time and the continued investment from Sheikh Mansour, City’s project could be a winner. The Independent claimed that Sheikh Mansour had earmarked up to £771m for our project, though goodness knows where they got that figure from.

City are in the process of buying a successful team in the short term, and are then looking to switch the emphasis to bringing through young players without need for the huge transfer spending. The fabulous track record of our Academy was a key attraction at City and it’s significance could return once the current spending spree is over.

On-field success will see Champions League income, increased commercial revenues from a global brand and increased match-day attendances. A new or expanded stadium could come into play once we have a waiting list for season tickets. This has been the case at Old Trafford and Highbury. City can’t charge London prices for tickets, so an increase in crowds would be necessary for the club to be self-financing in the long term.

Michel Platini and his new proposals for “financial fair play” are now looking like the biggest threat to City. These proposals have yet to be finalised and made public, but the talk is of clubs only being allowed to spend a percentage of their income from football related turnover. The Guardian gives details here. The 2013-14 season has been earmarked as the date for the new rules to come into play, though their has previously been talk of an additional three years before any clubs would face punishment by being excluded from the Champions League.

In the accounts just published City had turnover of £87m and operating expenses of over £120m. Turnover is set to increase, but will need to do so at incredible rate if we’re to break even in time for 2013.

For City to get their turnover up to the likes of Arsenal and Chelsea, never mind United and Real Madrid in three years would be a big ask. Maybe with the additional three years it would be possible with continued success. The pressure to get into the Champions League sooner rather than later is clearly on.

Quite possibly this was a factor in the dismissal of Mark Hughes. City may well have been on course for 6th place this season, but with a Champions League spot up for grabs and Platini’s proposals on the horizon, we need to go flat out for success now. Mancini says he can deliver it, and that’s what Sheikh Mansour wanted to hear.

As has been documented elsewhere, Platini’s ideas are full of flaws as they look to favour clubs with the highest turnovers. Rather than survival of the fittest, it looks more like a consolidation of the fattest.

As a consequence there could be a mad scramble get in the Champions League by 2013-14. The irony is that with no constraints in the meantime, a club like City would do well to spend what they can, while they can. Making big long-term signings prior to 2013 would be a priority for clubs without huge turnovers.

If we pip Liverpool to a Champions League spot this season, then a monster bid to get Torres makes even more sense.

Tags: , , , , ,
Posted in Features | 1 Comment »

Is Mark Hughes the man to make City a top four team and win trophies? (part one)

17th November 2009

With no Premier League games last weekend, it’s a good time to examine the qualities Mark Hughes brings to City and consider whether it looks like being enough to take City into the Champions League and win some silverware.

Firstly, we can consider the positive contributions the Welshman and his management team have made, then we can look at the areas of concern.

The good side of Mark Hughes

  • Professionalism off the pitch – One thing we repeatedly hear is how Hughes was shocked at the state of City’s training and medical facilities when he arrived from Blackburn. He pushed through an overhaul to give us top-level facilities which any galactico would be happy with. This fitted in nicely with the work of Khaldoon al Mubarak and Garry Cook in upgrading the infrastructure of the club.With his experiences of Bayern Munich, Barcelona and Old Trafford, Hughes knows what’s expected at a ‘big’ club and conducts himself accordingly. He’s similarly demanding of others and, as an example, sought to deal in-house with any waywardness from our Brazilian contingency last season.
  • Training sessions – Vincent Kompany and others described how the training is more intense and demanding under the Hughes regime than any they had previously known. Sven took a more relaxed, hands-off approach which players like Stephen Ireland have been critical of. The players certainly look fitter than they did under the latter days of the Swede.
  • Preparation – Hughes and his staff pride themselves on their organisation, and the players have spoken of the high levels of preparation in analysing opponents prior to matches. The benefit of having his trusted team around him has helped here.
  • Dealing with the media – From his time as a player, Hughes has clearly done his media training and rarely speaks out of turn. He may not be Mr Charisma but he is professional, and follows the modern path of always sticking up for his players regardless of any atrocities they may commit.As someone who was considered an up and coming British manager, it is noticeable that Hughes does curry some favour with certain elements of the press. In major interviews and features (often during pre-season and on training camps), Hughes is portrayed positively by the likes of Ian Herbert (Independent), Henry Winter (The Telegraph), Ian Ladyman and Martin Samuel (both Daily Mail).Even with the recent performances, the view of more considered journalists is that Hughes should be given time to develop ‘his team’. Whether an imported foreign coach would be shown similar goodwill after spending the money Hughes has, and being no closer to producing a solid defence or a coherent passing game, is very much debatable.
  • Transfers and squad building – It’s easy to question the value for money aspect of our transfers, but it’s difficult to see what else could be done to develop the side in a short space of time. Clubs who know we want their players quickly inflate fees. Hughes showed at Blackburn he could do well on a budget if required.Most top level players will only join big Champions League clubs, so they’ve been unobtainable for Hughes. Generally I think he’s bought the best quality available to him, even if it has meant paying over the odds.He’s been right to go for proven Premier League quality in an attempt to fast-track us into the Champions League. We now have a balanced squad with cover in most positions.There are question marks over some, such as Roque Santa Cruz, but no manager is ever perfect in the transfer market – even Arsene Wenger had his Francis Jeffers. If we discount Jo, the only truly bad one thus far has been Tal Ben Haim.Hughes is known for his thorough research of transfer targets, weighing up attitude and suitability to the Premier League, as well as ability. The squad looks tougher and more determined as a result, though a few less references to a ‘winning mentality’ would be welcome.Having established the core squad there is likely to be only a couple of signings in future windows as we seek to add quality when it becomes available. Hughes recently said how as soon as one window closes, he starts planning for the next one. This is one area where I would trust Hughes above his ‘top four’ rivals.
  • Relationship with the board – Whilst many were speculating that Hughes was a man living on borrowed time following the takeover by Sheikh Mansour, the opposite was true. Hughes’ appointment was under Garry Cook, and he has retained favour with the CEO. Even more importantly, the two of them went on to establish a positive relationship with Khaldoon al Mubarak . (al Mubarak interview here)The measured professionalism of Hughes appears to have found a kindred spirit in al Mubarak, and there has been a welcome trait of the owners to show patience with those they believe in. Sheikh Mansour clearly has an appetite for deal-making, and Hughes’ structured transfer strategy appears to have fitted in well with this.The big question now is what happens to that relationship if things don’t go according to plan on the pitch.

(‘Part Two: Concerns about Mark Hughes‘ and ‘Part Three: Conclusion‘)

  • Can you come up with additional qualities displayed by Hughes?

Tags: , ,
Posted in Features | No Comments »