Pembo

[Bristol Rob]

Trying to find a reasonable 'stat' website to compare pre and post Pembo coaching.

Did we improve or not after he left?

[Creg]

Found myself with a (rare) spare half hour at work, and put this together:

Championship after Pembo (8th March onwards) versus Championship with Pembo (7th August 2015 up to, and including, 7th March 2017)

In summary: We've improved (drastically) in win percentage and average goals per game, but are facing more shots and less accurate at hitting the target than before he left.

(nb. 'Championship Average' is Pembo's average, NOT the rest of the divsion)

[wendyredredrobin]

What on earth was Pembo doing wrong then? I thought we improved for a bit when he first came. Maybe got stale or fell out with Lee.

[Rich]

Lee happened.

Pemberton was a good coach under Cotterill, was a good coach and temporary boss when he left, He laid the foundations for our survival last season reverting to 442 and organising the players, and then Lee took charge, not changing much until survival was achieved. Lee tried out the squad in the last games, rotating players (as he's entitled to), then continued that process this season. After what many people felt was a lucky period in respect of results in the early part of the season the shyte hit the fan. We couldn't win a game and it was someones fault. Even after recruiting six new players in January, we still couldn't win, so someone had to take the rap. It wasn't the person in charge of the coaching team, It wasn't the person recruiting the players, it wasn't the person selecting the players, it wasn't the person choosing the tactics, it wasn't the coach brought in by Lee, so who had to go? Obviously the constant changing of player selection, formation and anything else, was carried out by Pemberton.

If people can't see what happened, then they are blind.

[Dynamite Red]

47 minutes ago, wendyredredrobin said:

What on earth was Pembo doing wrong then? 

Not widely liked by the players and other coaches.

[Aaron-Bcfc]

1 hour ago, wendyredredrobin said:

What on earth was Pembo doing wrong then? I thought we improved for a bit when he first came. Maybe got stale or fell out with Lee.

He was with us from all the way back in 2013 under O'Driscoll

[Major Isewater]

48 minutes ago, Dynamite Red said:

Not widely liked by the players and other coaches.

What proof do you have to support this statement ?

You don't have to be liked to be effective.

[JamesBCFC]

54 minutes ago, Rich said:

Lee happened.

Pemberton was a good coach under Cotterill, was a good coach and temporary boss when he left, He laid the foundations for our survival last season reverting to 442 and organising the players, and then Lee took charge, not changing much until survival was achieved. Lee tried out the squad in the last games, rotating players (as he's entitled to), then continued that process this season. After what many people felt was a lucky period in respect of results in the early part of the season the shyte hit the fan. We couldn't win a game and it was someones fault. Even after recruiting six new players in January, we still couldn't win, so someone had to take the rap. It wasn't the person in charge of the coaching team, It wasn't the person recruiting the players, it wasn't the person selecting the players, it wasn't the person choosing the tactics, it wasn't the coach brought in by Lee, so who had to go? Obviously the constant changing of player selection, formation and anything else, was carried out by Pemberton.

If people can't see what happened, then they are blind.

If Pembo was so good, why was our record at this level under Cotts so bad?

You've blamed the manager with an overall top half record in the Championship as a reason for a defensive coach who we never had a good defensive record qt this level under, not doing his job properly. Even though 40% ish of that time was with Lee Johnson 200 odd miles away managing another club. Or was it Johnsons fault that Cotterill and Pemberton had us bottom of the league.

 

Pemberton failed in his duties as a defensive coach for 3 out of 4 seasons here (evidenced by defensive records during that time) under 3 seperate managers. 

As for did a good job managing us. He had a worse ppg record than Johnson (who apparently is the cause of Pemberton failing at his job, even 3 years prior to Johnson coming here) and won just 25% of his games.

That said, there was nowhere near enough games played under JPs stewardship to say if he would have done well in the job long term.

[Bristol Rob]

I wasn't looking for a witch hunt, just wondering if we had improved in the short term.

Next season will give a better idea I'm guessing as I would imagine pre-season are when ideas and philosophys are shared. 

[JamesBCFC]

4 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said:

I wasn't looking for a witch hunt, just wondering if we had improved in the short term.

Next season will give a better idea I'm guessing as I would imagine pre-season are when ideas and philosophys are shared. 

We have improved short term, whether its really been enough games to draw a proper conclusion is hard to say (how many now 8-10?) 

After the summer there will be other factors to consider. New signings, last summers one having a full year at this level and Januarys ones having had a pre-season here.

