http://www1.skysports.com/football/...ck-at-charlatan-criticism-from-martin-oneill? Paolo Di Canio has defended his record as Sunderland manager and furiously denied accusations from Martin O'Neill that he was a "charlatan". The fiery Italian took over from O'Neill at the Stadium of Light in March, but he was sacked in September after the club picked up only one point from their first five games this season. New Republic of Ireland boss O'Neill branded Di Canio 'a charlatan' earlier this week, but the former Italy international insisted he saved a club that was "already sunk". Former Sunderland manager Paolo Di Canio defended his record at the Stadium of Light Speaking in an exclusive interview with Sky Sports News, Di Canio said: "I don't know if he knows the meaning of this word charlatan. Probably I can teach him, even if I am not English. "I respect the opinion of manager Martin O'Neill but the fact that he spoke after six months, not straight away, that proves what kind of level he is. He is not very big. "A charlatan is a manager who spends £40m to be a top 10 club and then sees the club sink into the relegation zone." Di Canio also stood by his criticism of the condition of the Sunderland players when he took over, describing their fitness levels as "pathetic". "I had players who told me they had cramps from driving the car," he said. "I had three players with injuries in the calf after 20 minutes of a game. Six different players with problems means they were not fit." "I respect the opinion of manager Martin O'Neill but the fact that he spoke after six months, not straight away, that proves what kind of level he is. He is not very big. A charlatan is a manager who spends £40m to be a top 10 club and then sees the club sink into the relegation zone." Paolo Di Canio The Italian also hit out at Phil Bardsley after the Sunderland defender claimed Di Canio tried to destroy his career. Di Canio accused Bardsley of "treason" after he posted a tweet mocking Sunderland following their home defeat to Fulham on the opening day of the season. "At the beginning of the season, he made tweets celebrating the defeat of the club that pay him," Di Canio added. "A person at the club came to me and said 'we want to fine him', and I agreed. "He was celebrating, that is the worst treason for the people next to you. It is clear that he tried to destroy his career on his own." Di Canio also denied claims from striker Steven Fletcher that he did not want the players to smile or laugh. He added: "Fletcher was never happy when I said, publicly, that after four years in England his record was two relegations, and twice 17th in the table. "Maybe the players wanted a big screen with a comedy movie. When you have a training session you are there to improve. Maybe there is a moment when you have fun, and they probably had too much fun." Di Canio has no regrets over his short tenure with Sunderland, and he remains keen to take another job in England with the "right club and the right people". Martin O'Neill talks to the media for the first time after being named the Republic of Ireland manager. "The sacking made me stronger," he said. "I am my own worst critic. Sometimes a situation like this gives you a graduation. I think my level was too high for this situation. "What doesn't kill me makes me stronger. I cannot wait to have another chance in the right place with the right people who let me work my way. Now I am a better manager than before, much better." Di Canio also insisted that he was keen to take another job in the Premier League or Championship despite hinting he has fielded offers from clubs in Europe. "Even if I have four requests around Europe, I don't go," he added. "I will wait until the time in England when there is no more space for me. Otherwise, I wait." Sunderland made 14 new signings during the summer, but Di Canio insisted director of football Roberto De Fanti and chief scout Valentino Angeloni were responsible for all transfer business and claimed he would have wanted more British players. "I think 80 per cent of the squad should be British footballers," he said. "I don't know why more didn't come, you would have to ask Roberto De Fanti and Valentino. "They were given power by the chairman. I gave them my opinion, I gave them names, but not one came and I don't know why. The players that did come, I accepted, but obviously they weren't my first choices." some parts of that I can agree with, but then he says the bits in bold (what a twat) and complains about the transfer business after he agreed to work with de fanti and was even recruited himself because of di fanti. Does himself no favours with parts of this.
Mad as a bag of badgers but O'Neill was little better in terms of where he was taking us. Glad that both of these chapters are now shut. I have soft spots for both of these ****ers though.
Blowing his own trumpet Think he could be a good top level manager if he chose to either get rid of a few of his daft laws or gradually work them in, not just full on
But he insisted, when the signings were made, that he had a big part to play in them. I remember reading about him saying "The title head coach was my own decision. I will still be involved 100% in who is signed by the club" So now he says he wasn't involved?? Seems like he's changing his story to make himself look better. The bold bits in the OP, agree 100% - what a twat
agree and disagree with some of his comments. At least he holds his hands up to his faults. The comments about fitness was spot on, I believe him over the transfers and Bardo and O'Neil, just disagree with the way he spoke to Fletcher.
