Jump to content
IGNORED

Pearson: “everyone needs to be on the bus and we can’t afford any passengers.”


LondonBristolian
 Share

Recommended Posts

Getting boring now isn’t it. 
how many times have we heard this from Pearson. But nothing changes. 
who is he taking about this time. Bentley? Baker? Martin? Weimann? Dasilva? 
Will he be dropping any of these from the squad completely? It’s all empty threats and is boring me. 
Pearson needs to stop saying shit like this and actually start doing something about it. Like giving his players the confidence to be able to keep hold of the football and not concede oodles of possession so late in games. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

Motivate the players.  Teach them not to constantly surrender the ball in the last thirty minutes and go back and back.  We could all see it, why not Pearson?

Baker’s tackle was reckless but the issue was that we were letting Forest have the ball and run at us all the time.  How many City supporters believed on the 85th minute, say, that we were going to win that match?  We were inviting Forest to come at us.  Baker was just the fall guy.

I agree with what you are saying, but it has to be more of a resource issue than coaching, how many of the players left on the pitch last night are natural ball holders, you can coach all you like but if that’s not in their make up you’re not going to change it.

I think O’Dowda was an attempt to make the pitch bigger and cause Forest to keep at least 2 players up around him, but then we did not play to that idea in that regard by just pumping long to him rather than balls in between channels and over the top.

Defending deep has been our weakness for a while, but I think it’s going to need a player investment to change. 
 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Rob k said:

I don’t think any Bristol City fan is a ‘happy clapper’ maybe people just have a differing view!

out of interest which part do you particularly blame NP for seeing we were playing a team with better players than us? Not after an argument just curious…..for clarity i didn’t go so saw highlight and this is what i saw 

- Scott missing an open goal 

- denied a penalty

- Baker with a rash challenge 

- Bentley pushing a ball straight to an attacker 

 

 

Of course all of those things contributed. 

As did two dreadful substitutions. Not the substitutes (the players themselves) but the substitutions.

I'd go further than @marmite - both the last two were poor poor decisions.

The wrong players at the wrong time sending out the wrong message to a side that completely lost it's shape and purpose. And put more pressure on the team to defend a lead - a team that's got a real psychological problem now about defending a lead and about home form.

It was no one person's fault last night, but NP carries the can as much as any other individual.

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, bcfcnick said:

Not in favour of managerial change but understand the question marks.   I think the Simpson and King recruits were mistakes but they are on one year contracts and young recruits like Tanner and Atkinson have been good.

The issue for me though is our inability to keep the ball.  I lost count of the amount of times players, such as Massengo, with the obvious ability to pass to his own teammate, regularly lost possession or passed into space where only the opposition were ever going to pick it up.  Is that down to our coaching team,  the manager and the way the team are set up or is it down to the calibre of players?  I'd love to see the stats for the times we lost possession after Bentley boots it upfield - it was probably 80% plus and that tactic surely has to be an instruction.

The positive points going forward are young players like Scott, Tanner and Atkinson and the hope that Pearson can add more of the same with decent  midfield recruits, wide players and a clinical finisher.  Above all, we need a team that is not having to defend with desperation and minimal possession for long periods of the game. When we do that there is an air of inevitability that we will concede and we do. 

It is very hard to pass the ball when half of the team is hiding. On Saturday we saw a team where every player wanted the ball all of the time. As soon as they pass they make themselves available to get the ball back. Each time their players looked up they had 4 or five options both short and long. For years we have had very little movement off the ball except when occasionally when we are 2 in front and have our tails up. I think this came from years of trying to stop the opposition instead of playing our own game. Last night for 90 mins I thought we were quite good. Some of the last ditch defending was great and we opened them up several times. For me we lost the game because we made substitutions for the sake of them and lost our shape (which had been very good) completely. The players that came on seemed to do their own thing rather than fitting into the shape.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Rob k said:

Problem is the players he has bought in so far who you would imagine would be on decent wages, King and Simpson are not having the effect we wanted. James I’m currently ok With but when we have such limited budget in hindsight we’re those signings wise?

