Cowshed

32 minutes ago, Natchfever said:

Is he a good lad?

Unless discipline issues its a puzzle for me.

Edit, just saw your comments Pete. Not sure how that level will improve him technically.

Yes he is more than a good lad. He is a resilient brilliant lad who had his knock backs through youth football, took it on the chin, grafted and improved, joined the academy late and excelled. 

He is a lad playing at pro and semi pro level. Playing versus adults in intense competitive football helps hone and sharpen technique. This intensity will produce more improvement for Ephraim than playing U18

8 hours ago, MelksRed said:

Down to motivation - no career enhancing opportunity like Southampton....players only want to turn up if they have a chance of being scouted for Prem clubs...irrespective of the input of the manager this macks of a total lack of professionalism.

Gone are they days when players played for the shirt. Just a stepping stone.....and we have clueless, spineless pr1cks in charge. What could go wrong?

How do you know that?

I have ex players and mates at Melksham where players get paid £50 - £240 a week. Turning up to be scouted? Something else?

City's players. Through academy and youth football I know two players contracted to City. Living like Monks, highly professional, dedicated, grinding through the training, doing extras, not in XI match day squads. Desperate to play and not doing it to be scouted by Man U.

Your post is a bit sweepingly silly.

4 hours ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

You said "You can play from possession and play on the front foot" that's how Man City play, hence my comment.

Well excuse me for believing that Manning ball was very much like how Man City play. Maybe the fact he crafted his philosophies whilst working for the City group maybe. 

The City group obviously didn't think much of the guy as they allowed him to leave the group. 

I have watched a impressive AYL Brislington junior team recently all short passing, working the ball up the pitch, high possession, but they were not playing very much like Man City. 

Ederson v O'Leary? Stones v ? The roles? The patterns? Use of half spaces? The formations? Possession yes, but very different possession football Mate. 

2 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

A lot in there - but just to highlight this. 
 

What you’re describing is a move to a more possession heavy side in a nutshell. And to transition to that, there will be transition of players. And I don’t disagree with building from the base - but what it is would be contrary to a) the continuation strategy and b) our already stated aims in the summer

To expand, we have given Zac Vyner a handsome contract this season. By not including him you’ve expressed implicitly concerns over whether he can do the job LM wants him to do (and FWIW I think a fit Atkinson could) and therefore there should be questions asked - if this was the strategy - as to how good an idea this was.

Im not going to disagree in any way that Max isn’t the best in a possession side. Hes got better, but the distribution is still not great. If you want the model, he needs replacing.

And obviously it is a process, but working on the “build from the back” maxim it suggests spending money there first.

The second issue there is that both Tinnion and Manning have identified the key target in the summer as being a striker. That suggests they see the first building block as different to your analysis (which I don’t disagree with as the sensible way of executing the model). This means the problems then continue as you’ve put the windows in but not built the foundation.

You do have to overlay the club and where you start from in thinking at this point. I think to transition fully and effectively to this model (if it works) is a 2-3 season job. And by the limited number of players you’ve highlighted you’re in the same place. We aren’t going to be holding players of quality for that long, and also based on Liams history, he’d look to move if it does work quickly.

So, I think it is almost as simplistic as I do get what he’s trying to do in theory. And I do see what a “good” Manning team should look like. But I think it’s kind of back to a point that @Davefevs made before - Russell Martin is better at  Soton than Swansea as he has the players to play his way and they are better than anyone else in the league at doing so, just as Liam did at MK Dons season one. And if we were league one, our relative size would mean we would be able to do that transition quickly. The “issue” becomes at this level we cannot afford or will lose quickly the very good technical players that suit this system.

The utopia is him having the best technical players to play this system. The reality is I don’t think we ever get there both due to time and financial reasons so it’s really what he can do without that “utopia” - which is back to the consistent question over him.

Good post tho

The team may not be necessarily more possession heavy, in the first two thirds the team is building play, its efficiency, ball circulation can be improved. The intent in the final third can differ the team may seek to penetrate quickly, take more risks versus keeping possession and moving the ball. The team could thus have -50% regularly.     

