Do managerial 'mind games' actually count for anything?

[sonofagun]

The papers have been saying for years how Fergie is the 'master of mind games'. I take it Mancini has beaten him at his own game then by saying 'the title is over' weeks ago, making United complacent?

[NorthCountryBoy]

No it's all a pile of rubbish to intellectualise football and give the papers something to write about.

[TeamOfTalents]

Originally Posted by NorthCountryBoy

No it's all a pile of rubbish to intellectualise football and give the papers something to write about.

This. And it's tedious hearing the vacant commentators who have nothing more interesting to talk about bring it up.

[Guinness Guzzler]

Originally Posted by NorthCountryBoy

No it's all a pile of rubbish to intellectualise football and give the papers something to write about.

I think its a bit of both- players are quite daft and if you can get them pissed off and they end up being reckless then you've done your job as an opposing manager. I think, as well, that its hard to suggest mind games had no impact on Keegan losing the plot with Newcastle and that definitely contributed to them throwing away the title. I think mind games can have a bearing on a title race etc, but only a certain type of player and a certain type of manager will be affected by them. Even if a manager is open to being wound up/ changing their style or approach because of a mind game, I think its often very hit and miss as to whether any one "mind game" has any effect. Most of the time managers are sensible enough to utterly disregard comments in the media- in this case I think united are just hitting a bad patch, I dont think Mancini's "its over" patter has had any influence on it

[Travis]

I am a a winner, I am a strong, successful manager not a one season fluke