I liked JP and he was a part in the most successful season in my life and I thank him for that.

But I won't pretend he did well with us at this level when the results show otherwise.

[RT's Vaseline Tub]

1 hour ago, Major Isewater said:

What proof do you have to support this statement ?

You don't have to be liked to be effective.

Ayling loved him amongst others so that is a very misleading remark.

[Rich]

1 hour ago, JamesBCFC said:

If Pembo was so good, why was our record at this level under Cotts so bad?

You've blamed the manager with an overall top half record in the Championship as a reason for a defensive coach who we never had a good defensive record qt this level under, not doing his job properly. Even though 40% ish of that time was with Lee Johnson 200 odd miles away managing another club. Or was it Johnsons fault that Cotterill and Pemberton had us bottom of the league.

 

Pemberton failed in his duties as a defensive coach for 3 out of 4 seasons here (evidenced by defensive records during that time) under 3 seperate managers. 

As for did a good job managing us. He had a worse ppg record than Johnson (who apparently is the cause of Pemberton failing at his job, even 3 years prior to Johnson coming here) and won just 25% of his games.

That said, there was nowhere near enough games played under JPs stewardship to say if he would have done well in the job long term.

1. Pemberton was an assistant at this level, to a manager that was not backed by the owner when it came to providing the tools he wanted/needed to do his job. That manager stupidly stood his ground on principal which ultimately cost him his job. So you blame Pemberton for our defence during this period of obstinacy. You blame Pemberton for the period under O'Driscoll, and you blame Pemberton under Lee. Surprisingly, each of those managers came under fire for their results record, before it was decided by Lee to part company with Pemberton, so it stands to reason that he must have been to blame for all the defensive frailties, even during the promotion year.

2. Who is this manager with a top half record in the championship? It surely isn't Lee

3. Who first stated that Pemberton was a defensive coach? I honestly don't know, I only knew him as a coach and managers assistant. It first appeared to me that he was referred to as a "defensive coach" when things weren't going quite right for Lee. Of course it must be Pembertons fault when we're winning three nil at Derby and the head coach decides to take off an striker and sit back to hold out for the remainder of the game. This happened so many times, that it just had to be Pemberton telling Lee to make those decisions. Think about it first, before quoting defensive records during times of struggle, he doesn't select the team, the tactics or anything else, he assists the head coach.

Who's the attacking coach? Who's the midfield coach? Why hasn't the midfield coach been sacked for the midfield not providing defensive cover, or coming up with hardly any goals? Who's the strikers coach for not producing more twenty goals a season strikers? It's not as simple as just coaching players, they have to be able to play as well, unfortunately, a coach can only work with the tools he has. In Pembertons case, some of those tools have just not been up to the job , or used badly, that's not his fault.

I think you have to remember that Pemberton was working under the direction of whoever was in charge. He can't coach a defensive unit only, the team as a whole have to be coached defensively, this aint rugby.  If he coaches individual players to do certain things and they're not selected, or selected in a different role, how can he be responsible for that? Ultimately the buck stops at the top, If Pemberton was not up to the job, then he should have been got rid of by the top man sooner rather than later. If the top man can't see a bad coach at work, then he shouldn't be top man. All the evidence I've seen so far is one of, comply with my philosophy or get out. I don't think there was a problem with his coaching, I think it was a personality clash, where a straight talkin Pemberton had his say and Lee couldn't take it. Fair enough he got shot of him as he's the top honcho.

How you can blame a coach for not getting the defense right when you've just been promoted and been left with a squad of fifteen inexperienced players at this level, amazes me. We were a struggling team with inexperienced players and we're still a struggling team, even though we've increased that squad of players with various so called quality players "I know a good midfielder when I see one" said Lee, so I won't play him. It's the same the world over, pass the blame down the line to an assistant.

 

[ZiderEyed]

We have drastically improved in terms of win rate since he left, however:

Correlation does not equal causation.

[Mr Popodopolous]

13 hours ago, Rich said:

Lee happened.

Pemberton was a good coach under Cotterill, was a good coach and temporary boss when he left, He laid the foundations for our survival last season reverting to 442 and organising the players, and then Lee took charge, not changing much until survival was achieved. Lee tried out the squad in the last games, rotating players (as he's entitled to), then continued that process this season. After what many people felt was a lucky period in respect of results in the early part of the season the shyte hit the fan. We couldn't win a game and it was someones fault. Even after recruiting six new players in January, we still couldn't win, so someone had to take the rap. It wasn't the person in charge of the coaching team, It wasn't the person recruiting the players, it wasn't the person selecting the players, it wasn't the person choosing the tactics, it wasn't the coach brought in by Lee, so who had to go? Obviously the constant changing of player selection, formation and anything else, was carried out by Pemberton.