Liam Manning appears to wants control and possession. Mr Manning may want to dominate possession. BCFC are not a high possession team, it’s a low one. Creating more control and more possession will come from improvements in fundamental key positions.

Control, building from the back, possession is Liam Mannings intent. This requires players with differing skills to primarily stop it, boot it, head it There has to be at least one player at CB in a team that is adept on the ball in a team building from back. City have options at CB. .  

I have seen Brian Tinnion’s remarks he was “excited” about a “big forward”, but “didn’t want to lose the running”. It’s a Giraffe! I could mold that into they want something to stretch play with a high DTI (running and recovery metric) to press like a bastard on the front foot, but it was not much to go on.  

I could have highlighted more players, but transition is gradual. 

I could have highlighted Mehmeti. I think I get the intent. I don't see it on the pitch. Getting more possession to the final third might improve .. There might be a player in there.    

You see how a Manning team can look. You see a process in theory. Bristol City went through a phase of semen up the wall spending with Lee Johnson and went through ways and identities, and plans A - Z, and dozens of players and tens of millions of pounds, accumulating huge financial losses till Mr Lansdown decided he wouldn’t afford it. 

City will never have the best to play any system. Losing players is inevitable, focussing on prioritising players skill to meet teams football is logical. 

And that is enough from myself.

51 minutes ago, Sheltons Army said:

@Cowshed

 

You clearly have a high degree of knowledge , qualifications etc of modern coaching and philosophies , and appear to understand what LM is trying to and on the path of developing.

It would be good for me , and the average fan , if in layman’s terms,  if you could set out what this is and what we should expect to see, and notice as it develops,  and what profile of recruitment we could expect to see from him moving forward 

Your not an average fan, you are very knowledgeable one. 

But park the comments of the club to one side about where the squad is and where the team can finish and think about what has been stated about its playing approach.

There is a vision there, a bigger picture and very likely a model of play what Liam Manning x BCFC want. It may not be called any of those things, but that big  picture is there.  

That model is the vehicle to deliver success. And that model of play should drive recruitment, and development. Its the where we/they want to be. 

The big picture is utopia, we are always working toward this. This model will have its principles those front foots, possession etc, and its sub principles how we keep possession, move the ball, its patterns. 

Each role within the team players then need key qualities (good on the ball) to meet the team expectations leading to that vision.

And it’s a big and. Nothing is perfect. Clubs are always in a transition stage of some sort. Reaching the vison (non layman - actualisation blah) is rare, and staying there is rarer still, teams are in cycles .. Klopps Liverpool - Moving towards, great, not so good, moving back and great again

Bristol City squad is not what they say it is. It can’t deliver that lofty expectation stuck out there.  It wont be this front foot possession footballing beast now because the aptitudes of the players can’t meet the ridiculously high expectation.

Working towards the vision, the big picture, the model is a linear process. Its abc, 123 and compromises will have to be made to move towards the vision. Liam Manning is not going to deliver the front foot possession footballing beast now, that’s ******* stupid, but he can move towards the vision linearly and marginally.

Across the team, the team collectively will gain knowledge with training, knowledge is frequently familiarity. Great coaches can take a season to reprogramme great players, Manning and the players? Time is needed.

Possession and front foot can be delivered. The two do exist in unison. Liverpools build up play is clearly possession based then they will stick in a big diag, speed up .. Their passing patterns also allow them to counter press aggressively. Its still possession on the front foot. Control and possession, Bournemouth in the championship did similar turning the burners on in the final third. Ipswich now control possession, and then attack vigorously when they break lines.   

The football there requires key skills in certain positions. Manning appears to want to have more control and wants to play more positionally. It is a measured approach that necessitates having good players behind the ball to reset retain. The team needs more players who can retain and switch –  effective circulation. The team doesn't have this effective circulation hence  passing, ponderous play, lack of penetration .. But this should be an expectation because the approach is being ingrained. The team is being developed, its in transition.    

GK is a problem. The circulation of the ball is not effective. Problem.  

CB looks .. Dickie can do a bit.

