Fuber

11 minutes ago, Jose said:

It’s dull. Bar the goal we’ve only looked like scoring by a set piece . It’s a snooze fest. Points wise we are going nowhere at the moment.

I'm actually going against the grain here and agreeing.

For our supposed shots - Watford were poor, but for the majority we were too slow in possession.

2nd half much better than 1st. But still poor in transition and across the midfield.

10 hours ago, Ron W said:

Always used to think teams who went up from this league had a horrible CDM. A Shaun Derry type.

Not saying we’re going to win the league, but we’ve got that position filled at least.

Finally got his legs back and he’s the player we thought we were buying.

This is they key thing for me.

Before tonight I thought his legs were gone, but in the last few weeks he's found that missing yard of pace - turns out it may have been match sharpness.

9 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

The only player that looked like he really wanted a row and fight for the cause was Coufal but unfortunately for him Pring was just as keen. That was a good battle tbf. As for the rest, we pissed all over them in the aggression stakes.

I'd also say Fabianski, running to get the ball - body language was good, but age has just caught up with him and he's never been good with his feet.

13 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I can get my head around a loan.

I can’t get my head around a loan with an option to buy at £5m.  I guess if it was £2.5m I could understand that, you give yourself some assurance that if he does well you’ve proven his ability ready for next season.  But £5m is just too much.  I guess Burnley covering themselves if they come straight down.

A funny one for me.  Hey ho. 

Almost strikes me as, if they go ahead for £5m that it's a bit of a panic signing.

I like Twine, but he's not worth £3m with his record at this level, let alone £5m.

Just worries me - don't want us going down the LJ path again backing the wrong horse. We just need comprehensive scouting and to be sensible. Doesn't strike me as the latter.

4 hours ago, alexukhc said:

I know people are saying 5million is a lot, but today’s prices is it? Yes we should’ve got him free back then, but we didn’t, but had he joined us he’d prob wouldn’t be half the player is now, name a better player or players we could get for 5 million?

When you consider that Knight has (actually) played at this level and been fairly successful?
Yes.

Twine hasnt proven himself at this level yet - even in a very good Burnley side.

21 hours ago, cidercity1987 said:

In fact I'd go as far to say 

IF we were planning to implement a 'front foot attacking style'

Jason Knight as our major summer expense

Is one of our most bizarre decisions ever.

As a bloke, first part of the press, key part of a counter YES I get it

Trying to create chances whilst dominating possession NO ******* way

In Pearson mind - he was never meant to replace Scott. 

We were supposed to, in NPs mind have a plan A and B lined up if Scott left.

We went with C, sign nobody, and sack the CEO, Manager, and Coaching Team.

53 minutes ago, headhunter said:

A bit of context here - people were calling for Nige's head 8 months before he left; the pro-Nige feeling is driven by deep rooted antipathy towards the owners for not spending, say, no more than another £5-£7 million of the Scott fee.

In my day job over the years I've seen several "family" companies bring in outsiders to turn their business around and in the majority of cases it ends in tears. They [SL/JL] simply didn't like Nige as he told them a few home truths!!

Couple of points. The eight months ago argument is part and parcel of modern football, happened with LJ on multiple occasions.

Point in bold I summarily disagree with.

- could see a style of play and patterns that we hadn't had since Cotts.

- built a squad culture that fans could get behind.

- did so generating huge returns on player sales, and, with Gould, got fans feeling involved with 'the project'.

- he was sacked purely during an injury crisis as only the latter could generate a set of results that the board felt they could use as an excuse to remove him from post, along with Tinnion.

They didn't spend any of the Scott money - near all the summer spending and Mehmeti was offset by the Semenyo fee in January.

6 hours ago, Numero Uno said:

Go back a few months and these two fired a Manager who was “failing to get the best out of a top end squad”. Fast forward eleven matches and we are in pretty much the same place we were. Surely a “better” manager recruited to give us a better chance of success should have come in and achieved MORE if it was only the old manager that was failing us? Your words suggested the squad was good enough but not the manager, YOUR WORDS.