King and Simpson are not on big wages and have 12 month contracts . They were needed as much off the field as on it . We have signed Simpsons replacement and at 300 k , so far it looks like it could work out . 
 

I think people are confusing a few years of a growing problem with how you solve it and the time taken to solve it . The frustration is it feels like years we have been this way , which we have , but if you sell your best players and replace , expensively , with average players you get what we have . Our squad has some glimpses of very good players , but we also have a number of pretty average championship players . That the game has moved on rapidly in terms of physical and athletic requirements has left us even worse off .  It is not in the last 6 months we have been talking about how poor we are up front and the lack of midfield technique. 
 

The squad will evolve more rapidly over the next 12 months and there is still much change to come . But you also have to work with what we have right now . It’s not pretty and it is far from where anyone wants to be . But you won’t replicate Brentford with the players we have . 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

So why not work on Louis Britton and bring him up to Championship level fitness.  One substitute appearance (and one goal) in the final match of last season, but now we’re led to believe he’s not fit enough.  Well whose fault is that?

And no young Premier League strikers we could have brought in on loan?

I get this.

In six months there should be a tangible improvement in fitness levels. Britton, may have started under Nige massively unfit (why, academy coaches?). He should now at least be capable of sustaining 10 minutes of Championship level football. 
 

So, there should have been a choice between putting CoD on or Britton off the bench for the last 10. Not a difficult one is it, particularly when you constantly play the ‘hit and hope’ high balls. …although that’s another debate. 
 

Why the hell we didn’t tap into the loan market or just get someone out of contract for free is beyond me. Martin is being flogged to a standstill, literally. If Nige is playing the ‘high ball, hold it up’ game then you need a second big bloke up front to alternate with Martin. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

Motivate the players.  Teach them not to constantly surrender the ball in the last thirty minutes and go back and back.  We could all see it, why not Pearson?

Baker’s tackle was reckless but the issue was that we were letting Forest have the ball and run at us all the time.  How many City supporters believed on the 85th minute, say, that we were going to win that match?  We were inviting Forest to come at us.  Baker was just the fall guy.

You seriously think you are telling Pearson something he could not see or does not know ! Where are the coaches that can “teach “ 30 year old players how to control a football ? 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Clutton Caveman said:

It is very hard to pass the ball when half of the team is hiding. On Saturday we saw a team where every player wanted the ball all of the time. As soon as they pass they make themselves available to get the ball back. Each time their players looked up they had 4 or five options both short and long. For years we have had very little movement off the ball except when occasionally when we are 2 in front and have our tails up. I think this came from years of trying to stop the opposition instead of playing our own game. Last night for 90 mins I thought we were quite good. Some of the last ditch defending was great and we opened them up several times. For me we lost the game because we made substitutions for the sake of them and lost our shape (which had been very good) completely. The players that came on seemed to do their own thing rather than fitting into the shape.

Absolutely! We have players who don’t seem to want responsibility for the ball and the ones who do have so little options it either goes back to Bentley or is given away in an attempt to bring stationary players into the game. It’s a big mental issue at the moment, last night Baker had an easy 5 yard lay off to massengo but opted to boot it out of play and surrender possession, which led to the madness of the next couple of minutes, that’s a mental/confidence issue which has been running through the squad for some time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, 054123 said:

I don’t disagree that signing a striker was paramount and it’s a mistake not too.

I honestly don’t know what money there was, but any of the FFP expert on here will tell you we are pretty screwed. 

We bought in Tanner and Atkinson and have tried to be be strong at the back first and in fairness we’ve been quite solid. These two acquisitions look good at present and tick almost all of the boxes.

Ultimately if there is no money then who is the striker we bring in?

What you say about the striker is fair enough. It seems that there was nobody out there within our budget who could improve us, so we didn’t sign anyone. That makes sense to me.

Where I would slightly take issue with you there is that I don’t believe that we have been that solid at all. We’re 13 games in and we’ve kept one clean sheet all season. We look reasonably well organised in the main, so I can see what you mean, but in each and every game we either make individual errors or have players out of position that cost us goals. And given that we don’t score that many, those lapses in concentration and our propensity to make often comical errors are always likely to cost us. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RedRock said:

I get this.

