LondonBristolian

Bottom line is tonight has happened. The score line's not nice but it's over and results elsewhere mean - goal difference aside - we've pretty much emerged unscathed in terms of the table. We can sit and analyse what went wrong - I'm sure fans on here will and the team will too - but what really matters is how the team respond. LJ needs to make sure the team get it out their system, draw a line under it and don't let it undo our good work over the last month. If he can do that, we'll be fine and tonight will be forgotten.

The cheap option wasn't made though. Whether LJ proved to be the right option or not, the simple fact is getting a manager under contract from another club who, though a division below, are of a comparative size to us, paying compensation and increasing his wages isn't the cheap option. You're entitled to your opinion, which I happen to disagree with, but it seems a bit daft to back it up with assertions that are factually and demonstrably untrue.

I completely disagree. I can see no reason why community engagement, good facilities and stadium, youth development, financial sustainability and buying players who will appreciate in value are League One specific concepts and am genuinely baffled as to who anyone would think they were. I'd be really interested if you elaborated on this as, on the face of it, your post makes no sense whatsoever.

I don't think the five pillars ever went away - they're all things the club are trying to do behind the scenes. To be honest - dislike of management speak aside - I've always been a bit confused by what the issues are with the five pillars. Firstly I've had enough experience of supporting a club without a plan and I'd argue the absence of one from 2008 - 2013 explains why we went from the verge of the play-offs with a hungry young tight squad to relegated with a bloated squad of poor players on expensive contracts. So I think a plan is a good thing. Secondly I don't really see the issue with the five pillars. Effectively all it is is the club saying the following five things are important to them: Community Engagement and promoting "health, social inclusion, participation and education" via the Community Trust. Investing in the academy and youth development to bring young players through. Aiming to sign young players with potential who'll increase in value and having a database of potential talent so we have good ideas for future targets in all positions. Financial control and prudence Building a new stadium and investing in training facilities. Personally I have no problem with any of those. 1. I want the club to be giving something back to the community. 2. I don't think I've ever met a Bristol City fan who doesn't want the club to have a good youth system. It's great that Bryan has become an established player and, whether or not the likes of Burns, Vyner, Reid, O'Leary, Morrell and Wollacott become first-team regulars, it's great we have players in with a chance. 3. Our recruitment has gone wrong but I'd say that's because we've got away from having a good list of potential targets, not because the plan is a bad one. 4. I know financial control splits fans who want us to be more ambitious but I don't want us to be where Bolton or Portsmouth are, or where we have been in the past. 5. Surely having decent facilities and a comparable stadium capacity to other teams in the Championship is vital if we want to compete. As far as I can see, whilst it's not yet translated to success on the pitch, the club following the five pillars has led to a rebuilt stadium, a Category B youth system with 3 youth recruits playing for the club this season and 3 more on the bench and a thriving community trust that's doing good things in the community. I'd be really interested to know what it is about the principles of the five pillars that makes so many of the fans find them inherently terrible.

First off, to be clear, I don't think he's a good candidate. I think he's a completely unviable candidate because he's about to retire and, if he was looking for a new job, he'd quite rightly think he could do a lot better than a second tier club in England. It just rankled with me that anyone would be so dismissive of the qualities of someone who has proven himself on stages far larger than Ashton Gate. Secondly, of course 9 years of experience 30 years ago would be meaningless on its own but this is in the context of someone who moved from that experience to the international stage and has been in constant employment since. I imagine Alan Sugar hasn't had direct experience as a salesman since the early 80s but, given he's only not worked in sales because he's worked himself into a higher position elsewhere, it'd be silly to use that as a reason why he wouldn't be suitable for a job as a salesman. I don't necessarily think Lagerback is likely to come to Ashton Gate any time soon, and nor do I think it would necessarily be good for him or the club. I just think your post was overly-dismissive of someone who deserves a lot more respect. More generally - and this isn't particularly directed at you - I find it incredible how many people on here are so choosy and so dismissive about so many candidates. Before my time as a City fan, the club appointed a 34 year old who had played 33 games in the top flight, 55 games in Division Three and then spent 5 years as an assistant manager in the second and third divisions. Such a candidate would be derided today but Alan Dicks stayed for 13 years and took us into the top flight. Our most successful manager since then had managed the Latvian national football team and a conference and League Two team prior to coming to us. Meanwhile, of the two biggest names to be appointed in my time as a City fan, one spent a fortune but couldn't get us out of League One and the other stormed off after two matches. I've no idea why so many people on here persist with the idea that past success is the best indicator of future success when there's so much first-hand evidence suggesting this is not the case.

