Red Skin

5 weeks isn't very long to totally change the way we play. Pearson won't be coming back, and if we sack LM how long do we give the next bloke? 5 weeks? Less, 3 weeks? He will still be just putting the cherry on top of a top 6 team after all won't he? That's the narrative that too many on here seem to be clinging onto. And the next bloke will still be appointed by the current ownership, so he'll have to deal with the same backlash. Or will the collective grief of the fan base finally moved on to acceptance of the reality of where we are?

Yeah, I am perfectly aware of your position. Regardless of that, it's been 5 ******* games. That's 5 occasions when we get to measure how Liam has done. I bet in whatever job you do you weren't expected to justify keeping your job after 5 days of actually doing it.

I think you are completely missing the point of the original post. 1. You can be angry about the board and how they dealt with Pearson and treated the fans, AND, 2. You can see some positives in how Manning is going about his job and changing the way we play. These aren't mutually exclusive positions. The results haven't been great. We haven't seen 90 minutes of scintillating football, but there are signs of progress. I suspect like me @Harryis frustrated by a lot of the noise on here right now. Everything LM does, doesn't do, says, doesn't say is used as stick to beat him with as some sort of way as getting back at the ownership. Just give the bloke a chance. If people are really that dissatisfied with the ownership, then address that separately. Do something constructive to change it.

It's still early and we have lots of players injured so needs must. One answer might be he hasn't got the players available to play how he wants. The other answer may be more nuanced. LM seems flexible in how we set up - to say the least. Looks like he is happy to change how we set up to exploit weaknesses in the opposition. (Whereas I always felt Lee Johnson changed to negate the opposition). The fact we have generally played well in the first half, and then struggled when teams adapt at HT would suggest the game plan is working initially. He's said before it's really hard to influence much from the touchline in game. And that it's an education piece that needs to be done for players to understand what's happening in game, be familiar with the solutions, and pick the right one to counter what they see. This is definitely going to take time and may in part explain why we fail to adapt in the second half. Maybe this is the consistency - the solutions, dynamic formations, as well as the possession, high press, and aggressive front foot - that will be practiced throughout the footballing side of the club rather than a rigid structure for organising the team whether that be 433 532 etc? Quite an undertaking and in terms of recruitment you'll need intelligent players that learn fast as well as possessing the other attributes required at the top level. We as fans seem far more hooked on formations than coaches. I am just as guilty of that as anyone. Anyone that watched how Tottenham's fullbacks played yesterday, how John Stones has been playing for Man City, or how Sheffield United's overlapping centre-half bamboozled teams a few years ago will appreciate how the game is continually being reinvented. I can't always follow it at the time, but I find it quite fascinating when it's explained in the analysis.

It's not a matter of age. Physically he just hasn't developed to the extent that he is strong enough. Rooney was a man at 16. Semenyo was a man at 18. Sam just isn't there yet. I agree about him playing on the right, but I wouldn't play him there ahead of Sykes.

Sounds pretty shrewd in that case. Obviously, to get the appointment LM would have had to had to pitch it as some minor tinkering. Now he's in position he can implement the style he (and the ownership) wanted and if it works then great, and if it doesn't he has some evidence to argue for some player investment. Whilst I don't think the squad is top 6, I'm still happy enough to let LM work with the players and see what they are capable of. It's still relatively early days for me. Great post @Harry.

I agree. Despite what another poster says, technically I feel he's very good at quick short passing when he comes inside. And he is a clever player too, so much so that I don't think others are on the same page. He's not really a winger, but until he gains a bit more physical stature he will struggle through the middle so I think on the wing is the best position right now. He can definitely finish, so when we attack down the right there isn't anyone I'd rather see coming in on the back post that Sam Bell. His finishing is that good. I wasn't at yesterday's game so no idea how Huddersfield set up, other than the formation on the BBC Sport app. I can only guess Manning felt our back 3 could largely look after their attack so Bell and Sykes would primarily be attacking. Bell is struggling for form tight now, but he's young and learning.

Dave, for an incredibly bright bloke you seem a bit naive on Pearson's sacking. The ownership did not want Pearson. They were grasping at straws to give a coherent footballing reason for getting rid of him. There isn't one. There is a very good case for organising to change the ownership and I'd support that. People would be far better pursuing that, rather than trying to rake over the ownership's empty words trying make any sense of them.

So, let me get this clear, now we are criticising Manning for not spending more time on Twitter? Give the bloke a chance. I don't want a manager that is so concerned about fan reaction that it would influence his decision to join a club or not. What kind of character and backbone would any such individual have when he is in the job and the going gets a bit tough? LM is obviously a man with a belief that he method and his ability, and I admire that. What I feel he (through the City media) are doing though is trying to ask for fans patience as his way of working in bedded in. That's a sensible approach for me.

No one really knows, but regardless of the talk of 'top six' finish that was nail in Pearson's coffin, LM would not have been given this as a target for this year when he was being courted. And that's what his appointment was, not an interview. He's a manager on the up, why would he come to City weighed down with those expectations? He'd be better off staying at Oxford and having the chance of a better opportunity in the summer, or taking them up and having it later. He is a man so immersed and obsessed with football at the club he is working for, I do not believe he'd have had any idea about how the fans felt about Pearson's sacking. Why would he? Did you see anything in the national media about how badly we took it? The only thing he would have had to go on would have been what he was told by the club. And most people seem to think they either didn't know or didn't care what the fans thought, so at the very least it would have been played down. The club owners are fair game, but I don't believe LM is. And taking the position that LM is fair game, where does that leave you? It means the righteous anger and antipathy that should rightly be levelled at the club owners and hierarchy is completely misplaced.