In six months there should be a tangible improvement in fitness levels. Britton, may have started under Nige massively unfit (why, academy coaches?). He should now at least be capable of sustaining 10 minutes of Championship level football. 
 

So, there should have been a choice between putting CoD on or Britton off the bench for the last 10. Not a difficult one is it, particularly when you constantly play the ‘hit and hope’ high balls. …although that’s another debate. 
 

Why the hell we didn’t tap into the loan market or just get someone out of contract for free is beyond me. Martin is being flogged to a standstill, literally. If Nige is playing the ‘high ball, hold it up’ game then you need a second big bloke up front to alternate with Martin. 

Arguably the loan market these days is as expensive as buying a player, it’s no longer getting the young lad from the Prem reserves or the older player who’s not part of the manager’s plans. There’s not only the wages to pay but the loan fee as well. Clubs like Chelsea have made a business out of it….

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have to solve the striker problem without funds.  I see little attempt to do so.

True options are limited but three are out there somewhere, viz

1 Recruit from non league.  I know about fitness but a real go for goal striker giving us 30 minutes a match would be a definite improvement. are we allowed to do this?  Might have to wait to January

2 Go with Bell for a span of matches, or go with one of our other junior strikers.  Again an hour of Bell is surely worth 90 minutes of Martin

3 Train one of our midfield to be a striker.  We have done this before - Reid was not bad!  And long ago we did it with Tommy Burden when stretched. Scott, Palmer, Massengo.

 

OK I agree nowhere near ideal but we can’t keep hitting our head against the same brick wall with the same outcome0

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Enter Sandman said:

Getting boring now isn’t it. 
how many times have we heard this from Pearson. But nothing changes. 
who is he taking about this time. Bentley? Baker? Martin? Weimann? Dasilva? 
Will he be dropping any of these from the squad completely? It’s all empty threats and is boring me. 
Pearson needs to stop saying shit like this and actually start doing something about it. Like giving his players the confidence to be able to keep hold of the football and not concede oodles of possession so late in games. 

Perhaps he's talking about O'Dowda who, for the second game in a row, was useless? O'Dowda might reasonably turn around after last night and say "but I'm not a striker, whose bright idea was that?" (although he may decide discretion is the better part of valour).

Perhaps Weimann who was using those concrete boots he sometimes wears? Although Weimann might reasonably say "yes but I'm not a midfielder". 

Perhaps Martin who had less impact than usual? Although Martin might reasonably say "yes but I'm not a Sat-Tues-Sat type player".

Perhaps he's talking about the fact he has to include players in every matchday squad he's decided are a waste of a wage and so aren't a realistic option when he turns to the bench for help?

More likely, I think he might be making a general, over-arching point that where we are as a club at the moment, in this division, with the current resources, we need all 11 players plus the subs to be at the top of their game week after week after week if we're going to get results but if even just one or two are off their game on any given day, we're not good enough at the moment to grind out results in this brutal league. And there were one or two off their game last night.

Playing strikers in midfield and midfielders as strikers and flogging Martin to death doesn't help though. Nor does the absence of Semenyo.  

Edited by Merrick's Marvels
  • Like 4
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dredd said:

He’s made this comment a few times now, but I don’t see any players left out

Because we have no strength in depth whatsoever, and that's on the previous regime. If we had a fully-fit squad to choose from, I'd say we're probably a pacy winger away from having a top-half-of-the-table starting XI. Beyond that, there's no quality at all. The signings NP has made have improved us, IMO. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, billywedlock said:

You seriously think you are telling Pearson something he could not see or does not know ! Where are the coaches that can “teach “ 30 year old players how to control a football ? 