Transfermarkt lists his time with Kilafors from 1977 to 1983 (most profiles suggest he actually left in 1982) but leaves out two later spells managing Arbrå BK from 1983 to 1985 and from Hudiksvalls ABK from 1987 to 1989. Check any bio of him (the one on Uefa.com is an example and so too are the below from the bbc and the telegraph) and these spells are listed. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/africa/8540420.stm http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/nigeria/7767678/Lars-Lagerback-Nigeria-coach-at-World-Cup-2010.html Even going with transfermarkt though, think for a second. They list him being there from 77 to 83. Do you really think he managed a football team for 5 or 6 years and didn't take charge of a single game? And, for that matter, then became Swedish u-21 manager and don't manage a single game there either? Or is it perhaps more logical to conclude transfermarkt does not actually stats from the Swedish lower leagues prior to the invention of the internet? As for actual stats for how Lageback got on in those roles, I do not have those any more than transfemarkt do. All I can tell you is he was at his first club for five years so one presumes they weren't anxious to sack him, and he must have done enough in the two subsequent roles in order to get offered a job with the national set-up so I guess he did okay. But how he did back then wasn't my point and nor is the fact that he has managed the likes of Henrik Larsson and Zlatan Ibrahimovic and has most recently taken a country with three quarters the population of Bristol to their first ever European Championship and the brink of a World Cup. My point was merely that it is inaccurate to say he has never managed at club level based on one stats site when this is contradicted multiple times elsewhere.

Indeed. I'd have thought he might be the kind of manager that the board are looking at and certainly I think we could do far worse.

In this case your 'inconvenient truth' is actually an 'inconvenient factual inaccuracy'. Not to let facts get in the way of a good rant but he's got 9 years of league experience over 12 year with three different clubs. I apologise for calling you ignorant but, in this particular case, you do have your facts wrong.

To be honest, anyone who would turn down Lars Lagerback is a fool. Massively experienced and respected manager who did well with Sweden has worked miracles with Iceland. However firstly I'm sure he could do better than a Championship club, secondly I don't think he's going to turn his back on a final European Championship this Summer and thirdly it's a completely moot point as he's already announced his attention to retire. However the fact that there are fans on here dismissing him just shows fans' ignorance of global football.

I'm not backing us to sneak into the playoffs on this evidence...

I'd obviously go for Moyes if he said yes.but don't believe he would. Of more realistic options, I'd be happy with Garry Monk or Di Matteo. Or indeed Chris Powell. In terms of leftfield options that are showing up on the bookies' lists, I'm a bit intrigued by Jaap Stam and wonder if the board should interview him and see if they like what he has to say. Pearson'd be interesting but it'd basically be signing the closest thing we could find to a carbon copy of Cotterill and it'd make me wonder about the logic of replacing him in the first place. I'm massively against Warnock for one reason alone, which is that I'm aware he doesn't sign or play young players for the future because he only wants players who'll make him look good in the short-term rather than building clubs for the long-term. I also think we need someone who's more of a head coach than a conventional control-all manager.

Giving youth a chance too. Hurrah!

A few weeks ago I'd have agreed. But Cotts isn't going to change. If he's not going to pick Reid and Burns when we've two games in 48 hours, not going to pick them for the next match after a 4-0 defeat and only going to bring one on 8 mins from time when we've not had a shot on target and one with 1 minute to go when we're a goal don. we have to accept he isn't going to pick them. There's no point in counting on suddenly Cotterill becoming a person he isn't. The club have to decide whether we make to do with the manger he is or whether to change. And they have to decide now whilst there's till time in the transfer window to make the change. To my mind, there's ten days until our next league game and only one decision that can be made.