If people can't see what happened, then they are blind.

Pembo switched us to a 4-5-1 after Cotts left, not a 4-4-2. 4-5-1 or 4-3-3,  When Tomlin joined you could argue that was 4-4-2 but it was never a straight up 4-4-2 under him.

Results and performances have certainly improved but whether it will be a long term decision, let's see...jury still very much out.

In terms of other sites, whoscored.com is usually quite interesting and you can see the individual player ratings- say take all the games since he left and the same number of League games he was here as assistant before hand, 10 of each I think it is and compare.

[Wheatus is back]

18 hours ago, Bristol Rob said:

Trying to find a reasonable 'stat' website to compare pre and post Pembo coaching.

Did we improve or not after he left?

Mark Little definately improved , overall we did pick up after he left although i think he was a great character for us .

[JamesBCFC]

12 hours ago, Rich said:

1. Pemberton was an assistant at this level, to a manager that was not backed by the owner when it came to providing the tools he wanted/needed to do his job. That manager stupidly stood his ground on principal which ultimately cost him his job. So you blame Pemberton for our defence during this period of obstinacy. You blame Pemberton for the period under O'Driscoll, and you blame Pemberton under Lee. Surprisingly, each of those managers came under fire for their results record, before it was decided by Lee to part company with Pemberton, so it stands to reason that he must have been to blame for all the defensive frailties, even during the promotion year.

2. Who is this manager with a top half record in the championship? It surely isn't Lee

3. Who first stated that Pemberton was a defensive coach? I honestly don't know, I only knew him as a coach and managers assistant. It first appeared to me that he was referred to as a "defensive coach" when things weren't going quite right for Lee. Of course it must be Pembertons fault when we're winning three nil at Derby and the head coach decides to take off an striker and sit back to hold out for the remainder of the game. This happened so many times, that it just had to be Pemberton telling Lee to make those decisions. Think about it first, before quoting defensive records during times of struggle, he doesn't select the team, the tactics or anything else, he assists the head coach.

Who's the attacking coach? Who's the midfield coach? Why hasn't the midfield coach been sacked for the midfield not providing defensive cover, or coming up with hardly any goals? Who's the strikers coach for not producing more twenty goals a season strikers? It's not as simple as just coaching players, they have to be able to play as well, unfortunately, a coach can only work with the tools he has. In Pembertons case, some of those tools have just not been up to the job , or used badly, that's not his fault.

I think you have to remember that Pemberton was working under the direction of whoever was in charge. He can't coach a defensive unit only, the team as a whole have to be coached defensively, this aint rugby.  If he coaches individual players to do certain things and they're not selected, or selected in a different role, how can he be responsible for that? Ultimately the buck stops at the top, If Pemberton was not up to the job, then he should have been got rid of by the top man sooner rather than later. If the top man can't see a bad coach at work, then he shouldn't be top man. All the evidence I've seen so far is one of, comply with my philosophy or get out. I don't think there was a problem with his coaching, I think it was a personality clash, where a straight talkin Pemberton had his say and Lee couldn't take it. Fair enough he got shot of him as he's the top honcho.

How you can blame a coach for not getting the defense right when you've just been promoted and been left with a squad of fifteen inexperienced players at this level, amazes me. We were a struggling team with inexperienced players and we're still a struggling team, even though we've increased that squad of players with various so called quality players "I know a good midfielder when I see one" said Lee, so I won't play him. It's the same the world over, pass the blame down the line to an assistant.

 

Pemberton was our assistant coach, but also our defensive coach, so some of the responsibility must lie on his shoulders for the bad defensive records, as it does the managers for their tactical choices.

Johnson has the following record at this level. P62 W25 D12 L25. This is a top half record.

Seeing as you are blindly refusing that fact, there is no point wasting my time continuing a discussion with someone who will not accept the reality.

[City Ben]

I think that we might be reading too much in to all of this. There are infinite variables at play so of course it's too simplistic to say "Pembo bad. Results bad. Pembo gone. Results good [caveman chest thump]" and therefore assume that Pembo was a cr@p coach. He's clearly not a cr@p coach.