CDM/HM ok. The kid Max Bird might be good. Naismith made of something other that glass could play the drop in circulate the ball Alonso (ahem) role.

I struggle to think of any good possession team without good on the ball through that spine. In those first two thirds I would expect to see change. The base feeds opportunity to theoretically attack more frequently, and also counter press as the team moves up as a unit. Increase ability here, options, numbers and cohesion improves.

I haven't gone on further because this is build from the back, and that is like the football. Its a team being built. 

Didn't once use behaviours!! 

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

If you're Man City you can. If you have a better team than your opponents you can. 

If you're Bristol City, you can't, not even with unlimited amounts of training days on the grass. 

If your Man City you can what? Manchester City generally play possession football and positionally through the thirds. And how does that relate to BCFC? 

Bristol City are not attempting to play like Manchester City.  

3 minutes ago, Sheltons Army said:

So ,and keeping it to the playing style approach and , to me the glaring discrepancy about a Tinnions repeated sound bites , front foot football ,athletic, runners , pace , etc

Surely the simple answer is one of two things Gull , 

A We’ve (Tinnion) has decided to take a completely different playing path philosophy based around possession , control , processes etc and then identified LM as the ideal fit

or 

B BT , for whatever reason only he could explain , hooked onto LM as the next bright thing and with JL was prepared to chuck aspects of the footballing philosophies , and follow and back Manning instead

 

I guess there’s the third option that they diidnt comprehend or understand what they were appointing in terms of playing philosophy etc , but as I’ve said previously , that’s ridiculously absurd even for them

There is another option. You can play from possession and play on the front foot. The principles alter across thirds. A discovery, or a knowledge is that squad does not have the skills to meet the principles at this point.

21 minutes ago, bexhill reds said:

I’d like to think the outcome of the next 12 games will decide that. To my mind poor results and more importantly poor performances would suggest he’s done nothing to earn a summer, especially as he now has empty weeks and an international break to convey whatever he wants to do. 

I’m not buying the players not being good enough or capable of change, these are experienced professional players mostly of championship quality, who are used to being coached and playing different styles - we know he’s not up to it tactically as recent games have demonstrated, but perhaps he’s not that good a coach at this level either…

Not sure of the need to highlight Pearson here though, my argument is the apparent inability of the incumbent and the lack of experience at this level.

Good debate though. Let’s hope you are right and I’m not.

I highlighted Nigel Pearson because BCFC think he is was not the right fit. Liam Manning is according to BCFC. My entrance to the thread was a point about Manning ball. The poster I replied to isn't articulating what they understand it to be.  

Manning ball must involve passing and possession. Liam Mannings football clearly involves build up play, building through the thirds. His football is his variant of possession football. 

Teams playing possession football. Starting at one which teams does Max Olearys passing ability get him into? What possession team doesn't have a GK with a high level ability that influences team shape and dispersal? Do the successful ones? 

The GK's starting positions have been improved, his technical distribution deficiency won't be, and that leads to tactical limitation. 

The team has clear technical deficiencies in key positions from GKL outwards if its big picture is possession based football. QPR exposed limitation. The team couldn't play through them. Possession is leaden and slow moving - Its technical deficiency.

Problems and challenges, they are not reasons to cease pursuing the quest. Its a challenge to overcome. 

2 hours ago, bexhill reds said:

I get what you are saying, but we both know that football does not work in that way. A string of poor results and the coach/manager is under pressure regardless of the hoped for end game.

The commercial implications of poor results and increasing apathy amongst supporters, e.g season ticket sales, sponsorships, corporate hospitality will all have an effect, and that’s before you consider playing side issues. On the playing side you have to consider relegation (probably not at risk this season but not mathematically ruled out at this point). Can the club survive a season or two in League 1, probably yes, but not without major restrictions on budget and transfer attractiveness that will ultimately set us back years, and also affect the club’s perceived value to investors especially if the current owners are seeking a way out.

Your expectation is not where the club publicly pitched the appointment of Manning, so whether that’s his fault or not, there is an immediate litmus test on his progress, and bluntly that’s not going well. I think the potential of this squad remains upper mid-table with a bit of twinge of playoff excitement as there is always a team that has a late run, and I don’t think Manning is currently capable of reaching that.