The thing is I can forgive a poor performance and I can forgive players not being good enough. What I can't forgive is playing the same system and same players week on week even though it's not working and then refusing to make substitutions even when you have players who are clearly fatigued (as last Saturday), losing (as on Monday), or had no shots on target (as today). Or bringing players in on loan and refusing to play them. Ultimately when things aren't working you have to try something different. And, as you say, we desperately need players. But didn't SL say quite recently SC hadn't even approached him to suggest potential targets? If SC has got ideas for players we need that are likely to want to come here, are likely to make a difference and are going to enable us to vary the way we play a bit then fantastic. But, at the moment, Cotterill seems bereft of ideas and the team seem bereft of fight. And much as we need players, I actually think the problem runs deeper than anything one or two singings are going to fix...

Apart from anything else, I think it's proved to everyone else in the squad - Reid, Burns, Little etc. - that no mater what they do, the manager is not going to give them a chance. And it proves to everyone in the team that, no matter how abject they are, they'll continue to get picked unless we sign anyone. Not really much of a motivator is it?

For me, Cotts is taking a big gamble using the same line-up after 1 win in 13 games. Especially with this being our 3rd game in 8 days, and how bad we were Monday, you'd think we'd have to try something to see if we can get a different result - whether that's a different shape, playing Reid or Burns or whatever. It might not work but we know that it's not working with the players we've got. Surely there's a point where you have to try something? I seriously hope Cotterill and the team prove me wrong but another poor performance and another heavy defeat and surely that HAS to be the final straw?

For me, the failure to make subs is the final straw. If we're playing like we are, and the manager isn't even prepared to take risks that might improve things even when there's nothing to lose, there really is nothing else to say. I don't want us in league one next season and that's where Cotts is taking us.

I think the worst thing is the crushing inevitability. The transfer window can't open quickly enough...

Completely disagree. We were utterly comfortable throughout. At times we let Walsall have the ball in areas where they couldn't hurt us but, a slight wobble mid-way through the first half aside, there wasn't a single moment where I thought Walsall might score and I reckon our players had more than enough in the tank to respond if Walsall had got a goal from someone. I thought it was a thoroughly professional performance. What also really struck me, from sitting right up at the top of the stadium and looking down on the action from above, is how fluid our formation is. At different points of the game we were be 3 - 5 - 2, 5 - 3 - 2, 3-2-4-1, 4 - 4 - 2 and 4 - 3 - 1 - 2 and it made it pretty much impossible for Walsall to pick players up or know where they'd be. Seeing the team in a big stadium with a quality pitch just emphasised how good they actually are.

I utterly agree with this. These debates seem to inevitably collapse into SOD vs Cotterill and that muddies the water so I don't want to go down the road but Cotterill has not impressed me at all and has shown absolutely nothing that suggests to me he can find a way to lift the club and improve our fortunes. I completely agree with how bad the transfer activity and coaching seems to be. We've had the slight improvement of fortunes that clubs tend to get for a few games when they get a new manager but, now that has passed, there is not very much left.

There comes a point though, where the manager has to start doing something about that and I just don't think he is. Obviously it's not SC's fault we're in the position we are but I'm increasingly convinced he's not the man who's going to save us from it. When he was appointed, I genuinely wanted to give him a chance but bizarre team selections, players being dropped for no particular reason, perseverance with formations that don't work and a general lack of ideas are extremely concerning. I'm not normally the first in the 'sack the manager' queue - I was all in favour of giving Johnson, Millen, McInnes and O'Driscoll time to prove themselves (in some cases perhaps wrongly) butI honestly think that the sooner this arrogant, clueless no-mark gets out of our club, the better it'll be all round.

To get someone who can rebuild us over the summer. I know full well that was the plan with SOD last season and it didn't work but it was the wrong manager rather than the wrong plan.

Initially McInnes, Millen and SOD all seemed to be improving things too.

He confirmed he would have been if an opportunity had come up at the right time in the past. He's said several times that he does not want to manage now. Our fans just choose to ignore that repeatedly.

Fair point. I didn't mean to suggest SOD was in any way a golden age. The results were awful for the most part and, as I said, he didn't seem to motivate the squad. What I do think is he brought in a group of players in order to play a certain way and, if we'd got a manger in to build on that, we'd be be in a better position than bringing in a manager who seems to be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. There were, of course, several things that needed to be improved from the SOD era but I'm just not convinced Cotterill is improving them.