However what I can well imagine is that there was a difference in philosophies between LJ (and the rest of the coaching staff) and Pembo. I've no idea what that difference was! But I can definitely imagine a new guard/ old guard kind of thing. If that was the case, then regardless of quality of coaching the team as a whole wouldn't have worked well together. Once he'd gone, with everyone pulling in the same direction, results improved. 

As I say I'm speculating, but I can certainly imagine this being the case. 

Note this is different to Pembo being "straight talking and Lee not being able to take it." It's more just about a harmonious working environment with everyone wanting to achieve the same thing in broadly the same way. 

[Red Army 87]

10 minutes ago, City Ben said:

I think that we might be reading too much in to all of this. There are infinite variables at play so of course it's too simplistic to say "Pembo bad. Results bad. Pembo gone. Results good [caveman chest thump]" and therefore assume that Pembo was a cr@p coach. He's clearly not a cr@p coach.

However what I can well imagine is that there was a difference in philosophies between LJ (and the rest of the coaching staff) and Pembo. I've no idea what that difference was! But I can definitely imagine a new guard/ old guard kind of thing. If that was the case, then regardless of quality of coaching the team as a whole wouldn't have worked well together. Once he'd gone, with everyone pulling in the same direction, results improved. 

As I say I'm speculating, but I can certainly imagine this being the case. 

Note this is different to Pembo being "straight talking and Lee not being able to take it." It's more just about a harmonious working environment with everyone wanting to achieve the same thing in broadly the same way. 

I think that the above isn't too far from the truth, and people underestimate the impact that would have on the players attitude and confidence going into a match.

would also explain why the club thought a change would have a positive impact. 

[shelts]

Like Cotts he's gone and not forgotten . Some good , some bad. 

[Ashtonwurzel]

16 hours ago, Major Isewater said:

What proof do you have to support this statement ?

You don't have to be liked to be effective.

True in the short term but shouty and nasty soon wears off and fails. You will never go that extra mile for a boss you don't like or respect.

[downendcity]

13 hours ago, Rich said:

1. Pemberton was an assistant at this level, to a manager that was not backed by the owner when it came to providing the tools he wanted/needed to do his job. That manager stupidly stood his ground on principal which ultimately cost him his job. So you blame Pemberton for our defence during this period of obstinacy. You blame Pemberton for the period under O'Driscoll, and you blame Pemberton under Lee. Surprisingly, each of those managers came under fire for their results record, before it was decided by Lee to part company with Pemberton, so it stands to reason that he must have been to blame for all the defensive frailties, even during the promotion year.

2. Who is this manager with a top half record in the championship? It surely isn't Lee

3. Who first stated that Pemberton was a defensive coach? I honestly don't know, I only knew him as a coach and managers assistant. It first appeared to me that he was referred to as a "defensive coach" when things weren't going quite right for Lee. Of course it must be Pembertons fault when we're winning three nil at Derby and the head coach decides to take off an striker and sit back to hold out for the remainder of the game. This happened so many times, that it just had to be Pemberton telling Lee to make those decisions. Think about it first, before quoting defensive records during times of struggle, he doesn't select the team, the tactics or anything else, he assists the head coach.

Who's the attacking coach? Who's the midfield coach? Why hasn't the midfield coach been sacked for the midfield not providing defensive cover, or coming up with hardly any goals? Who's the strikers coach for not producing more twenty goals a season strikers? It's not as simple as just coaching players, they have to be able to play as well, unfortunately, a coach can only work with the tools he has. In Pembertons case, some of those tools have just not been up to the job , or used badly, that's not his fault.

I think you have to remember that Pemberton was working under the direction of whoever was in charge. He can't coach a defensive unit only, the team as a whole have to be coached defensively, this aint rugby.  If he coaches individual players to do certain things and they're not selected, or selected in a different role, how can he be responsible for that? Ultimately the buck stops at the top, If Pemberton was not up to the job, then he should have been got rid of by the top man sooner rather than later. If the top man can't see a bad coach at work, then he shouldn't be top man. All the evidence I've seen so far is one of, comply with my philosophy or get out. I don't think there was a problem with his coaching, I think it was a personality clash, where a straight talkin Pemberton had his say and Lee couldn't take it. Fair enough he got shot of him as he's the top honcho.