There are 12 games left, if we have 12 performances that are anything like the dross served up of late then I think he’s done, a poor result against Cardiff at home won’t do him any favours in the short term.

 

The club expectation was a nonsense, and so was the removal of Nigel Pearson. The expectation of changing the Manager mid season, expecting him to change the approach of the team, and promotion are crass.

Jon Lansdown in football terms is ignorant and stupid. The man doesn't even have entry level qualifications for coaching kids football. Never played. Never coached. Never Managed. But takes far reaching footballing decisions for BCFC. That is ignorance and stupidity.

My expectations for the man ignorant and stupid employs is that his team continues on its path of lows and highs to the end of the season. The team has clear limitations in key positions. Players aptitudes are not synching with the football Liam Manning wants to play. The team will not be relegated. 

Liam Manning deserves a summer, additional players and that time of the grass to demonstrate he is the fit BCFC said he is, and Nigel Pearson evidently was not. 

17 minutes ago, bexhill reds said:

Exactly and underlines my point, what point of reference does an inexperienced coach (from a league football) perspective go back to when things are not going well? Manning’s point of references will be a bit of L1, L2, and pretty much little else, all he’s got is the theory and experience that would have come from his coaching qualifications and academy youngsters. 

Does a business looking to recruit a new Ops Director bring in a Business Management graduate with potential or someone with experience? The answer is that they bring them both in, one to develop and one to lead.

Unless he can learn as quickly as he wants the current squad to, then I think he’s got problems.

An answer would be the head coach develops and leads. 

As you are using the parallel of business. Liam Manning is clearly  unskilled clearly, the team has lows, and highs, so this is not all chance. He is in that business arc of change, problems in change, challenges have to be expected, unless we believe these players are capable of promotion.

My expectation was bottom half. Transition. Challenges and problems. Learning who can reach expectations, who can develop, who can cope, who progresses, and those to replace and bin because they can't, or won't meet the expectations of his big pictures vision.

Any coach, super or otherwise, has big problems here if they are viewed versus months while, implementing a differing direction.

42 minutes ago, bexhill reds said:

I think the point being alluded to is that the belief is that Manning is one of these new “textbook” coaches where everything is based on theory rather than experience, magnets on the whiteboard as it were.

 

 

The belief is silly. No able coach coaches solely out of a text book. 

All football is based upon theory. And experienced and inexperienced managers apply their systems of ideas (theory) to football.

Theory will tell a coach that magnets on a board are not the best means of communication for all players. Experience and theory will also tell a coach how to use differing learning styles of visual, aural, reading, kinesthetics etc (VARK). 

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

It’s not difficult CS.  If you’ve learned stuff in a set way, if they do this, we do that, if we do this, they’ll do that…and either you or the other team go off-piste, have you got the skills to think on your feet.  What are you falling back on to form your solution.

That's what WSM is trying to say.

 I’m not saying LM is or isn’t, just explaining LM’s analogy.

The poster made a points about overloading players with information, flight or flight, got that wrong, I guess ... Yes it was very difficult to understand, It is all over the place. 

There was a sweeping assumption that Liam Manning has learned everything from the text book, the manual like there is one book guiding all learning. The coaching badges Liam Manning gained are not achieved in that manner. 

Aspects of badges focus very much on have you got skills, your solutions and being able to demonstrate this - Its the individual displaying their knowledge and expertise not the answers from a text book. There are coaching modules covering psychology, communication and learning styles and neurology.  

1 hour ago, Dr Balls said:

Curse of the autocorrect @Davefevs

I think we all might be a lot happier if Manning had someone more senior than him, who he and we could trust to advise him as Director of Football rather than Tinnion, who is short-lived failed League 1 manager at the same club, nearly 20 years ago.

