Phileas Fogg

I reckon they'd prefer someone like Russell Martin, if he was available. I think it's likely that Lansdown's ego was a bit bruised after the Johnson saga (without getting into the success/failure debate) and really wants to achieve success with his own ideas about a preferred "type" of manager.

I would trust Pearson (with £500k) to deliver a better team than the Lansdowns’ and whoever they would prefer as manager (with £5m).

I would say that, pound for pound, we have an argument for having the best academy "pathway" outside of the Prem at the moment. I always remember when we would be envious of Southampton and Cardiff's successes with young players in recent years

I’m not so inclined as to trawl through peoples posts from 2016-2020 so I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt. I think the fixation on whether you were ‘right’ and others were ‘wrong’ is a little odd though. In this context it’s completely subjective. Did Johnson leave us in a better place than when he arrived? Probably. Did he get us promoted? No. So I suppose it comes down to what your expectations were of his appointment.

Not sure that’s quite true.. I haven’t seen one person post on here that LJ should’ve stayed as manager - unless you can prove otherwise. People just take objection to the personal comments. His height (irrelevant), his ability as a player (irrelevant), even (weirdly) his marriage for some reason? You can find all three of those in this thread - almost 4 years after his sacking! If people want to debate his performance as a manager, especially when you factor in the disparity with how he was backed compared to Cotterill (or even Pearson!) that’s a valid point of debate. The fixation on the personal stuff is bizarre though.

I’d argue it was a tricky time to take over. Having money doesn’t necessarily guarantee success - look at Chelsea. He’s recruited very well and improved players who were already there.

Impossible to say anyone would *definitely* do better than Southgate. I think though, if we're insisting on an English coach, those are the two stand-out options. I know people will cite Potter's time at Chelsea, but I think that was clearly an anomaly. I don't think many managers would achieve what they expect given how that club is being run. My choice would be to not limit ourselves to a purely English coach.

I think there’s more to it than that. People felt Cotterill wasn’t backed and Lansdown went for ‘his man’ - and that’s a completely valid point of debate. People feel he over speaks and is a bit cringeworthy - fine. People feel he over complicates things and is too ‘newfangled’ (measuring of grass/Europe in 5 years) - fine but no context considered (and people probably know that but don’t care because it suits their agenda), the Europe in 5 years thing was clearly exaggerated to highlight Rovers relative lack of ambition (didn’t they say ‘new training ground’?) I just don’t really like how selective people are, simply because they personally have an issue with Johnson. I think we needed a change of manager, probably far earlier than when he was sacked, but I don’t fixate on all the little personal things others seem to do. I just find that weird.

I’ve said this before - but I find the clearly personal dislike of him pretty odd. I appreciate that it was hugely frustrating that Cotterill wasn’t backed in the same way, and I agree that there was clearly favouritism in the appointment.. and I’d sympathise with the clearly personal dislike if he has self-serving intentions (like Ashton). Johnson, for all his faults, was desperate to succeed here. I also think there’s the context of which players were ‘his’ and which players were ‘recommended’ that needs to be factored in - but we’ll never know the truth there. I just find the personal dislike of someone who clearly tried his best a bit odd. He’s not perfect, some of the stuff he says is cringeworthy - but he means well. It’s weird that people are so fixated on him when he left nearly 4 years ago.

No he probably isn’t but he plays that role of unglamorous midfielder very well. Very good at set pieces. Top teams don’t necessarily have world class individual players in every single position anyway, but have players who play their role very effectively.(Rabiot for France or De Paul for Argentina for example). These players allow the world class attacking talent (Mbappe/Messi/Kane/Bellingham etc) to shine. I feel JWP is one of those. Regardless, Henderson being selected over him is ridiculous. I used to think he was overrated, but was impressed with what he did with Newcastle last season.

I hope he does well there. He's obviously got his faults, but he doesn't exactly hide from taking challenging jobs and he always wanted the best for Bristol City.

I think (if insisting on English) Howe and Potter definitely would. I hope we don’t insist on an English appointment next time because so many managers would love to manage us.

I find the selection issues immensely frustrating. Especially the dogmatic loyalty to players who've performed for him in the past. Maguire, Henderson and Phillips shouldn't be anywhere near the team. Maguire and Phillips as they aren't playing regularly, and Henderson's England career should've been over as soon as he moved to Saudi Arabia. A 1-1 draw in a fairly meaningless early season international game obviously isn't a disaster in itself, but these selection issues still linger. Jude Bellingham has started brilliantly in Madrid and there's a genuine possibility I think that one day he could be seen as the world's best player.. Madrid seem to have found a perfect role for him - so why doesn't Southgate play him exactly as they do?! I feel for the likes of Ward-Prowse, the messaging is completely wrong. A player in his peak starting the season really well at a high level of football not picked.. but a player in the twilight of his career who's moved to Saudi for money is. I know it's a fairly nuanced debate, but I found Southgate's support of Henderson pretty duplicitous, especially as the team under Southgate have been fairly outspoken on moral issues. For me, if you're going to do that - you have to be consistent. Southgate shouldn't have supported the move. This is a very cynical view, but such a stance starts to look like using such issues for morality brownie points. I think Southgate is a good guy, but I just can't see us winning anything under him. I'd love for him to prove me wrong though.