How you can blame a coach for not getting the defense right when you've just been promoted and been left with a squad of fifteen inexperienced players at this level, amazes me. We were a struggling team with inexperienced players and we're still a struggling team, even though we've increased that squad of players with various so called quality players "I know a good midfielder when I see one" said Lee, so I won't play him. It's the same the world over, pass the blame down the line to an assistant.

 

1. Not backed?

I stand to be corrected, but Im sure I remember us making bids of £7m + for Gayle and Gray. If that is not backing from the owner I don't know what is.

That those players chose not to come here is not SL's fault, and at a push it could be argued that perhaps SC was not able to sell the club as well as, for example, LJ did to Chelsea and Tammy last summer.

2. There's another post somewhere on OTIB showing that LJ's overall record with us is P62 W 25 D 12 L 25, which the poster says IS top half performance. 

There are debates on OTIB about Tomlin and also Taylor. We all know which of the  two is the most skilful and entertaining, but it is the other one that  has been involved with our upturn in form since coming into the team.

Out of coaching/management team who has been the object of derision, especially when things were at their worst - well it wasn't Pemberton? A large number of fans wanted LJ gone,  and I confess that over the turn of the year I could see no way we could avoid relegation without LJ going. As it turned out SL's faith in LJ, and bringing in Jamie Mac  to replace Pembo  saw the upturn we all wanted and against, I suspect, most expectations.

Whether it be the first 11 or the coaching staff they are teams  and it is the relationship of all of them together that makes the end result. While many fans still have a major issue with LJ, at the moment we have to accept that keeping LJ and getting rid of Pemberton had the desired result. LJ still has to prove himself and hopefully with Jamie Mac on board and appearing to work well with LJ, we will enjoy a more settled season come August.

 

[Monkeh]

14 hours ago, Rich said:

1. Pemberton was an assistant at this level, to a manager that was not backed by the owner when it came to providing the tools he wanted/needed to do his job. That manager stupidly stood his ground on principal which ultimately cost him his job. So you blame Pemberton for our defence during this period of obstinacy. You blame Pemberton for the period under O'Driscoll, and you blame Pemberton under Lee. Surprisingly, each of those managers came under fire for their results record, before it was decided by Lee to part company with Pemberton, so it stands to reason that he must have been to blame for all the defensive frailties, even during the promotion year.

2. Who is this manager with a top half record in the championship? It surely isn't Lee

3. Who first stated that Pemberton was a defensive coach? I honestly don't know, I only knew him as a coach and managers assistant. It first appeared to me that he was referred to as a "defensive coach" when things weren't going quite right for Lee. Of course it must be Pembertons fault when we're winning three nil at Derby and the head coach decides to take off an striker and sit back to hold out for the remainder of the game. This happened so many times, that it just had to be Pemberton telling Lee to make those decisions. Think about it first, before quoting defensive records during times of struggle, he doesn't select the team, the tactics or anything else, he assists the head coach.

Who's the attacking coach? Who's the midfield coach? Why hasn't the midfield coach been sacked for the midfield not providing defensive cover, or coming up with hardly any goals? Who's the strikers coach for not producing more twenty goals a season strikers? It's not as simple as just coaching players, they have to be able to play as well, unfortunately, a coach can only work with the tools he has. In Pembertons case, some of those tools have just not been up to the job , or used badly, that's not his fault.

I think you have to remember that Pemberton was working under the direction of whoever was in charge. He can't coach a defensive unit only, the team as a whole have to be coached defensively, this aint rugby.  If he coaches individual players to do certain things and they're not selected, or selected in a different role, how can he be responsible for that? Ultimately the buck stops at the top, If Pemberton was not up to the job, then he should have been got rid of by the top man sooner rather than later. If the top man can't see a bad coach at work, then he shouldn't be top man. All the evidence I've seen so far is one of, comply with my philosophy or get out. I don't think there was a problem with his coaching, I think it was a personality clash, where a straight talkin Pemberton had his say and Lee couldn't take it. Fair enough he got shot of him as he's the top honcho.

How you can blame a coach for not getting the defense right when you've just been promoted and been left with a squad of fifteen inexperienced players at this level, amazes me. We were a struggling team with inexperienced players and we're still a struggling team, even though we've increased that squad of players with various so called quality players "I know a good midfielder when I see one" said Lee, so I won't play him. It's the same the world over, pass the blame down the line to an assistant.

 

not backed by the owner?!?! you are talking rubbish, Lansdown has backed every single manager here, 

[PHILINFRANCE]

51 minutes ago, downendcity said:

1. Not backed?

I stand to be corrected, but Im sure I remember us making bids of £7m + for Gayle and Gray. If that is not backing from the owner I don't know what is.