No, it isn't unreasonable if you believe what they said. I never believed it for one minute. The owners didn't want Pearson and they were looking for excuses for what was a very poor decision and really couldn't be justified on any objective grounds. Some honesty would have help us fans, no matter how unpalatable, and it would have certainly helped Liam. He's been given a really tough job because of this and I feel lots of empathy for him because of this.

Pretty sure I've seen posts from you moaning about the football since LM took over. Might be wrong though, so apologies of that's not the case. I do think that many (maybe you, maybe not) are weighing down LM with the expectations the hierarchy had for Pearson this season, and the reason for sacking him i.e. top six finish or challenging top six this season. Everything has changed with Pearson's sacking.

No one is asking you to forgive, and we have been lied to. I think there is a groundswell of opinion amongst fans for changing the ownership, but you can still support the team and LM without supporting the ownership.

Mate, we might support the same football team but we are miles apart in terms of how we view life and deal with (very minor) adversity. I am very much accepting of where we are, but judging by your posts you aren't.

And that's the crux of the issue. If people have a issue with the ownership, then let's organise around that. I'd support it. But we need to recognise that support for LM and the team is not support for the ownership. Somehow, supporting LM and seeing anything positive in what we seen in games and viewed as supporting the Lansdowns and Pearson being sacked. And that's just not the case.

**** me, did you really? I buy my season ticket to see my mates for a couple of pints before the game. If the football is decent then that's a bonus. The stated reason for sacking Pearson are bullshit. We haven't got a top six side. We all know that. And just because they said we have it doesn't make it true. Have you not been watching the games? This shouldn't be a stick to beat LM with. Pearson was building something special. I was gutted he was sacked. But, despite what the JL, SL and Tins have said I never thought we'd seriously challenge this year especially given the injury list. Do you really think we would? What I was witnessing, however, was the consolidation of a squad with an identity and sense of belief. Sadly, Pearson has gone. What I want now is the players to adopt and believe in what our new manager has to bring. Regardless, of how we got him and what I wanted I really think he could be decent. There seems to be some sort of of grief we, as fans, are going through. But we all seem to be at different stages. Some are still angry, some are still in denial, some are numb, and some are accepting of where we find ourselves. I think Liam deserves a chance and regardless of what I think about how Pearson was treated I'm gonna give Manning my support and choose to see the positives rather than the negatives. .

Not I'm in cheap seats.

Not you, but I think that judging by the comments of some on here and the reactions of some of those around me at the games I've been to, there are people expecting to see really cohesive free-flowing attacking football for 90 minutes.

Was is Tommy?

Maybe this is more of a pitch to those fans who expected to see the finished product of LM's coaching after 4 games?

Jesus, haven't we all had enough of fans projecting their own feeling onto players? As Matt James said when asked about Nigel's departure, managers departing clubs is part and parcel of football. Yes, I'm sure players that Nige was picking will find it unsettling, but I suspect most are pretty focussed on themselves and being successful as a team despite Nige departing. And certainly players that weren't being picked every week e.g. Mehmeti, will probably be glad of the chance to impress a new manager. As for what's gonna happen over the next games, let's not catastrophize. Let's just see how things unfold.

It's clear to me that some fans are so pissed with the board for sacking Pearson, they are blind to anything that could be seen as improvement. I didn't want to see Pearson sacked (feel I have to say that when I post anything positive) and no one believes what the Club hierarchy says about the reason why, but let's give Manning a chance. Yes, there was a fair deal of passing along the back that didn't go anywhere but we did make a number of incisive pieces of play to open up Norwich. As the players get more used to what Manning wants I am optimistic we'll see more incisive passing and more opportunities. I also think clever players like Bell will be more impactful coming inside and linking play than being stuck out on the wing and just being asked to chase hopeful punts down the channels. Conway is struggling now, but I see more chances (like he had today) coming his way too, as the players become more adept at executing what the new regime are trying to implement.

Well said @Harry. We had 3 or 4 really decent chances in the first half that came through patient build and incisive passing. Sure the second half wasn't great, but there are signs of improvement for me. Must be the torches the pitchfork brigade are carrying are blinding them to some decent glimpses of football?

Maybe he was going back to the changing room to give the players a bollocking for conceding late on? If he'd come over to crowd to 'celebrate' a last minute defeat, he'd get pelters for that too. The bloke can't win. I didn't want Nigel sacked but this dissection of every word Manning says and every action he takes is absolutely ridiculous.

I think sin bins have some merit. I've always thought the accumulation of yellow cards resulting in a ban has always had a issue of fairness about it. And this is the scenario. - It's the penultimate game of the season. City are level on points with Leeds for the second automatic promotion place. (I never said it was a realistic scenario!). - Both clubs have to play Norwich in one of the last two game. City play Norwich in their penultimate game, and Leeds play Norwich in their last game. - In the City v Norwich game, four of Norwich's key player are one booking away from a ban. - All 4 players pick up yellow cards in the game v City for professional fouls and are subsequently banned for the final game of the season against Leeds. - For City, all the offences by these players deny us from winning the game, and yet it's Leeds that benefit from these offences as they face a weakened team because of the offences committed against City. Leeds benefit, but we don't. Ok, an unlikely scenario and I've exaggerated the impact to prove a point but at any time of the season a misdemeanour by one player that merits a booking does not really help the team they commit it against. By sin binning him, the team he has committed the offence against immediately benefits rather than some other random team further down the fixture list. There are arguments against of course - would it result in a very defensive formation from the sin-binned team - but it would solve this particular injustice that I have always struggled with.