A totally legit comparison ?

I've only just got round' to listening to this - after reading most of the comments. It was a very sanitised interview and obviously a bit of a PR exercise. He was quite evasive about some key areas, but he'd clearly gone in with a brief about what and what not to discuss. The thing I found odd though, and it's been something that's been happening for years and years, was all the praise about SL. I've never heard anything quite like it - it's very odd that there's so much focus on how amazing the Lansdown family are. It's really OTT and unnecessary. We don't need to be told how great SL is from a relative newcomer - he's been owner for ages now, fans have an informed opinion based on years of experience. It felt like at least a third of the interview was Alexander praising Lansdown either directly or indirectly. Also - a couple of answers were strange. Describing Scott as our "best player" - notwithstanding whether it's true or not, I just don't think you'd hear that from a club with serious ambition. My interpretation of that is that implies that the level Scott is at is far beyond our reach which contradicts all the talk of wanting a top 6 finish. Pretending there was some sort of risk about buying players that we were intending to fund with Scott money - Anyone sensible knew that Scott was going this summer. We aren't stupid - so please don't pretend that spending a % of anticipated income in advance of a sale was some sort of gamble. Pretending not to know about macro issues ie potential change of ownership - Not being able to talk about it in the public domain is understandable, but he'll obviously know about it so don't pretend otherwise. Overall - I think he did ok, just frustrating he was clearly keeping to a party line. I didn't rate Gould as a speaker particularly, but appreciated the way he generally approached questions with a straight bat. Pearson does the same, so when you have someone who gives a bit of spin in answers it's just tiresome, especially after years of Ashton.

I think there's a few factors at play. We've had a lot of midtable seasons. No real relegation scares as such, but no battles for top 6 either. That in itself dilutes the atmosphere. Even in the double winning season, we had the unfortunate timing of the ground renovation work ongoing which obviously has an impact. I think the local derbies have become a bit less vociferous than they used to be - Cardiff doesn't have the same needle. Weirdly, Swansea seems to have more of an edge to it than it used to. I think the Cardiff situation isn't helped by their ground having a similar issue - a new ground where the atmos is diluted. I think a game vs Rovers would be an exception actually. It would probably be a fantastic atmosphere, but there's plenty of needle and we play them so rarely that a good atmosphere is inevitable. It wouldn't be the club's preferred type of atmosphere by any stretch.

You are this forum's Ned Flanders

Henderson too. I'd get it if he was still playing in the Prem, but he's moved to a poor league for purely financial reasons. The moment he moved there should've been the end of his England career.

I don't agree with this really. Demographics of supporters around the country are pretty homogenous now, so it's not a case of some clubs having more supporters who create atmosphere. Most clubs with a good atmosphere have developed a culture that helps create that, and it needs buy-in from the club. Liverpool is a prime example, the Kop as a concept is synonymous with Liverpool as a club. I always get the impression 'the club' are supportive of the old EE and the current singing block through gritted teeth rather than overtly. The club's idea of a good atmosphere is something like that Man City home game, where it was quite a family affair really. Lots of pomp and circumstance with that display conceptualised by the club. It was very "Come on you reds" and PG if that makes sense. There's nothing wrong with this as such, and it's obviously an improvement on the current regular home atmosphere but it's a stark contrast to, for example, Rovers at home in 2013. I think a lot of the issues with home games boil down to what the club want to endorse as a good atmosphere. If the club were 100% committed to having a vociferous, supportive and hostile AG - there's not a chance the current placement of away fans vs our singing area would be as it is.

You've just made a tonne of assumptions about people despite knowing nothing about them - simply because of how they've chosen to dress. Perhaps what really happened was that you were trying to insinuate that the people pictured were potential troublemakers.. then realised you had no evidence to back it up but didn't want to admit that, so had to find another way to justify your original post.

Embarrassing post

Stupid and pathetic? Feels inordinately strong wording.

Where is there any indication that these people are a) involved in football violence or b) an ‘embarrassment’?

Exactly - not sure why the ridicule. If that’s how they want to dress then whatever.

The Lansdown stand is horrible for atmosphere. It’s enormous and filled with non-singers. That, plus the away fans being as physically far away from vocal home fans as possible = poor atmosphere. It’s such a shame because those in the corner do try. The club had opportunity to get this right - the way to do that was to put away fans in the closest blocks to the Atyeo in the Lansdown or Dolman.. and give the entire Atyeo to vocal home fans. I’d bet pretty much anything that if they’d done that and allowed the culture to grow in the home end - the atmosphere would be unrecognisable. I believe that ‘the club’ don’t really want that though. They believe that atmosphere, or at least the more typical terrace culture atmosphere, = trouble. The club want families and more of a rugby clientele.. people who will drink at the ground and buy from the club shop. I think most of us know that positive home atmosphere contributes to the likelihood of good results. It’s such a shame the club have never really agreed.. and dragged their feet the entire time.