That those players chose not to come here is not SL's fault, and at a push it could be argued that perhaps SC was not able to sell the club as well as, for example, LJ did to Chelsea and Tammy last summer.

2. There's another post somewhere on OTIB showing that LJ's overall record with us is P62 W 25 D 12 L 25, which the poster says IS top half performance. 

There are debates on OTIB about Tomlin and also Taylor. We all know which of the  two is the most skilful and entertaining, but it is the other one that  has been involved with our upturn in form since coming into the team.

Out of coaching/management team who has been the object of derision, especially when things were at their worst - well it wasn't Pemberton? A large number of fans wanted LJ gone,  and I confess that over the turn of the year I could see no way we could avoid relegation without LJ going. As it turned out SL's faith in LJ, and bringing in Jamie Mac  to replace Pembo  saw the upturn we all wanted and against, I suspect, most expectations.

Whether it be the first 11 or the coaching staff they are teams  and it is the relationship of all of them together that makes the end result. While many fans still have a major issue with LJ, at the moment we have to accept that keeping LJ and getting rid of Pemberton had the desired result. LJ still has to prove himself and hopefully with Jamie Mac on board and appearing to work well with LJ, we will enjoy a more settled season come August.

 

Indeed.

But when such ostensibly high bids are made, they must be capable of being backed up with appropriate wages/salaries or else the original bid, which may well have been accepted by the 'selling' club, will ultimately fail when the proposed transfer talks collapse due to 'the parties' failure to agree terms'.

In addition, it rarely helps conclude a contract when other parties try subsequently to change the previously agreed terms.

Was SC really backed unequivocally by the owner?

[Monkeh]

Just now, PHILINFRANCE said:

Indeed.

But when such ostensibly high bids are made, they must be capable of being backed up with appropriate wages/salaries or else the original bid, which may well have been accepted by the 'selling' club, will ultimately fail when the proposed transfer talks collapse due to 'the parties' failure to agree terms'.

In addition, it rarely helps conclude a contract when other parties try subsequently to change the previously agreed terms.

Was SC really backed unequivocally by the owner?

yes, the double winning season is proof of that

[Kid in the Riot]

29 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

not backed by the owner?!?! you are talking rubbish, Lansdown has backed every single manager here, 

Some more than others...

[Monkeh]

Just now, Kid in the Riot said:

Some more than others...

still backed,

[Kid in the Riot]

3 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

still backed,

Then eventually cracked, then sacked...

[reddoh]

14 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

still backed,

 

8 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Then eventually cracked, then sacked...

Brazilian then back, sack and crack.

[poland_exile]

2 hours ago, City Ben said:

I think that we might be reading too much in to all of this. There are infinite variables at play so of course it's too simplistic to say "Pembo bad. Results bad. Pembo gone. Results good [caveman chest thump]" and therefore assume that Pembo was a cr@p coach. He's clearly not a cr@p coach.

However what I can well imagine is that there was a difference in philosophies between LJ (and the rest of the coaching staff) and Pembo. I've no idea what that difference was! But I can definitely imagine a new guard/ old guard kind of thing. If that was the case, then regardless of quality of coaching the team as a whole wouldn't have worked well together. Once he'd gone, with everyone pulling in the same direction, results improved. 

As I say I'm speculating, but I can certainly imagine this being the case. 

Note this is different to Pembo being "straight talking and Lee not being able to take it." It's more just about a harmonious working environment with everyone wanting to achieve the same thing in broadly the same way. 

not only do i completely agree, the caveman chest thump has brightened my day  

[Rich]

9 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Pembo switched us to a 4-5-1 after Cotts left, not a 4-4-2. 4-5-1 or 4-3-3,  When Tomlin joined you could argue that was 4-4-2 but it was never a straight up 4-4-2 under him.

Results and performances have certainly improved but whether it will be a long term decision, let's see...jury still very much out.

In terms of other sites, whoscored.com is usually quite interesting and you can see the individual player ratings- say take all the games since he left and the same number of League games he was here as assistant before hand, 10 of each I think it is and compare.

Ok, Bit pedantic but, I was trying to say that he'd changed the formation from Cotterills preferred 3-5-2 which was not working in the championship, as it had in league 1. And in so doing, this made us more difficult to beat and the players and supporters seemed happy with that.