Silvio Dante

I think what you have to remember is Nige was an anomaly in the amount he played academy players, and this was undoubtedly driven in part by circumstance. We gave the most minutes to academy players in the top two leagues so even maintaining that (noting that ability coming through isn’t always consistent) would be difficult. Thats not to say Manning wouldn’t give a Scott a chance but he may not play a Kadji or an Omar Taylor-Clarke. And in a lot of ways that’s natural as finances improve - you can take less of a “punt” on academy players as you have money to get in proven. Dont get me wrong - the point that he’s not brought through Academy to date is concerning, and this measure makes it less likely that more will make the breakthrough in the short term. The key for me is how this develops and if we’re sat here start of next season with pathway still seemingly blocked then I think there are questions to be asked over Tinnions statements or Mannings intent.

It depends if it’s short or long term. Short term, as I said, I absolutely see the logic in it but longer term it’s more difficult to So, as with not hanging LM for not playing Yeboah I’m also not going to criticise him for a move I can see the short term logic of such as this one

This is both sensible and disturbing at the same time. There is no doubt Manning has a “set” way that involves “processs”, “behaviours” etc etc and the players will need to have that “trained” into them. Smaller the group, more you can focus on training those behaviours and patterns in etc. However, what it also does is make it a closed shop. That pathway becomes less visible, and more importantly for the here and now it gives you less options for the team. Pring (for example) playing badly? No matter, he’s in the squad because the academy players don’t know the exact thing they’re supposed to do at the exact moment. It also potentially explains LMs reticence to bring through academy at prior clubs - if you’re working with that set group and overloading them with information it’s enough work. It makes sense in the here and now of an immediate appointment and need to train the approach into players. But I’d be disappointed if it was the long term approach, and it’d (again) be contrary to the noises made at appointment

What I’d say, in a run like you predict after the Hull game we’d be LLDDLD (starting from Saints). That kind of a run would require exceptional mental toughness from the players at the start of a new way of playing to have the belief they were on the right lines - because the new way of playing had yielded 3 points in 6 games. That in itself would make the Watford game hugely difficult as it becomes must win, and if the players begin to doubt, that becomes less likely. For my money mentally the players need a win (and of equal importance a 90 minute performance) before then.

I agree with this, but I think the point most are making that under Pearson (or continuation candidate), we probably needed a hammer and a new Phillips screwdriver. Under Manning, it’s more like needing that geezer in the Ryobi adverts garage full of tools, because the tools we’ve got aren’t the ones this particular carpenter requires. To mix the metaphor a bit, in the words of Geoffrey Howe, the batsmen have gone to the wicket and found their bats broken by the captain.

Yeah good point and not disputing it. The issue that brings is an interesting one - a lot of those younger coaches have a similar ethos - possession heavy, waiting for mistakes. The problem is that if everyone is playing the same way either the coach has to be “the best” or the players have to be “the best” for it to work. It’s also not a style that fosters excitement (in the short term at least). Tactically, the “batch” of coaches are interesting so I see why people like them. But I’m not sure what gives individual coaches the edge when they all seem to have gone to the same school.

I think it is a concern with Manning that he has a reputation of being someone who gives youth a chance but (and to answer @W-S-M Seagull’s question) hasn’t really brought players through from academies at prior clubs. That could be argued to be a lack of quality at Dons and Oxford, but per Tinnions public pronouncements, we have a production line going here. Either way, either Tinnions bigging up of the academy is unfounded (and ironically the youth success was down to Pearson) or Manning isn’t someone who will bring youth through. If the youth don’t come through then at least one of the perceived attributes isn’t in place. As for Yeboah - in my view very raw and not hugely at this level yet, so gradual build for experience the best tactic. Wouldn’t hang Manning for not playing him but I’m equally not convinced Mehmeti or Bell are any better.

By this logic we could sign Mbappe, he could then be unavailable for a period due to an unforeseen matter (let’s say a car accident) and you’d be bemoaning the recruitment team. I don’t agree with your view on Cornick and Roberts (you always need squad players/ones who you sign to develop) but to use McCrorie as an example to bemoan our recruitment is batshit. At the very worse case you have to discount him from analysis!

I posted a few days ago that I think the appointment of Manning was in a lot of ways a reaction to what’s happening at Ipswich, both in terms of it being the latest thing that brings success (see Luton) and that there would be a part of the Lansdowns who look at Mark Ashton in harness with a head coach and think “hey, we were right after all” As Fevs said in that thread, the trouble is that’s viewing the outcome and not the process. It seems McKenna is just exceptionally good and following the same approach may not give the same result.

Yes.

I said this two weeks ago on here and have long held the opinion. I haven’t seen anything to change it.