Conclusion so far? Manning is getting no more out of this squad than the sacked manager did. What does that suggest? To me it says the squad was never top end in the first place and where we are with it is as good is it gets. Liam has achieved no more, no less,

I have no doubts Manning will get the point per game that sees us easily safe. But that is not what the two at the top said they would deliver. Front foot, attacking football and success were the sound bites. Three league games without a goal suggests it ain’t happening. More seasons of this type of mediocrity will see us leave the division in the end……..

It’s clear that Manning needs the tools to deliver what has been “spun” from the top. So it’s literally over to the hierarchy. Are you a pair of sound bite bullshitters who will **** us over in the end, which some think you are, or do you have the ability to recruit what Liam needs and what you have said yourselves?

I think many fans will be watching you now…..is it bullshit and bluster or are you going to deliver on your words? Over to you guys!!

*Despite being in an injury crisis, that has now mostly passed.

43 minutes ago, TonyTonyTony said:

Lansdown has sunk in how much - 200 odd million? He's not going anywhere until he recovers most of that.

Reality check

Reality check adjustment. It's a football club, football isn't, has not been and will not be, profitable.

Unless you get a club into the top 1%.

If we're also aiming to increase sustainability - you don't tend to sack a well-liked manager in the middle of an injury crisis due to a difference of opinion in a professional setting and replace him with a novice coach with 24 months managerial experience for a large compensation package, with further spending to sack incumbent coaches spending more to replace them.... when the formers contract ended in 8 months anyway.

This is only going to all get worse due to the way in which NP was sacked. Its lose lose for the board as, if they back Manning now, others such as myself will question as to why the predecessor didn't get backed. The fact they also feel the need to back him rubbishes 'the squad is good enough' argument.

It's just flagrant egotism, cronysim, and incompetence. Utter delusion.

20 minutes ago, johnheadbcfc said:

Yeah but part aswel in Pearson preferred a small squad 

He preferred a smaller squad than what he inherited.

Which considering how much of a car crash he inherited doesn't say much.

When he was pressed on it, he rightly pointed finger upstairs and just replied 'budget'.

7 minutes ago, TV Tom said:

The trouble is that he’s taken over what I think is a poor squad, you can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear !!!

Bigger problem for me is Manning was and is the wrong man for this squad of players.

They were not bought in to play possession football and neither are they capable of it. NPs premise was to play to a system to force openings on the transition via patterns.

Mannings premise appears to be waiting for opening when the enemy loses, i.e. take the openings when they appear passively, not force them. A one-eighty in footballing philosophy.

It's going to take money we don't have to get the staff in to pull it off - had and still has a similar vibe for me as Duff at Swansea.

Whereas if this was end of the third season under LJ with (present) Manning in to replace him - it could've worked as that was a much more technically skilled and creative players. I'd be more optimistic. 

Sadly the leadership's view of this squad between JL and BT is seemingly delusional delusional.

On 08/01/2024 at 18:35, Chessels Chick said:

Oh yes I've never actually printed a ticket just use the pdf/email instead ... but it won't be a digital ticket per se (so won't appear in your Apple/Google wallet)

Worth noting, assuming that the ticket will be in the email and barcode in format - you can scan it with google wallet (if you have the email on a computer) from your phone as a loyalty card and it will also still work, just converts the barcode to QR-format, and you don't have to dig around your emails on the day nor have to rely on patchy 4/5G.

21 hours ago, BCFC1512 said:

Sorry but I disagree, if that’s a city player we’re all screaming pen!! it’s a penalty 

If Conway was in a position where he could score and went down (which he has done twice this season) - I was and will be very annoyed with him, irrespective of if a penalty was given or not.

1 hour ago, Rob k said:

It’s a Penalty all day long in the modern game. 

It shouldnt be - which is the problem.

2 hours ago, GrahamC said:

You think Bournemouth have a better “infrastructure”?

It is all about money.

Infrastructure for me, is ownership structure, strategy, and facilities.

You need all three, we only have the latter.

The former two have been switched around like a continuous puzzle with all corner pieces the last five years.

If it was just down to pure facilities, Darlington would have been in the PL by now.

2 hours ago, GrahamC said:

You think Bournemouth have a better “infrastructure”?

It is all about money.