Pearson’s substitutions suggested he was happy with that way of seeing out the game.  When he brought O’Dowda on for Wells (who looked exhausted) I assumed we were playing for the 1-0 win.  I did say to my mate, if we concede a goal now we’re going to struggle to find a winner with this line-up.  It’s not about controlling a football, that’s just facile, it’s about the tactics the team adopted during the last thirty minutes and the manager is the person who can do something about that if those tactics are seen to not be working.

if Pearson could see what was happening, why did he not do anything about it?  Was he communicating with his players?  Probably didn’t help that his captain is the keeper.  Where was the leadership on the field?

Please don’t tell me that the manager has no role in this.  We didn’t lose last night because of stupid mistakes.  We lost because of a fundamental breakdown in the way we were playing, leading to our opponents being allowed almost total dominance in the last thirty minutes.  Pearson was in a position to do something about that, but he didn’t.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The squad is thin on quality for sure, once the subs come into play it all seems to fall apart. 

But what is this sitting deep after 75 minutes all about, we were playing OK I thought and then clock hits 75mins and you couldn't see a City player anywhere near the half way line and the battering begins.

If its the players mentality causing it then that needs to be addressed, but if it is down to Pearson's tactics he needs to change them and quick cus we just can't see a game out at home. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, tin said:

Because we have no strength in depth whatsoever, and that's on the previous regime. If we had a fully-fit squad to choose from, I'd say we're probably a pacy winger away from having a top-half-of-the-table starting XI. Beyond that, there's no quality at all. The signings NP has made have improved us, IMO. 

Dont make the threat then. Its pathetic, I dont belive it so im sure as **** the players dont.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, bexhill reds said:

Why? 
 

what could he have done differently with the resources available to him last night.

NP was not the cause of Baker diving in, nor the 90 seconds of madness that followed that. 

Of course he was, he set us up to sit back with no striker on the pitch camping on the edge of our box inviting pressure. 

Everything that happened last night was caused by Pearson 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Rob k said:

I don’t think any Bristol City fan is a ‘happy clapper’ maybe people just have a differing view!

out of interest which part do you particularly blame NP for seeing we were playing a team with better players than us? Not after an argument just curious…..for clarity i didn’t go so saw highlight and this is what i saw 

- Scott missing an open goal 

- denied a penalty

- Baker with a rash challenge 

- Bentley pushing a ball straight to an attacker 

And they scored 2 goals against our 1.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bringing in young, inexperienced strikers is risky but given Wells Martin & Weimann have consistently demonstrated they've no productive output, that's not a huge risk to take. If the youngsters prove not good enough, well, that's exactly what their predecessors were.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Nuno Gomes said:

And they scored 2 goals against our 1.

9 times out of 10, their winner wouldn't have stood.

Clearest deliberate handball I've seen in ages.

No excuses, just the facts. The ref / lino was as poor as we were at the death.

Edited by AppyDAZE
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lew-T said:

I noticed he said our home form is almost embarrassing now….

Nige with respect, it’s been embarrassing for as long as I can remember. Long before you…

I think it's fair to say our home form over the last 10 months or so is on a different planet to anything we have ever done before, I think we are only a handful of games away from having the worst home record in the whole history of the football league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Jacki said:

What you say about the striker is fair enough. It seems that there was nobody out there within our budget who could improve us, so we didn’t sign anyone. That makes sense to me.

Where I would slightly take issue with you there is that I don’t believe that we have been that solid at all. We’re 13 games in and we’ve kept one clean sheet all season. We look reasonably well organised in the main, so I can see what you mean, but in each and every game we either make individual errors or have players out of position that cost us goals. And given that we don’t score that many, those lapses in concentration and our propensity to make often comical errors are always likely to cost us. 

To give some context I just meant we haven’t been battered. I think apart from Bournemouth all games have either been draws or decided by an odd goal.

It’s a low starting point😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LondonBristolian said:

In answer to your first question, I honestly don’t know. I’d like to see our young strikers more but I honestly don’t know what their form is like in training, how their fitness is or how they would do if they were playing.

 

Britton's "form" is that he scores a lot of goals and scored in the Championship when we gave him his cameo appearance. Against Brentford as well. He's 20 now. Not a child.

