Silvio Dante

Nein.

Just to say that I do think this is a very fair point - and I agree that you don’t give “minutes for minutes sake” - the players have to be the required standard. The counterpoint is twofold - he had the opportunity to play Jamie KL yesterday and didn’t despite him being around the first team squad regularly, but probably more pertinently over 3 years of management now he hasn’t brought one academy player through. It’s possible that MK Dons, Oxford and ourselves all don’t have any academy products of the required standard, but at some point that record goes on the coach and his willingness/ability to bring through academy players as opposed to the quality of the academy players themselves. And three years, across multiple clubs, is a pretty strong sample size overall.

Related to this subject, but also to Vyner being injured, a titbit from Weston yesterday; Raph Araoye has had his loan spell ended one week early by City. Possible he’s coming into first team contention in view of the injuries; equally likely that there is an U23s game which if we win we go 6th and are able to have a mass celebration that he’s needed for. Edit @petehinton - posting the same at the same time

To have not said how many have sold to date if they are going well is beyond bizarre. On Tuesday it’s one week until renewal date and if that’s not met with a campaign of “Join the xxx who have renewed already”, I think it’s safe to say we’re a long way down from what the club hoped.

I’m saying nothing… (Over 6 games 11 points is playoff form)

Liams first press conference at Oxford: “You look to academies first, why wouldn’t you” Liams first press conference here: ”I understand the importance of players to see the pathway, and the most rewarding thing for academy staff is where you see someone make a debut. But also from a pure business perspective you invest huge sums in the academy, why wouldn’t you look there first? That doesn’t mean you take everyone from there but it’s the first place you look…..we’ll definitely look there first then go external after that” Just leaving those here. And guess how many he brought through at Oxford.

Agreed. The fact is that Twine isn’t the only player out there that can do the job - this is why I hold no stock in the argument that him being in has allowed Knight to drop back. Any player being played in that position allows the Knight move and I’d think there are better options, based on what we’ve seen, than Twine.

That reminds me somewhat of the Post article when LM came in initially. They asked Dons and Oxford fans for views on him and one standout comment was the one below. The correlation here is that if you’re struggling to create chances beyond the two points mentioned, naturally you’re going to have a lower xG. And because the “cutback” goals are better chances (higher individual xG), they’re more likely to be scored. Basically your analysis correlates with what we’ve seen under Liam - a real struggle to create good chances. Against Blackburn our xG was ramped up by two penalties and one on ones they gave us - we actually created very little off our own steam (but the press equally forced the mistakes). People may point to shots of x per game, but a lot of time they’ve been shots that aren’t real chances. The lack of “good chances” has been a real thematic So, if the secret to outperforming xG is not to create much, I’m not sure it’s a formula for long term success - and if you look at the implications of the below quote, it suggests Oxford were getting by on worldies, which is unsustainable and plays to the theory we employed a coach on a “good streak” as opposed to one who’s cracked it.

Six. Watford, Leicester, Plymouth, Sunderland, Blackburn, Huddersfield. I can understand getting it wrong by a game but being 100% out is a bit disturbing..! And I know that we are undefeated in those six, so I’ll tap my “correlation doesn’t equal causation” sign again.

To be fair, you highlight Cardiff there and one of the two losses was under Nige. We were on fumes that game so saying we could have been plus 3 points without investment from that game is bonkers - the exact problem is we didn’t have resource. Start of the season I thought keep or adequately replace Scott we had a chance of top six - a punchers chance, but a chance. Not doing so made mid table my expectation. It’s a broader problem that I think we’ve regressed under Liam (and how that bodes for trajectory), but dispassionately he’s going to achieve what I pretty much expected without investment day one. The fault in performance as ever lies with the board - both for not investing in the summer and for the statements/actions in October. Liam in no way gets a pass but I’d say he’s delivered (positionally) on realistic minimum expectations. Debate/discuss how likely it is he can progress (regress) us further or how he’s got us to those points - and that’s where his issues lie.

Just another quick thing to add into the mix - the accepted wisdom appears to be that Burnley will want to retain him if they go down. I’d suggest that performance this season in particular would mean that isn’t a sure thing - if we’re doubting if he’s good enough for us as a middling table team, then he certainly won’t be good enough for a top six side. I think likelihood is that he’s available come what may in the summer. And that makes it all the more important, from evidence to date, that we don’t jump into a deal.

It’s interesting you bring the Watford game up. What sticks out for me from that game was twofold - the dead ball entry being superb but the open play being shocking (it was about 50% pass completion). At the time I put it down to not being on the same wavelength as the team but he’s still not a massive creative force. And at this level, you can’t have a “special teams” player As I’ve said a few times, correlation doesn’t equal causation. Leicester sticks out - we were better when Sykes came on for Twine and Sykes set the goal up. And in respect of best position, I think Liam rejigged the side to deliver that. Remember he was wide left at Hull, and that Liam only likes one up top. I’m not sure him playing behind the striker isn’t his “best position” - which only adds to my doubts!