Why would you not believe him over the transfers? He described the one thing that continually happens with DOF in this country, something that has happened to many English clubs let alone loads of European clubs. He publicly declared interest in Huddlestone and didn't get him. That proves his point for me. I think it's blatantly clear that all signings were as a result of Angeloni's scout portfolio that Di Fanti clearly made use of. Not complaining about our signings, I'm reasonable enough to give them all the time they need. But surely everyone can see the Summer transfer business was entirely down to Di Fanti and our head scout.
Did he? I'd like to see a source to that quote because I recall him explaining in great detail who the transfers would work where he explained that he will set the criteria and and Di Fanti would bring in players that fit it, which seems to have happened to an extent, the big problem was clearly too many players who didn't speak English, a Problem that even Guss has drawn attention to which verifies Paolo's concerns for me.
For me, PDC has all the right ideas, but completely the wrong way of implementing them. If he could realise that himself I think he could go on to be a top coach. However, I don't think that he will.
1. He accepted the job of head coach knowing there was a DoF - it was up to him to set the terms in how he worked with the DoF, or turn the job down 2. Its all very well saying "I wanted English players", but which ones were available at what price? 3 english players would have cost him as much as 15 non-English ones 3. Not speaking the language is an excuse which surely has a part to play but not a big one. You dont need to speak it fluently to know what "get up the pitch", "pass", "shoot" etc mean --> a vocabulary of about 50 words would probably do it. Giacc seems to be doing OK ? do you not think Roberge and Diakte look ok when they have played? Celustka doesnt (didnt?) speak english either, did he? Bale is managing allright at madrid, and he struggles to speak english never mind spanish
1. We don't know the answer to that, we can only speculate, Defo not for paolo to set the terms though, that responsibility lies with Short. 2. We don't know the answer to that, we can only speculate. We know Hudds was available and was sold for just 500k above his valuation. 3. All I know is Both Poyet and Paolo have moaned about the language barrier and Bally would only play Giacc, got to be something in it. Giacc is a class above everyone else in his position so of course he plays, the others, well it can be argued that the English speaking players can be just as effective as them so that would explain that.
when negotiating for a job salary etc, especially if you have been head hunted, you can always modify (tweak) the terms. he wont be able to say "sack the DoF but he would be able to negotiate on how much say he has on the transfer De Fanti want to bring in. however, if he didnt like the terms set by Short, why accept the job? I think its pretty well known that decent/proven English players are more expensive than foreign ones, and are generally snapped up by clubs like liverpool
The bit about the fitness of the players seems to be spot on to me. Right now we have NO injured players. I put this down to Di Canio's fitness regime. Remember the times when we had a multitude of injuries under both Bruce and O'Neill? Hull have them now under Bruce and O'Neill is manager of a national team so is out of the equation.
Paolo is saying the the players brought in wasn't to his specifications, so as far as he's concerned the terms have been breached for whatever reason. Weather it be a di fanti power trip, or more much likely, like you say, priced out of moves for british based players. I think you're viewing it black and white. When really it's all grey. Paulo didn't get the type of player he wants, Difanti tried to get him them but was restricted for what ever reason, most probably because of the budget which is completely out of Paolo's jurisdiction. You seem to be implying that paolo is in someway dishing out blame on the situation which he clearly isn't. Just explaining a situation how he see's it. I think you're being harsh on him over transfers. I just don't see where Paolo is in anyway out of order with his comments regarding transfers. I think it's reasonable and professional.
DiCanio doing what he always did, looking for people to blame. This is what he said: http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/sp..._Canio_determined_to_have_a_say_in_transfers/ http://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/2896...-with-role-as-sunderland-close-in-on-director
Who's he blaming in those links? they're pre transfer window mate. Really don't get your point. Perhaps if you provided a quote of him blaming Di Fanti? All those links say is that he has a say in transfers, we know this, and that his part in it was setting the criteria of what type of player he wants, we already know that too. Paolo has said the players didn't match his criteria, which was true, this is evident in a failure to bring in Huds who was british and available. He hasn't blamed anybody or given a reason as to why he didn't get them. "I think 80 per cent of the squad should be British footballers," he said. "I don't know why more didn't come, you would have to ask Roberto De Fanti and Valentino. "They were given power by the chairman. I gave them my opinion, I gave them names, but not one came and I don't know why. The players that did come, I accepted, but obviously they weren't my first choices." There's no issue with Paolo so why is there one with you? Any excuse to get on his case I suggest, and holding grudges is a bit sad. Such venom.