They have better ownership, progression, and ambition.

Ruthless enough to go after their targets and see deals through.

The last 15 years made that pretty clear.

It gives them the PL platform they need to get a better move from proving themselves at that level. Greater progression.

2 hours ago, Super said:

Would be better with away fans.

Would also be better with our singing section not hemmed on the opposite corner of the ground.

1 minute ago, Cowshed said:

 

4 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

Vila, play through the thirds, from a base of possession.

Correct that's its Villa, except they didn't win from a base of possession. They in fact had 46% of possession, against Man City, and regularly played on the break down the wings when Man City went to play inverted on the transition.

Man City had two shots on target. Despite having more of a ball - as Villa were more organised on closing quickly in their half man to man and turned them over, with pace.

Not saying, again, that you can't win with possession - but all it takes is one error with the ball and you can concede. At this level it's easier to force that single error than thread a perfect 30 yard through ball. You can worry about the former when you get to the Prem like Brighton and Bournemouth have done. As NP said, at this level it's fine margins working with what you have.

10 hours ago, GrahamC said:

Callum Styles can’t get in the Barnsley side one division down, I get Murphy (18, loads of time to improve) but Styles isn’t the answer.

I’d be amazed if we bring in 3 more midfielders next summer alongside Knight & Murphy.

2 possibly, depending on whether any of James, Williams or TGH are still here, but can’t see 3.

He's been fairly disillusioned there under Collins is my understanding and moved between different positions often.

My post was with the assumption that James, King, and Williams all leave in the summer.

7 hours ago, Charlie BCFC said:

I criticised the poster because he went on absolute ramble around Guardiola had ruined football and was a fraud which of course is absolute rubbish. I said the performance wasn’t great, that’s not defending the performance. Anyone who went today would know that it was probably the worst performance of the Manning era 

Scrumps main point, to me, was the effort by clubs (and managers) attempting to emulate Guardiola as being a poor strategy, comparing it to the style yesterday, and that without tempo it means very little.

The Etihad comment is arguably wide of the mark, agreed - the PL as a whole has become more and more sterile.

The issue here is you just insulted the poster without any context. Then meaning you were criticised in turn as people thought the criticism of Scrumps post could be taken as a defence of the performance.

"Not Great" performance could still be interpreted as mediocre or OK, and it just wasn't - at least in my opinion, for clarity.

It was just very very poor against a mediocre Millwall side. Agree to disagree.

2 hours ago, Cowshed said:

Villa frequently will play a short passing possession game. They approached nearly 700 passes v Sheffield Utd. 

That's not exactly outside the norm for any team playing Seffiled United this season - but again also Villa have higher quality players and could break them down.

 Villa average midtable in every metric for touches. https://fbref.com/en/comps/9/possession/Premier-League-Stats - SHU bottom for possession with an average of 36%.

Possession is only slightly above division average. Explained by an equally slightly above average number of successful (%) take-ons.

As a comparison - West Ham in 6th average 41%.

When Villa are playing for a goal however - they tend to wing-play.  6th most crosses in the League. Added to which themselves and Wsst Ham are 4th and 2nd in the league for goals direct from counters.

To clarify, I'm not suggesting possession isn't useful, it is, especially at killing off games or tiring the opposition - but it depends on personnel and how its being used.

As an example- see if you can guess which two teams in the PLs match the image is from.

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Bearing in mind Mehmeti (who in previous games was drifting in) stayed wide left today, don’t you think it was tactical?

Mehmeti, part covering Pring against the progressive Norton-Cuffy.

Tanner can handle the less dynamic Murray Wallace.

So instead of being lopsided towards the right, today we set up to be lopsided to the left.

I don’t think Weimann or Tanner were THE problem individually today.

Agree for the most part - for Andi however, he needs to stop going inside all the time. A number of times he left Conway to run the channel, and didnt contribute much if anything in the pocket. He hid at time today which did him no favours and is unlike him.

3 hours ago, GrahamC said:

Did not expect to think at the halfway point of the season that he would be first pick in midfield but now looks that way.

TGH was really poor when he came on today & James was 6/10 but Joe, who was good at Birmingham & apparently outstanding at Watford, certainly edged him.