The story that comes to mind is actually about the Gas. A long time back they had a young Paul Trollope as Head Coach and a very experienced Lennie Lawrence as Director of Football. A lot of their fans questioned what Lawrence added, and presumably so did the board as they let him go as a cost-cutting exercise. It was subsequently quite clear what he added, which was experience with which to guide Trollope. The results tanked, Trollope was sacked, relegation followed, and ultimately a season or 2 later they were relegated out of the Football League.

The moral of this story is that experience and wisdom are undervalued in our current society and football it would seem is no different!

I made posts about the lack of the Director of football wise old owl at BCFC ten years ago.  Now think of clubs that BCFC could have been considered our peers, the successes and their development. BCFC undervalue this role.

17 minutes ago, Snufflelufagus said:

I would argue Max is not coached by Manning, more so the goalkeeper coach.

I would not argue that Liam Manning instructs what he wants the goal keeper coach to focus on with the keepers, I would not argue that Liam Manning also conducts meetings with goal keepers, and units, and the team, and why focus has been placed on starting positions and interventions. 

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

I think he’s just using it as an analogy for you can read a text book,

People in fight flight are generally not reading anything Dave. The parasympathetic nervous system post fight/flight might help you read a text book.

14 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

 And when the scenario yoyre asked to act upon isn’t in the textbook, can you take your learnings and internet the situation and choose the right answer.

 

Nope. Struggling with that one as well. 

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

Yep same with the West Ham and Forest games. In fact I think looking back now we can be a bit disappointed with not beating Forest in either of the games. Especially in the replay that Manning considered a free hit and was happy to rest/rotate players. 

I remember watching the Blackburn Away game. We were absolutely pants and then it seemed the players thought f Manning ball we're playing how we want to and then we nearly ended up getting something out of the game. 

I think by and large, most of our victories under Manning have come from not playing Manning ball? 

I don't know. I think at times he can adapt but then he has a really annoying habit of then reverting back to his way. 

I said in another post yesterday that when he came in he overloaded the players with information. He then recognised he got that wrong so adjusted that. Now he's gone back to too much information. Fight or flight I guess so reverts to what he knows and that's from a textbook. 

You post a lot. Could you highlight what Manning ball is? 

Your last paragraph barely makes any sense. The sympathetic nervous system does not make an individual revert to a text book.  

10 minutes ago, Simon bristol said:

Its not hard to predict we would get turned over by qpr and sheff weds, cardiff will beat us as well, and we will look decent again against swansea. Chapter 2 of the coaching manual explains how to play against physical battling teams, but liam hasnt got that far yet

What are you referring to?

7 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I did wonder whether you were playing the goalie up top, or modern methods now quoted the keeper in formations!

I have seen this refereed to as 4-2-5. 

2 hours ago, Cowshed said:

. 4-2-4-1 

 

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

It’s probably the tactic a lot of Lg1 teams used, get behind the ball, but Ipswich’s quality told in a lot of games last season, but they did have a wobble for a spell.  Their results against the top 6 were excellent though, think they only lost 1.

Looking at my typo that's one way of getting at teams getting behind the ball.

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Those “bounce passes” are where they really break forward from settled possession to what almost appears to be a counterattack - but not from a regain.

The number of times they play into Chaplin in the middle third, and then he either:

• rolls his man and then goes quickly wide to Davis (or Burns or Clarke) usually because Broadhead has sucked a player infield is so evident, or
• he lays off and someone else makes the pass instead, but it’s done quickly.

Although you say “guarantees possession” I think they are incredibly brave (trust the process) too.

I’m still surprised teams get sucked in, their patterns are so repeatable, albeit superbly executed.

Having a footballing goal keeper gives Ipswich a consistent overload at the back, and he can with ease take part in the patterns of play, he also can pop balls efficiently over the top into team mates. When you have that behind the lines providing balance it makes teams bolder. They can ping it about, and put their foot on it, and their CBs can drive to release. 

he lays off and someone else makes the pass instead, but it’s done quickly - Up back and through. It appears relentless. 

If they don't go up, second season may see teams letting them have it. 4-2-4-1 they have quite frequently five players behind the ball, let them have it. 