I don’t overly disagree, but if you think we’ve been “fortuitous” in the games post Easter (and I’d add to your analysis above the four Vardy chances pre our goal Vs Leicester) then the balance has to be whether in the six games post Southampton we were unlucky to only pick up three points. (NB - avoidance of doubt I’ll say in the three wins post Easter I have liked our intent and that helps deserve points) Those games were (in chronological order): QPR (H), Weds (A), Cardiff (H), Ipswich (A), Swansea (H), WBA (A) If you (or anyone) thinks we were unlucky to only get three points from those games the argument is that it’s luck balancing out. However, if the stance is that we got pretty much what we deserved from that batch, then people with that view should be concerned about the performances that continue - if not the results.

Rider to your last sentence….at league one level You have to remember that Hull were Ok with letting him go at this level, and that Burnley he wasn’t fantastic for. At this level, across three teams, he’s been nothing more than “OK”. I’d absolutely trust Liams judgement in him at league one level. But if we take Mehmeti as a case in point, a player that Liam (correctly) thinks can do it at league one has been sketchy at best at the higher level. It might be that how he’s played is just how good he is at this level. It happens.

As I said on another thread, it’d be madness if he was and would have serious vibes of Kasey Palmer. We’ve seen what he can do and he’s gone from peripheral in prior games to today being uninterested in putting any work in. Palmer was signed despite a poor loan spell at great expense because LJ overestimated both Kaseys importance and Lees own ability to get stuff out of him. If you’re charitable, it could be argued that he had the Afobe linkup in mind but that was more happy accident. It seems to me (and I don’t think LM is LJ as some do), in this case for Lee read Liam and for Kasey read Scott To reiterate the point, we’re looking at a player who had a fantastic season at a lower level 2 years ago and has not proven himself at this level, in addition to having two injury spells. We’ve seen him for us and not one person thinks he’s a must buy. Even at £2m, with the takeover of Burnley wages, it’s not a cheap deal and I’m not convinced he’s worth that. Not a deal we should do and would smack of a vanity project based on the evidence to date.

I’ll go the earliest of anyone and say the season was over when we sold our best player and out of pure spite and dislike to the manager didn’t make funds available for a replacement. Notably, those funds became magically available in January via the bid for Azaz and signing of Twine. So, in hindsight, August.

See you in a few days Lez mate. Look forward to the next account.

Keep up, he was on holiday so couldnt get on here. That bloody World Wide Web and its misleading name. @Moderator - Unless I’ve understood the terms of the forum incorrectly then banned users aren’t allowed to sign up under a new ID (as has happened here as the signup was on Thursday, conveniently the day after @Ian M barred a couple of his other IDs. I believe Lezzie here had just admitted to a breach of forum rules and in order to keep this account active must provide you with his prior accounts so you can check his reason for bans and determine if he is allowed to post. Rules. Just like understanding formations, they’re bastards.

For once I agree with you, a number of forum posters have said what you’re saying. There was Lez, there was Zuni, there was Londoner, there was Dog, there was you, there was Hunstanton Red, there was CiaCru…..

“Your ideas intrigue me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter”

In effect, the best eleven players don’t make the best team.

Fair comment. It probably comes down to short term va long term thinking - I think the overarching point is this; we’ve been on a good run (and results wise we still are) - and there have been positive signs of “intent” on how we want to play next season. With nothing on the game (for us) it was an ideal opportunity both to see JKL (or what’s the point in him being in the squad) and to help the players get used to their roles in the current system - in essence we have the opportunity for an extended pre season / time on the grass. What we instead did is put players in positions they haven’t been playing (and are unlikely to play under normal circumstances) and consequently lost a lot of rhythm and shape. We also lost the opportunity to see if our current “first sub” centre back can play at this level - and it’s unlikely we’ll get another opportunity. We ultimately got out of jail with a 1-1 draw. But we prioritised “today” (which ultimately means nothing) over longer term development, and took a step down in performance. So, arguable that “right” decision in terms of result - and nobody knows how well we would have played if we had not shifted things around - but for me, wrong decision both in the message to young players, and moreso for the overall development of the team.

Cheers Lez, always good to hear from you.

Funnily enough Niges last game against Cardiff came into my head as I was leaving the stadium today. In that game he had the “testicular fortitude” to play Joseph James and also bring on Jamie Knight Lebel for a debut. The rejigs needed were necessary that day, and he had the courage to involve people who hadn’t been anywhere near the first team. This is where I think I have more of a problem than you with today, while fully acknowledging it’s better to play a “youngster” if they have experience next to them. But we had a natural defender who’s been good enough to be on the bench for 25 odd games (so more experience than Nige had available) and chose not to use him - instead doing multiple positional moves which stifled how we played - and weren’t needed. Injuries or not, there was a tactical decision made - and it was the wrong one (and that isn’t benefit of hindsight). If I’m Jamie Knight-Lebel, and I have no idea if he would have played well or not, I’m spitting bloody feathers tonight and wondering if it’s worth it. The decisions made today have likely disillusioned the only academy player (that wasn’t involved regularly before) who has got anywhere near the first team consistently under Liam. It was a really, really bad call on so many levels - injuries or not.

There really isn’t any compelling reason to sign him is there? However, I am getting decidedly Kasey Palmer vibes. An underwhelming loan spell that doesn’t demand he’s signed permanently but a manager who thinks he can make him into a standout player, then us stuck with a player on big wages that we need to somehow offload….