Cowshed Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 21 minutes ago, Badger08 said: Can't believe some people want to slag off LJ, but not even listen to what hes got to say. I'll admit, my support had waived over the past month, but after hearing that I'm excited again and need to remember this is a project. It may not be this year, however, it could be next or the year after. This club is in a much stronger place than I can ever remember, so lets not lose focus on that. He was asked simply to describe exactly what his identity is. His reply was if I have the opportunity to build a fantasy team. It is not answer to the question and neither was what followed. His point about getting the ball and space and this not being seen with the naked eye is comical. Maybe he is alluding to players understanding patterns and their internalised responses but you have to seen the patterns first to spark conscious and unconscious competencies. Maybe it was just flannel, coaching Brent speak , I just chucked some around there. Identity cog .. Anybody? This could be Lee Johnsons idea of a Leader or in more coaching waffle a cultural architect. But for this to occur there has to be an identity put in place with its culture and behaviours by the Coach/Manager for the cultural architects/ leaders/identity cogs to follow. People are clearly listening to what he says. There is a consistency to the critique from fans due to Mr Johnson own inconsistency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lenred Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 7 minutes ago, supercidered said: To be honest the bar has been set pretty low! Nothing against him and I'm not an LJ out person but god I'm sick of listening to his interviews. So I don't anymore. I think this is the point. Within the first couple of minutes it’s ‘we’ve got our identity back’, ‘we’ve got our mojo back’, ‘so much good stuff on Saturday’ and the ‘Lee Johnson identity cog’. It’s just pointless sound bites and platitudes with nothing to back it up and it’s just a turn off to me. I appreciate others don’t see it that way and that’s fine but I just don't like it, I can’t get on with it anymore. I just wish he could talk with clarity and purpose but it seems he can’t. He sounds like Barry Homeowner from Athletico Mince! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 2 minutes ago, Cowshed said: He was asked simply to describe exactly what his identity is. His reply was if I have the opportunity to build a fantasy team. It is not answer to the question and neither was what followed. His point about getting the ball and space and this not being seen with the naked eye is comical. Maybe he is alluding to players understanding patterns and their internalised responses but you have to seen the patterns first to spark conscious and unconscious competencies. Maybe it was just flannel, coaching Brent speak , I just chucked some around there. Identity cog .. Anybody? This could be Lee Johnsons idea of a Leader or in more coaching waffle a cultural architect. But for this to occur there has to be an identity put in place with its culture and behaviours by the Coach/Manager for the cultural architects/ leaders/identity cogs to follow. People are clearly listening to what he says. There is a consistency to the critique from fans due to Mr Johnson own inconsistency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowshed Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 2 minutes ago, Davefevs said: Can those glasses see space the naked eye Lee says can't be seen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowshed Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 3 minutes ago, Badger08 said: "His reply was if I have the opportunity to build a fantasy team" Its wasn't though, was it. You're a johnson outer, so I'm not surprised you've just taken snippets and turned them in to a problemm.l I made a small error. Mr Johnsons reply was "If I had the opportunity to build like a fantasy football team .. " My personal view does not affect the question posed and Mr Johnson clearly not answering the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowshed Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 4 minutes ago, Badger08 said: Yeah, carry on the answer...... His answer wasn't a sentence was it.... Why don't you carry on the answer as you clearly feel I will not interpret it faithfully? An identity is not something that is not attainable, and that is what Mr Johnson is describing for further sentences .. The unattainable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickJ Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 11 minutes ago, lenred said: I think this is the point. Within the first couple of minutes it’s ‘we’ve got our identity back’, ‘we’ve got our mojo back’, ‘so much good stuff on Saturday’ and the ‘Lee Johnson identity cog’. It’s just pointless sound bites and platitudes with nothing to back it up and it’s just a turn off to me. I appreciate others don’t see it that way and that’s fine but I just don't like it, I can’t get on with it anymore. I just wish he could talk with clarity and purpose but it seems he can’t. He sounds like Barry Homeowner from Athletico Mince! Agreed, and I wonder if those who say it's a good interview actually think about what is being said, or just listen to a lot of impressive sounding phrases and assume it must be good. To be fair, as @Davefevs has alluded to, there is some clarity and plain speaking, but it comes towards the end of the interview, in fact from around two thirds of the way in I thought it was almost normal and indeed informative, but it was a real struggle for me to get that far, because to do so you have to put up with for example, Brownhill was a "Lee Johnson identity cog out of the wheel". Really? Or is that just an opportunistic subtle moan to justify the recent poor run. The describing of Fulham as "galacticos" is particularly amusing. And the elusive identity has changed from "Busy bees" to "having 2 parts: 1. The mathematics of creating overloads through systems and patterns of plays What does this mean? 2. The 3 attributes of do you want the ball, can you handle the ball, can you win it back Does LJ really believe this is exclusive to Bristol City??!