Benarous is 19, but he must also be wondering if he couldn't start to be introduced late in games. Gets rave reviews from those that have seen him play. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Bringing in young, inexperienced strikers is risky but given Wells Martin & Weimann have consistently demonstrated they've no productive output, that's not a huge risk to take. If the youngsters prove not good enough, well, that's exactly what their predecessors were.

A fundamental issue for me is that both Martin and Weimann dip massively in effectiveness once they're playing two games a week. Weimann is largely treated as undroppable by managers - and, for a good reason as he offers something we don't have in the team - but I'd rather he had 36 very good games and ten where he is rested rather than 5 very good games and 41 where he's under par due to needing a break. 

Edited by LondonBristolian
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, BasSavage88 said:

Of course he was, he set us up to sit back with no striker on the pitch camping on the edge of our box inviting pressure. 

Everything that happened last night was caused by Pearson 

I don’t agree, but you have your view on Pearson which I suspect no amount of debate is going to change….

Lots of good exchanges which sped up my 2 hour train commute. But off to work now…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

Perhaps he's talking about O'Dowda who, for the second game in a row, was useless? O'Dowda might reasonably turn around after last night and say "but I'm not a striker, whose bright idea was that?" (although he may decide discretion is the better part of valour).

Perhaps Weimann who was using those concrete boots he sometimes wears? Although Weimann might reasonably say "yes but I'm not a midfielder". 

Perhaps Martin who had less impact than usual? Although Martin might reasonably say "yes but I'm not a Sat-Tues-Sat type player".

Perhaps he's talking about the fact he has to include players in every matchday squad he's decided are a waste of a wage and so aren't a realistic option when he turns to the bench for help?

More likely, I think he might be making a general, over-arching point that where we are as a club at the moment, in this division, with the current resources, we need all 11 players plus the subs to be at the top of their game week after week after week if we're going to get results but if even just one or two are off their game on any given day, we're not good enough at the moment to grind out results in this brutal league. And there were one or two off their game last night.

Playing strikers in midfield and midfielders as strikers and flogging Martin to death doesn't help though. Nor does the absence of Semenyo.  

I reckon you can add KP to the list, I'm not sure he actually touched the ball last night!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Enter Sandman said:

Getting boring now isn’t it. 
how many times have we heard this from Pearson. But nothing changes. 
who is he taking about this time. Bentley? Baker? Martin? Weimann? Dasilva? 
Will he be dropping any of these from the squad completely? It’s all empty threats and is boring me. 
Pearson needs to stop saying shit like this and actually start doing something about it. Like giving his players the confidence to be able to keep hold of the football and not concede oodles of possession so late in games. 

Simple fact the players that he's inherited just ain't good enough and he's limited to what he can do.. Every player signed before Pearson needs to go and I'm not joking it needs a massive change because I think several players think it's an easy life at this football club.

Look at the quality Pearson has brought in just think what he can do if he had money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Enter Sandman said:

Getting boring now isn’t it. 
how many times have we heard this from Pearson. But nothing changes. 
who is he taking about this time. Bentley? Baker? Martin? Weimann? Dasilva? 
Will he be dropping any of these from the squad completely? It’s all empty threats and is boring me. 
Pearson needs to stop saying shit like this and actually start doing something about it. Like giving his players the confidence to be able to keep hold of the football and not concede oodles of possession so late in games. 

What’s he supposed to do if there’s a lack of options otherwise? Whether it’s the best way to do it idk but he’s stuck with these players run so he’s got to get them to buck their ideas up somehow.

He did exactly this when he first returned to Leicester. He came in during November of 11/12 and for the rest of that season he criticised players in a much similar fashion, he fell out quite acrmioniously (head butting Matt Mills) with a couple of them.

Difference is he was able to spend 3m in January on Drinkwater, Morgan and Marshall. Then about another 10-12m the following season plus just paying off or taking a big financial hit on players he didn’t want around. Of course that’s back in 2012 so bigger fees than they sound now, before FFP, with his recruitment setup and with an owner willing to spend. So whether he can achieve the transformation need given the constraints he has now is up for debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...