Probably true, QPR were horrifically managed. The ability for that squad was there under Beale and they were just shot confidence and tactic wise. It’s also true that Pearson probably did get as much out of the team as anyone was going to but in Liams own words he “doesn’t see it as a rebuild”. That has to mean tinkering with 1-2 in January to get a decent upswing as opposed to major surgery. I’m probably (definitely) more concerned than Harry as to what I see thus far. I’m seeing more shots but not major evidence of GKs being worked. Our goal today was great but very reminiscent of a Nige goal - break lines quickly, in behind at pace and square. I’d definitely acknowledge that the errors aren’t systemic but may be due to players not playing in a way they’re comfortable - and if they can’t get comfortable then it is a rebuild. As with anything in football, the truth is often a case of perspective. Over 5 games I haven’t seen a full game performance as yet, and have seen probably progressive deteriorated performance as games have gone on. My concern with Liam is the ability to change things - on a bizarre basis, we may have a stated progressive coach who is more rigid than most coaches as he is wedded to this way of playing. I’m just not convinced with these players it can work - and that is a rebuild which has no guarantee of success

It’s difficult to totally judge in view of very poor conditions, but it’s hard to argue it was a very good performance. It was fine in patches but very lethargic in others. Tanner getting caught wasn’t the only time we got done playing out (Max just before), and we remain a side who look more comfortable playing at pace as opposed to overly slow. Taking out the first minute of the second half, it’s again another poor half two after a relatively decent start in the first. The issues remain the issues five games in, and without the playing a Boro or a Soton. We need to play quicker to play to the teams strengths, and we desperately need a 90 minute performance.

One thing you have to say, he’s not going for the safe option. Assuming no injuries then dropping our best left back, playing Sykes out of position and benching TGH who is probably our most creative outlet of the two in midfield when you’re under pressure (and he is) is ballsy or foolhardy. John Lennon once said that he wasn’t sure he was a genius or a madman. This is giving off the same vibes.

We do, but there is sometimes cause for it. Sykes started on the left at Southampton and the rationale there I’d imagine is that it enabled us to have someone who’d work back and cover for Kals lack of pace. The “normal” left side of Bell or Mehmeti is pretty naive tactically and don’t work both ways so Sykes on the left made sense to avoid us being exposed (it’s in a lot of ways why Pring hasn’t been as effective this year - he’s managing that side solo). With Pring now back I agree Sykes should be right side but I don’t think the initial move was unjustified - it just shouldn’t have carried into the Norwich game.

I’m not sure the newly appointed manager of a championship club being interviewed on football focus is “really pushing it”. In fact, it’d be more of a surprise if the BBC didn’t do a small piece on it. Not sure there’s anything to criticise here.

Just to confirm what people have said, there are 29 divisions across age groups in the AYL. Average of 10-12 teams per division. The U12 is 9 a side then its 11 a side upwards. With 7 divisions of 9 a side and squad for each game (typically) 12 players then U12 alone it’s 840 kids each week! If you assume 14 players per squad after that then the higher age groups is over 3000 kids. HML is 5, 7 and 9 a side at various levels. 29 groups. The 5 and 7s are double fixtures so squads there are often c18-20 players, although less teams. Conservatively I’d guess around another 4000 kids per week. Its a lot of people and helps explain the empty seats vs Norwich - I had to move my fixture to the am and make a dash for that one.

I think if you go from January, suggesting 4/7 are failures feels a bit harsh. If we take the ones there is no argument over (Knight, TGH, Dickie) out of the equation then taking the other four: McCrorie - Way too soon to judge. Horrible unforeseen injury and we have no idea if good or not. At best you have to put him into the “not sure yet” bucket as he’s not played a game! Roberts - Free transfer and cover player. Very good games (Oxford) but also some poor. Chances limited and I think it’s “jury is out” until we see more Cornick - Don’t get me wrong, if we were signing him as our main striker I’d be saying it was a failure. But we didn’t, he isn’t, and it isn’t. He’s a low cost squad player who comes on the pitch at 70 minutes and occupies - well - a tired defence. For the job he’s asked to do I think he does it well and I’d be more inclined to put him in the success bucket Mehmeti - This is the one I do think is a failure. Hes had chances and cameos but always resembles a playground footballer - lots of skill but has no idea when to use it, what decision to make or how to aid the team. I get why some like him because he may get you off your feet - regrettably more often than not it’s to the exit as opposed to in excitement though. So I think it’s 4 successes (for varying reasons), 2 jury out and one failure. If that hit rate continues under Manning I’d suggest we’re doing well.

Yeah I’m out on this one. Youth team coached take precedent and there is a game that day. Imagine many in local football will be in the same boat - even with early k/o for kids game no chance to get there

Serious question - do you actually go to the ground. They were there from the time the Atyeo opened in 1993 until the redevelopment 20 years later….

No, we’re not doing that. What we’re doing, is quite logically and based on what we know of Liams character, is stating that it’s highly likely he would have done some due diligence. The genesis of this is that some posters have stated he would have no idea what he walked into here - and that’s patently not going to be correct. Doing due diligence means that he understands what’s been said and the expectations raised by the board and articulated to the fans - which is a position any manager would want to be in as a minimum. Ironically, the posters who suggest he wouldn’t have done due diligence are the ones who are actually criticising him, as it would make him an exception to practically every person who’s gone for another job ever!

Robbo - I’d just like to thank you for your logical posts above fully explaining, and sources given, as to why the away fans are in the Atyeo. It’s this level of due diligence that’s missing on the forum sometimes, and to know that Colin told you the fans were located in the Atyeo 25 years ago due to a police directive is useful info. Except for the sodding fact that they were in the east end at that time and until about 2013.

I agree with a lot of that; I think the bottom line though is slightly wrong. If he’s read the statements, gauged the fans view and got a holistic view (and we are told he has huge attention to detail) and then said to himself “You know what? I understand what happened and what’s been said and I think I can make this work with those factors understood as underpinning the expectations” - then that is in no way negligent and fair play for taking on the challenge. If he didn’t do any due diligence and took the job “sight unseen” then that is negligent (and out of character from what we know) Bottom Line. Read the response above