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?

5 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Problem is mate, there hasn't been any positives so therefore it's impossible to post about positives. 

I don't count high posession as a positives as watching our cbs pass it between themselves is dull and tedious. 

You may think there has been positives and that's fair enough. I don't and that's fair enough too. 

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.  

4 hours ago, supercidered said:

I find it amazing that we as City fans forgive and forget so quickly. (this isn't a dig at you LB). We as fans have been royally f@cked over for many years and the last debacle with NP followed by the LM appointment was the proverbial straw.

I have seen precious little to get excited about since LM came in. I don't see how anyone can see a draw at Huddersfield as a positive result. I've already written this season off as 'also rans'. I'm pretty sure that all we are going to hear now are lines like 'January is a tough time to do business' 'lets see what happens in the summer' ''we need a good pre season'. Same old sh!te and same old mid table obscurity. 

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.  

20 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Right I've looked at the thread for the Record.

I remember Tinnion saying we play or aspire to play the same way throughout the club at all levels.

System, ethos or a bit of both..

Am I to take it that we are now playing, will play a back 3 or wingbacks- if not we are deviating already, and it was not on the brochure.

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. 

2 hours ago, JoeAman08 said:

Old enough he should be able to deal physically a lot better than he does. 
 

If we are going to play him it should be on the right imo.

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. 

18 hours ago, Alessandro said:

So for me all he’s doing is highlighting what we knew - you want this style, you want top 6? Well you’re going to need to spend money. 

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.

35 minutes ago, Marina's Rolls Royce said:

Bell's biggest crime appears to be youth and inexperience-  he's City through and through, one of our own and will come good given time. 

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. 

5 hours ago, Davefevs said:

If that was so, ie promotion isn’t the aim, wouldn’t you then wonder - why did they sack Nigel Pearson

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.

8 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

I think you’ve highlighted here something which, if true, i’m going to call the “Manning Paradox”. He is at the same time so obsessed with football that he spends every waking moment devouring information on it, yet at the same time is so unobsessed with football that he doesn’t do basic due diligence on fans expectations/feeling on a club when he is looking at a job. This place, Twitter etc aren’t hard to find and nor were Jon and Brian’s (eventual) public pronouncements.

If he did have no idea, then I’d suggest he’s not as diligent about things as he’s made out to be.

 

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. 

1 hour ago, Silvio Dante said:

I’m more than willing to say that he had different conversations internally than were positioned externally, but he undoubtedly knew what he was walking into in terms of public expectation.

On that basis, for want of a better term, I’d suggest he’s “fair game”. As with any job, he knows the expectation (set at a false bar by the ownership but the fans will judge on that), and not meeting that will naturally lead to dissatisfaction.

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.   

18 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Do you think it's a unreasonable expectation then? When the club said "We've made this change now to give the new head coach the best chance of success this season" I think that's a reasonable expectation to also place on Manning.

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. 

Just now, W-S-M Seagull said:

Not sure what makes you think I don't support the team and LM. 

I want us to do well regardless of the ownership or the manager etc. 

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.  

Just now, W-S-M Seagull said:

And that's fair enough mate. 

Trust is a big thing for me. I wont forgive someone simply because I know they have lied to me.  Many of us feel as if there is no trust between the club and the fans. 

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. 

2 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

If you want to look at it in a simplistic view of being able to sit in a seat for 23 times a season then fair play. 

When I go to the movies, I don't go there just to be able to sit in a seat. I pay to sit in that seat to watch a movie that I believe will be entertaining. 

So when I made my decision to part with over 500 quid and then commit to travel costs etc on top of that it was because I brought into the journey we was on. During this cost of living crisis, I took my time making my decision because I wanted to be sure that it wouldn't be another season of just bumbling along. I went into the season believing the play offs were achievable. 

During ST sales if the club would have said "despite us making progress (however slow) we're going to rip up that plan and start again and we want you to get on board for another journey/rebuild and would like you to be patient" I'd have not renewed. Basically had I known what I know now, I'd not have that seat! 

No I don't believe it at all but I'm not a forgiven person. I don't appreciate deceit or lies. I'm not going to simply forgive them because I knew they were lying. That's a ludicrous way to live life. 

It was said "We've sacked Pearson to give the new head coach the best possible chance of challenging this season" I'm holding them to that. 

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.  

14 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I sympathise with this point, and we have to give Manning a fair crack but if we spend relatively freely in January and or the rhe hierarchy move the goalpost definitively, while it shouldn't hopefully affect Manning all that much, the hierarchy however.. that is a major trust issue and it won't be easily repaired.

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.

36 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

When I purchased my season ticket, I didn't sign up to another journey or another rebuild. 

Manning was so say brought in to get us challenging THIS SEASON. So no I don't expect to see the finished product after 4 games but I do expect us to challange. 

Other managers have gone in at other clubs and delivered immeidate results so I don't buy into this "he needs time" bullshit. If he needs time, then he was the wrong choice by the board for their stated aims!

**** 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.

. 

4 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Are you saying you sit with JL and Tins

Not I'm in cheap seats.  

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Playing devils advocate, LM’s journey is starting from a different point to your typical starting new manager starting point isn’t it?

Nobody thinks it’s a finished product after 4 games, but OTIBers are purely saying that he is starting from a better place (than normal) and he’s ultimately expected to kick us on as he settles.  And if we are trying to achieve promotion, his period of settling-in is small. 

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.  

15 hours ago, AG City said:

Went back to a beach hut on a Thai island with a Swedish worldie in 2007. Someone had scratched Bristol City FC in the wall above the bed! 

Was is Tommy?  

46 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

Considering the noises made by JL/BT about how the progress is expected, describing it as “the start of a journey” is a bit tin eared tbh.

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.  

17 minutes ago, Harry said:

I think we’ve generally done ok so far and I can see positive changes in how we are playing. 

We’ve let in 5 goals under Manning. 
1 dickwad own goal from Vyner. 
1 sloppy mistake from Tanner gifting Boro the ball in his own half. 
1 unstoppable shot into the top corner by a full back. 
1 unlucky own goal that derived from Weimann gifting Norwich the ball in his own half. 
1 dickwad error from Vyner misjudging the flight of a long ball. 
 

We’ve actually played ok I think. We’ve competed, we’ve created, we’ve ran, we’ve worked, we’ve passed, we’ve just conceded 4 very very soft goals (none of which were as a result of how we’re trying to play and thus are not manager error). 

I’ve actually been rather encouraged so far. 

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.  

1 hour ago, Harry said:

Also. Did anyone see our goal today? 
It was a period of slow possession across the back 4 before it finally opened up the space for Dickie to play a forward pass to Knight, who layed a first time ball to Weimann, who took 1 touch and played a ball out wide to Sykes in plenty of space to make a cross. 
The possession allowed us to create the passing lane for the ball to Knight and also to create the space wide for Sykes. 
I thought it was very good. 
 

If keeping the ball along the back 4 helps to create great passages of incisive play as we saw for the goal, then I don’t know what there is to complain about! 

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? 

6 hours ago, petehinton said:

Also went straight down the tunnel at FT, after lapping up the crowd on the pitch after we beat Boro. Cannot stand managers that do that, can’t have it both ways.

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.