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 30 minutes ago, lenred said: I just wish he could talk with clarity and purpose but it seems he can’t. Good grief Len - listen again with your ear muffs off.You’re not in the Dolman how................. That interview was as clear as it gets. It was informative, very open and honest and treating us fans with respect but then you’re a LJ out merchant so it’s no surprise that you choose not to understand what he’s saying............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 2 minutes ago, NickJ said: Agreed, and I wonder if those who say it's a good interview actually think about what is being said, or just listen to a lot of impressive sounding phrases and assume it must be good. To be fair, as @Davefevs has alluded to, there is some clarity and plain speaking, but it comes towards the end of the interview, in fact from around two thirds of the way in I thought it was almost normal and indeed informative, but it was a real struggle for me to get that far, because to do so you have to put up with for example, Brownhill was a "Lee Johnson identity cog out of the wheel". Really? Or is that just an opportunistic subtle moan to justify the recent poor run. The describing of Fulham as "galacticos" is particularly amusing. And the elusive identity has changed from "Busy bees" to "having 2 parts: 1. The mathematics of creating overloads through systems and patterns of plays What does this mean? 2. The 3 attributes of do you want the ball, can you handle the ball, can you win it back Does LJ really believe this is exclusive to Bristol City??!! You’re another, Nick who is another LJ out merchant who chooses not to comprehend what LJ says in his interview. Like Len it suits your agenda perfectly and makes it difficult to give either of you any credibility because of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickJ Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 2 minutes ago, Robbored said: You’re another, Nick who is another LJ out merchant who chooses not to comprehend what LJ says in his interview. Like Len it suits your agenda perfectly and makes it difficult to give either of you any credibility because of it. Educate me then. What does it mean: The mathematics of creating overloads through systems and patterns of plays Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 4 minutes ago, NickJ said: Educate me then. What does it mean: The mathematics of creating overloads through systems and patterns of plays Spudski or Cowshed could answer than better than I Nick but if you think about it’s not that difficult to understand but you choose not to.............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lenred Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 12 minutes ago, Robbored said: Good grief Len - listen again with your ear muffs off.You’re not in the Dolman how................. That interview was as clear as it gets. It was informative, very open and honest and treating us fans with respect but then you’re a LJ out merchant so it’s no surprise that you choose not to understand what he’s saying............. I just don't have the words to express how much I like this post! 2 minutes ago, Robbored said: Spudski or Cowshed could answer than better than I Nick but if you think about it’s not that difficult to understand but you choose not to.............. Do it then? Have a go. Enlighten us mere merchants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 4 minutes ago, NickJ said: Agreed, and I wonder if those who say it's a good interview actually think about what is being said, or just listen to a lot of impressive sounding phrases and assume it must be good. To be fair, as @Davefevs has alluded to, there is some clarity and plain speaking, but it comes towards the end of the interview, in fact from around two thirds of the way in I thought it was almost normal and indeed informative, but it was a real struggle for me to get that far, because to do so you have to put up with for example, Brownhill was a "Lee Johnson identity cog out of the wheel". Really? Or is that just an opportunistic subtle moan to justify the recent poor run. The describing of Fulham as "galacticos" is particularly amusing. And the elusive identity has changed from "Busy bees" to "having 2 parts: 1. The mathematics of creating overloads through systems and patterns of plays What does this mean? 2. The 3 attributes of do you want the ball, can you handle the ball, can you win it back Does LJ really believe this is exclusive to Bristol City??!! 4 minutes ago, Robbored said: Good grief Len - listen again with your ear muffs off.You’re not in the Dolman how................. That interview was as clear as it gets. It was informative, very open and honest and treating us fans with respect but then you’re a LJ out merchant so it’s no surprise that you choose not to understand what he’s saying............. I think much comes down to our own licence of interpretation / translation. If you want to take some of it as just the pure words spoken, it’s gonna seem a bit bolloxy (is that a word). But if you try to translate it, you can get a lot out of it. How many of us a few years ago were using lingo like passing lanes, low block, high press, etc? Now it’s commonly used, but that’s not to say it’s fully understood not everyone understands it either. I remember using the the “cheat” to describe Marc Duffy of Sheff Utd, and someone replied that he’s a very honest player. What I meant (and thought was well understood, but obviously wasn’t!) was that he cheats defensively, in that he doesn’t track back when they lose possession, and therefore finds himself in space when they recovered the ball. Its why in both work and OTIB, I try use pictures (and stats) to convey my thoughts and ideas. Lee’s coaches voice video with his magnet board is a much better example of how to explain things. I bet if you got him in his office or on the training ground (not the pub Robbo) he’d convey playing identity much better than he can in pure spoken words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 3 minutes ago, Davefevs said: I think much comes down to our own licence of interpretation / translation. If you want to take some of it as just the pure words spoken, it’s gonna seem a bit bolloxy (is that a word). But if you try to translate it, you can get a lot out of it. Yes you can but the LJ out merchants aren’t interested in translating anything LJ says. I bet if you got him in his office or on the training ground (not the pub Robbo) he’d convey playing identity much better than he can in pure spoken words. Im much more comfortable in my own setting - a pub or anywhere with a bar Dave! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 In terms of “the mathematics of overloads”, I’m no coach, but i suspect this wasn’t what he really meant. It probably made sense to him, but not to everyone. If we take it purely in the words, the mathematics of an overload are quite simply you’ve got the ball into a position where you have more players than them, e.g. maths 2>1, 3>2, etc. Well that’s effin’ obvious, not earth-shattering either...and I suspect many of us, even with our naked eyes () can spot the situation.. However, if he was able to describe how you achieve that, it would be much easier on a a whiteboard / magnetic board, and the end result might be mathematical, but the process to achieve that result is less easy for us mere mortals to see. It is often why the subtlety of a goal scored / conceded goes back further in the passage of play than the final shot or pass. In our poor run of late 17/18, why did Joe Bryan keep getting exposed 1 on 1 or worse 2 on 1, and therefore blamed for us conceding goals? Because teams worked us around to create their overloads. Not saying Joe wasn’t completely blameless but the root cause goes back further than the situation Joe found himself in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mozo Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 5 minutes ago, Davefevs said: In terms of “the mathematics of overloads”, I’m no coach, but i suspect this wasn’t what he really meant. It probably made sense to him, but not to everyone. If we take it purely in the words, the mathematics of an overload are quite simply you’ve got the ball into a position where you have more players than them, e.g. maths 2>1, 3>2, etc. Well that’s effin’ obvious, not earth-shattering either...and I suspect many of us, even with our naked eyes () can spot the situation.. However, if he was able to describe how you achieve that, it would be much easier on a a whiteboard / magnetic board, and the end result might be mathematical, but the process to achieve that result is less easy for us mere mortals to see. It is often why the subtlety of a goal scored / conceded goes back further in the passage of play than the final shot or pass. In our poor run of late 17/18, why did Joe Bryan keep getting exposed 1 on 1 or worse 2 on 1, and therefore blamed for us conceding goals? Because teams worked us around to create their overloads. Not saying Joe wasn’t completely blameless but the root cause goes back further than the situation Joe found himself in. He meant to say 'numerical' overloads, or had that in his mind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 3 minutes ago, Davefevs said: If we take it purely in the words, the mathematics of an overload are quite simply you’ve got the ball into a position where you have more players than them, e.g. maths 2>1, 3>2, etc. Well that’s effin’ obvious, not earth-shattering either...and I suspect many of us, even with our naked eyes can spot the situation.. However, if he was able to describe how you achieve that, it would be much easier on a a whiteboard / magnetic board, and the end result might be mathematical, but the process to achieve that result is less easy for us mere mortals to see. Yep.....as I posted earlier, it’s not that difficult to work it out if you’re motivated to do so and sadly neither Nick or Len could be arsed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 2 minutes ago, mozo said: He meant to say 'numerical' overloads, or had that in his mind Without a “question of a doubt”....been chasing shadows with that one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickJ Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 30 minutes ago, Robbored said: Good grief Len - listen again with your ear muffs off.You’re not in the Dolman how................. That interview was as clear as it gets. It was informative, very open and honest and treating us fans with respect but then you’re a LJ out merchant so it’s no surprise that you choose not to understand what he’s saying............. 18 minutes ago, Robbored said: Spudski or Cowshed could answer than better than I Nick but if you think about it’s not that difficult to understand but you choose not to.............. You do make me laugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 15 minutes ago, NickJ said: You do make me laugh. No need to feel embarrassed because you don’t understand Nick, you’re not alone in that, Len is the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 1 hour ago, Cowshed said: I made a small error. Mr Johnsons reply was "If I had the opportunity to build like a fantasy football team .. " My personal view does not affect the question posed and Mr Johnson clearly not answering the question. He wants a team of ‘ six foot two’ers ‘ , heightist . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downendcity Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 2 hours ago, havanatopia said: I liked the last bit especially when he said words to the effect; "depends what league we are in" referring to player contracts. Made I larf did that. Absolutely right Havana. Surely he realises we are perfectly safe from relegation! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolcitysweden Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 We have been shit for 125 years and he is talking about something better forgotten Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downendcity Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 1 hour ago, Davefevs said: I think much comes down to our own licence of interpretation / translation. If you want to take some of it as just the pure words spoken, it’s gonna seem a bit bolloxy (is that a word). But if you try to translate it, you can get a lot out of it. How many of us a few years ago were using lingo like passing lanes, low block, high press, etc? Now it’s commonly used, but that’s not to say it’s fully understood not everyone understands it either. I remember using the the “cheat” to describe Marc Duffy of Sheff Utd, and someone replied that he’s a very honest player. What I meant (and thought was well understood, but obviously wasn’t!) was that he cheats defensively, in that he doesn’t track back when they lose possession, and therefore finds himself in space when they recovered the ball. Its why in both work and OTIB, I try use pictures (and stats) to convey my thoughts and ideas. Lee’s coaches voice video with his magnet board is a much better example of how to explain things. I bet if you got him in his office (not the pub Robbo) he’d convey playing identity much better than he can in pure spoken words. He's a visual type of guy, and this is how he simplifies his explanation of high press and creating overloads. To help understanding, drive is pressing from the front, reset is when the Bentley has to pick the ball out of the net, centronics is when Wells or Weimann is asked to play out wide. and joystick is when he brings Kasey Palmer on to change the game! As you can see, this is for home games ( Gate array) but he has a separate diagram to demonstrate away tactics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolcitysweden Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 2 minutes ago, downendcity said: He's a visual type of guy, and this is how he simplifies his explanation of high press and creating overloads. Drive is pressing from the front, reset is when the Bentley has to pick the ball out of the net, cetronics is when Wells or Weimann is asked to play out wide. and joystick is when he brings Kasey Palmer on to change the game. As you can see, this is for home games ( Gate array) but he has a separate diagrammer away tactics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steviestevieneville Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 49 minutes ago, NickJ said: You do make me laugh. 32 minutes ago, Robbored said: No need to feel embarrassed because you don’t understand Nick, you’re not alone in that, Len is the same. So you state it’s easy to understand . Then in your next post say you can’t explain what LJ meant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 3 minutes ago, steviestevieneville said: So you state it’s easy to understand . Then in your next post say you can’t explain what LJ meant. Read it again Steve - that’s not what I posted at all............... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowshed Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 1 hour ago, Davefevs said: In terms of “the mathematics of overloads”, I’m no coach, but i suspect this wasn’t what he really meant. It probably made sense to him, but not to everyone. If we take it purely in the words, the mathematics of an overload are quite simply you’ve got the ball into a position where you have more players than them, e.g. maths 2>1, 3>2, etc. Well that’s effin’ obvious, not earth-shattering either...and I suspect many of us, even with our naked eyes () can spot the situation.. However, if he was able to describe how you achieve that, it would be much easier on a a whiteboard / magnetic board, and the end result might be mathematical, but the process to achieve that result is less easy for us mere mortals to see. It is often why the subtlety of a goal scored / conceded goes back further in the passage of play than the final shot or pass. In our poor run of late 17/18, why did Joe Bryan keep getting exposed 1 on 1 or worse 2 on 1, and therefore blamed for us conceding goals? Because teams worked us around to create their overloads. Not saying Joe wasn’t completely blameless but the root cause goes back further than the situation Joe found himself in. Because he was pushed up to create overloads in midfield. His technical ability created more probability (maths) as more passing patterns could be played off a player with great feet. Mr Johnson may even be referencing that ability in his latest word soup. Defensively at a point in 2017 the player also helped City play higher as a unit where the ball could be kept shorter and if lost up the pitch City counter pressed quickly. This could have been elements of City's identity and it's clear principles progressed v cyclic change and recruitment and wasted finance/time. Lee Johnson was talking about players who have left. The identity, an identity doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bristolcitysweden Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 All bunkum. Totally pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted March 12, 2020 Report Share Posted March 12, 2020 15 minutes ago, Cowshed said: Because he was pushed up to create overloads in midfield. His technical ability created more probability (maths) as more passing patterns could be played off a player with great feet. Mr Johnson may even be referencing that ability in his latest word soup. Defensively at a point in 2017 the player also helped City play higher as a unit where the ball could be kept shorter and if lost up the pitch City counter pressed quickly. This could have been elements of City's identity and it's clear principles progressed v cyclic change and recruitment and wasted finance/time. Lee Johnson was talking about players who have left. The identity, an identity doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.