In every fall there must be a fall guy. As Manchester City's Premier League title hopes fall away, it is Mario Balotelli who has been selected for the role. In some ways this is a very fair award of blame; in other ways it is just a masking tactic covering up the real faults at the Etihad Stadium. To blame Balotelli for his senseless conduct is all well and good, but he is not responsible for City's dramatic loss of form. City have ten other players on the pitch, plenty of strength on the bench and a manager who has it in his power to leave Balotelli out. They had all these factors at their disposal in the latest slump against Arsenal, so it seems rather rich that the Italian maverick is being blamed for the defeat. Perhaps his late red card denied them any chance of fighting back for a draw, but a solitary point would not have been enough to realistically keep up their diminishing hopes of the title.
The reverse at the Emirates leaves City eight points behind neighbours United with just six games left to play. A victory would have cut the gap back to five points, the status quo before the day's play, meaning City would only have needed United to drop points in one other match, provided they beat their rivals at home in the derby at the end of the month. Now they need United to lose three of their remaining six games, the same number they have lost in the whole of the season to date. Did this last glimmer of hope fade because of Balotelli? Quite simply, no. The mad Mario may have tried his best to get sent off, a shocking early challenge on Alex Song somehow missed by referee Martin Atkinson, but he was on the pitch until a minute was left on the clock, his eventual dismissal for two yellows coming moments after Mikel Arteta's deserved winner. Reading and hearing all the post match comment, it would be easy to receive the impression that the striker was sent off early on, leaving his team a near-impossible task to play an in-form Arsenal with ten men. However, he did not leave them a man short when it really mattered. Now, I am not condoning Balotelli or his actions on the day as he blatantly should have been sent off early. What I am saying is that to blame him for the defeat is ludicrous. City lost because they were outplayed on the day by the better side. Their away form has been very poor recently and has been the main contributory factor to their demise. Can this form all be blamed on Balotelli too? If it can, then there is one man even more to blame for continually picking him: Roberto Mancini. If you blame Balotelli, you have to blame Mancini too.
As a non-City fan, I must admit to enjoying the presence of Balotelli at the Etihad, a loose cannon distraction who seems to hamper his team on and off the field just as often as he helps them with his undoubted ability and goals. Having his antics filling column inches takes the media pressure off the half of Manchester I sympathise far more strongly with, the United half. I am not party to the dressing room at City, just like nearly every other soul with something to say on the matter. I don't know what goes on behind closed doors, just how much Balotelli is affecting morale and concentration at the club. In short, I don't actually know how much blame should be placed on the Sicilian-born striker. What I do know is that if he really is the man to blame, as even his manager has begun to suggest in the fallout of Sunday's game, then surely something should have been done about the problem a long time ago. There are suggestions that Mancini allows Balotelli more licence to offend than he would other players because of some sort of compatriot nepotism. Maybe this is true, or maybe it is because he managed him previously at Inter Milan. Maybe he just hasn't previously seen him as a particularly big problem. Balotelli has come in for constant criticism in the press, and reportedly even from his own team mates, and yet the senior Italian keeps on selecting his junior countryman. If Balotelli really is the problem that it is continually suggested he is, then why does Mancini keep selecting him? Is Balotelli actually harmless? Or is Mancini just foolish?
Moving our concentration back to the Arsenal game, few would have been surprised when Atkinson brought out a second yellow for Balotelli after another daft challenge by the forward. Moments earlier, I had been wondering to myself why Mancini had not yet substituted him, as I viewed him as a ticking time bomb. Minutes before, Sergio Aguero was replaced by Carlos Tevez, following the replacement of Samir Nasri with Aleksandar Kolarov. Why did Mancini not replace Balotelli instead? Why leave a player on the pitch if he is such a potential liability? If Balotelli is to blame for getting himself sent off, which he is, then I also feel the manager needs to take his share of the blame for not using his brain and removing the chance of the situation occurring. Mancini seems to be escaping relatively lightly from his team's collapse, with pundits saying they hope he is given the chance to remain in the job, and even suggesting he has been a gentleman among all the problems with Balotelli and Tevez. To me, it is not a gentleman who continually places a young man who has clear issues in the firing line repeatedly. Mancini may not be able to control his players every minute of the day, may not be able to stop them crashing cars in to women's prisons and setting fireworks off in their bathrooms, but he can remove them from the pitch when they are walking proverbial tightropes instead of leaving them to falter and fall in to the media backlash that inevitably follows. So, how do you solve a problem like Mario? Over to you Roberto - time to earn your massive salary.
No comments:
Post a Comment