Williams is not the answer if the question is who should start in a Manning system. His passing simply isnt good enough, escecially in scope of his injury record with us.

We needed a new midfield in the summer with the Scott money - we only got TGH who simply is not consistent at this level, and in NPs own words Knight wasn't a Scott replacement. At the very least, by the coming summer, we need three new midfielders (across Jan and Summer coming windows) to complement Knight with a view to the longer term; with King, James, and Williams deals all expiring in 7 months time and Benarous as of yet unlikely to come back from his innjury issues, assuming McCrorie will come in and displace Tanner at right-back.

Add Weimann also being out of contract come the summer.

With a view to that a couple of loans for players going into the final years of their contracts next season would make financial sense if we can agree optional fees.

Ironically two of our midfield targets (Adam Murphy [St Pats], and Callum Styles [Barnsley]) I'd possible enquire for, adding a loan. See if we can't shift Kingy early as I don't see a future for him under Manning.

25 minutes ago, Bs4Red said:

I mean he’s 0.07 higher, we’ve scored more goals per game slightly and for have conceded roughly the same per game. 
 

This after 11 games, so with time I have no doubt that only improves. Granted I could be wrong mate but this is NP side. 
 

So LM is getting more out of a side that isn’t his than the previous manager. 
 

With a few additions I only see this improving personally. Players are still adapting and learning. 

He's also got five first teamers back from being unavilable that NP didnt have available for selection.
So I'd expect him to get more out of the squad, to be honest.

43 minutes ago, Charlie BCFC said:

Sorry what? Where did I defend the performance? Are you looking at the right comment?

You criticised SB for calling a dire performance dire and insinuated he was still drunk from NY - and said by return it was 'not great'.

It was a woeful performance up there with the S'OD era, was my point. To call his critique of today 'one of the weirdest posts on this forum' is some way off the mark.

Today was up there with the Barnsley game at AG back when Simpson and Downing took caretaker charge against Barnsley. For context in case people can't remember that far back - https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/12220056/bristol-city-0-1-barnsley-carlton-morris-fires-tykes-to-victory.

5 minutes ago, Bs4Red said:

Guardiola ball is not the way. 
The way that has just won a treble and dominated English football since it begun. 
 

Today was poor, but it needs to be tweaked and have the right players for it too work. All needs time.

The days of blood and thunder football are gone. Any successful team currently play a version of your “Guardiola ball”

There are teams that don't play possession based and do well. Villa, Bournemouth, Palace, West Ham - all examples of teams that play on the counter or wing-play without great amounts of possession. Secondly - Guardiola-ball has adapted, more and more season by season, it may keep the ball and focus possession still, but he uses have changed. Case in point, look at how Guardiola setup against Klopp back in April. (https://www.premierleague.com/news/3791815) Transitions is the key word. Its why I - personally - liked NP's approach as it was pragmatic.

The only teams that play possession and do well is where they (already) have the players for it - usually with a great advantage of technical players with comparison to the rest of the league they play in. Leicester this season for example, along with Southampton, can affod to do so - as they have the forward players with the creativity to do so as they have the one vs one ability to beat a man.

Problems with a Guardiola-like system (or how the gist of it is emulated at this level) as you moot above is that, re the bit on bold - you're not likely going to be able to get the players that can pull of that system at our level. Its that simple. Leicester manage the sort of possessions numbers under Maresca, because that squad shouldnt have been playing at this level in the first place.

Compare and contrast the opposite to that (interpreted) approach with Luton of last season. Well coached 4-4-2/4-4-1-1, round pegs in round holes. Horvath, Bree/Drameh, Osho, Lockyer, Bell; Clark, Campbell, Mpanzu/Nakamba, Doughty, Adebayo, Morris. Direct and quick in general play and transition. Two forwards strong in the air and quick on the deck, with wingers in Doughty and Clark who have good technique, with quick overlapping full-backs in Bell and Drameh. The epitomy of 'football can be a simple game if you do the basics right'.

I despise suggestions that suggest we need to rebuild. How many 'right' players is this evolution going to take? - as based on todays evidence, its everyone apart from the backline.