Kid in the Riot

Sure they must all be buzzing on the coach journey up knowing that their potential progress into the first team is being delayed because we're going for glory in the youth cup, on the orders of footballer development experts Steve and Jon Lansdown. 

Fml.

4 minutes ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

That has Steve Lansdown's fingerprints all over it. Wouldn't be the first, or last, time he's to stuck his oar in.

The man just can't help himself, whatever the sport. Here's Pat Lam just a few weeks ago:

"Steve Lansdown had a quiet word with me about playing the Bears way, he wanted to be excited about the way we play and I said I'd see what we can so". 

So because the owner was a bit bored at the rugger, he told the Coach to play a different way.

Says it all really. 

I have it on good authority that was in the dressing room in front of the Bears players too.

Ah, balls. It wasn't a nightmare. He really said it. 

6 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Utterly mental.

Maybe the FA Youth Cup prize is £20m and a place in the Champions League?

Tinnion then went on to say how great it was that the plan had clearly worked as the u-18s were in the semi finals. As if it's some sort of stroke of genius to screw your first team and development squads up at the expense of the u-18s.

The hubris is excruciating.

28 minutes ago, firstdivision said:

Why are abusive about someone's opinions on a podcast you don't have to listen to/can simply ignore. You have enough opinions - why don't you create your own podcast if you don't like what you hear from Ian G? 

Or message Dave and ask to go on the podcast....

His passing stats are unreal too.

2,309 completed passes at 85% pass accuracy.

City's next best player for passing is Joe Williams 1,153 completed passes at 80%.

More than double the number of completed passes compared to his closest teammate.

Must be Premier League clubs taking a look. 

Pretty obvious Manning didn't want him but our Teknical dyrektor did. 

Back to the MA/LJ transfer bun-fight days. Joy. 

25 minutes ago, headhunter said:

There was a lot of agreement and reasoned debate where there was conflict

Can you confirm how many people have asked to come on the pod since you came on here and said anyone is welcome?

A rough estimate is fine as I'm sure it's loads given the number that come on here and say how taking apart Ian's arguments would be as easy as kicking snow off a piece of rope. 

Like I say, I'm sure it's too many to count, but a rough estimate would be interesting. 

1 hour ago, TonyTonyTony said:

Unlucky Kid, but France the better team.

Your Photo is upside down - if you put the 6N table upside down, Wales would be top

2026 Slam winners, you heard it here first

France were good second half. Amazed how many of them were there. Must've been 10k and created a great atmosphere 

6 minutes ago, Dr Balls said:

The relegated MK Dons team from which he was sacked mid-season must have been pretty poor too. Or was that also not how he wanted to play?!

Brilliant - well done. 

2 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

But that's how we ARE playing the game at the moment!! First 45 minutes, ZERO shots, not even anything blocked.

Absolutely.  But the idea a coach wants his side to deliver those kind of outcomes is clearly for the birds... 

Bollox. Good 60m but France too strong in the end. Amazing atmosphere with the roof on

20 minutes ago, Dr Balls said:

The problem is that the way Manning wants football played is the antithesis of exciting and what fans want. He doesn’t want passion or emotion, he wants control. He doesn’t prioritise the strikers or anyone else getting chances, he’s more interested in maintaining possession. It’s boring, dull and also not very effective, especially when we do have the majority of possession. Passes back and forth along our back line are never going to lead to anything other than improving the possession stats.

You think that's how Manning wants to play the game? Seriously? His MK and Oxford sides would suggest he prefers a different style.

5 minutes ago, Roe said:

The "manager / head coach" is arguably the most overhyped role in all of football. Far more important is the structure behind them and the players in front. You need all 3 of those parts to align to have success. We've got none at the moment

It's changed hasn't it. The likes of Fergie and Wenger built entire clubs by managing upwards and sideways as well as downwards. 

Clubs just aren't structured like that anymore so the head coach/managers influence has been reduced. 

The role is probably more important at a club like City though, where there is a complete vacuum in the background.

13 minutes ago, Swede said:

Not filling the subs bench does limit your opportunities. I am astonished that this goes on. I thought this was basic coaching. There are plenty of good players out there that could do a better job in the short term than some of the youngsters, and you have to include Mebude in that list who seems unable to free himself from nerves.

I looked at it a couple of months ago and we're one of the only clubs to regularly not fill the bench. I agree with you, it's absolutely bizarre to me, especially when we have a really good academy. 

Why would you not give yourself the most options available? 

8 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

With reference to Des Buckingham and how he’s struggled.

Grasping mate. If you want to have a Liam discussion feel free to populate one of the other 1500 threads on it. 

Of which you'll have started about half of them

37 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

If you read the Oxford forum it’s a mirror of ours re Des Buckingham post Liam. 

21 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

Not everything has to be about Manning. 

But yeah, fee free to bring it around to Manning if you want to derail the thread!

I mean, if it wasn't obvious enough your point was being made about Manning, you did also specifically name him and Oxford in your post

No chance. Off to Cardiff for Wales v France 

5 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

It’s an interesting topic. I don’t necessarily think it’s new managers per se but the new “breed” of managers (i.e. coaches with limited playing experience) who are having a lot of trouble across the board, even having had some success elsewhere.

If you read the Oxford forum it’s a mirror of ours re Des Buckingham post Liam. I’d also throw in the new Notts County boss who came from Wealdstone and had no real playing background.

The compare/contrast here is Mousinho at Pompey. He’d be seen as included in that new breed, but had a solid if unspectacular playing career and was also the head of the PFA so you’d argue really understood the players mindset.

Rooney proves that being a great player doesn’t make you a great manager. But I think that there has been a trend to employing a certain type of coach. And there will be some that are good, but the law of diminishing returns is what you’re seeing.

You seem to have forgotten Kieran McKenna exists again.

When you say new breed of coaches with limited playing experience, I assume you are specifically talking about the past couple of years in order to validate your views on Manning?

As clearly there have been loads of successful coaches over the years with limited playing careers from Ron Noades, to Mourinho, to Sarri, to Brendan Rodgers etc 

9 minutes ago, One Team said:

I can’t see it being anything other than pretty toxic if we lose Pete. Bad enough against Cardiff! 

Because nothing screams "toxic" more than a lunchtime Sunday kick off at Ashton Gate. Maybe someone will shout a rude word at Lansdown?

Not exactly La Bombonera, is it?

1 hour ago, Northern Red said:

All part of the performative outrage competition that's been running on here for the last few weeks.

A few of the more regular posters on here could seriously do with a week or two away from posting to regain some perspective. 

Big 3-1 win at third placed Worthing today for Taunton. 

Ouch.