9 hours ago, Sheltons Army said:

For me , I don’t think we can afford to assemble a ready made squad to play that way

So , to think of a run at promotion by any means ,

 

Manning either needs to prove to be an exceptional ,or at least excellent coach in drilling 11 v 11 on training ground , significantly improving / developing players we can afford , and be very good tactically in game 

Or

We we find a more pragmatic way to win games , probably more Luton than Burnley (I cant see Manning ever considering this)

I haven’t looked at any stats and only watched them casually , and Fevs will correct me if I’m wrong , but I don’t see them as possession based at all

Id certainly describe their football as front foot , which we certainly are not , for all the spout by Tinnion  

Ipswich have more possession than opponents generally, but its not high. The teams approach differs through the thirds starkly. Their keeper is very good on the ball, they use a double pivot in a 4 - 2 -3 -1 and build up play in the first third that guarantees possession. This intent alters in the second and last third - They become aggressive looking to play up back and through quickly, quick combinations attempting to penetrate, and play a lot of bounce passes bringing opponents onto them and hitting spaces in behind.   

2 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Max Bird next year maybe..?

Fully fit Naismith and a retained Scott would've given us a bit if everything in midfield IMO. I know that is a very unlikely counter factual but Naismith as the deepest with his range, Scott with his ability to pass, carry, win fouls in both halves and so forth. Knight doing what Knight does.

That could've been well balanced.

However Scott sold, Naismith injured most of the season. Dream on.

Two players there who would vastly improve Bristol City tactical flexibility because of their key technical qualities in key positions.

Think of good possession teams, and great ones, and their systems as ask yourself which ones don't have above average on the ball throughout that spine from GK - CB - CDM - CAM? It will be a short list. 

Thats where Liam Manning is. Working towards a model without yet his quarterbacks, the numerous players to dictate play and uphold the principles. BCFC's football is forming, its in an early developing stage. 

51 minutes ago, spudski said:

Yes that's a given. 

Opposition coaches have said we play with a clear identity. The QPR coach spoke about it, and how he nullified it. 

Limitations are already to the fore in how he's trying to play in the final third. 

BCFC don't have a clear possession based identity. Limitations are very much to the fore in the first third, and second.

Its not clear who at this point will be the teams leaders and architects are who will uphold the teams possession system in the longer term. The team does not have high passing ability in key fundamental positions throughout the spine of the team. Average yes, high, good? Err one, two. 

Liam Manning won't establish a clear identity in 3/4 months. 

Just now, spudski said:

The best teams, have the very best players. As top coaches have said, if you've got the best players, they will win regardless...

Top coaches say a lot of things. You can have the best players and be underperforming for years. A former top team in the EPL assemble top top players together and do not win regardless. 

The best teams have structure. Liam Manning is creating it, forming and establishing. Building towards a model and identity.

Its interesting to see how this progresses when he is inhibited by players limitations in key positions. 

12 hours ago, spudski said:

Whilst I respect your reply RR...I think it's pretty obvious how he wishes to play. 

He spoken about his methods and it's obvious to the eye. 

It's actually easier to pick out than when under NP. 

I can now watch games, and it's so structured that I can call pretty much where each player is going to move after each passage of play. 

As others do and have pointed out. 

It is that drilled and structured. 

 

You could be describing the best teams in the Country. 

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

Doesn't compression improve blood flow? So would seem counter productive to cut holes to reduce risk. 

Compression increases blood flow. This player is?

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

I still recall Trevor Francis (RIP) getting Achilles injuries in the early 80s, and blaming it on the lightweight, “modern” (as it was at the time) boot.  They only got lighter and lighter over the years.  Any school of thought on that?

+++++

I still remember my first pairs of Puma Kings, they had a nice thick leather, still soft, not over heavy, but over the years the leather got thinner and thinner.  No idea what today’s boots are like, it’s 20+ years since I played.

There are increases now in certain injuries. One is injuries to the achilles. Sports scientists put this down toboots providing  less support around the achilles and the very high use of 4G pitches (they are harder). Seems logical enough.

I really don't like many modern boots, and particularly gimmicky boots with sock fitting. Its anecdotal but I have lost count of the number of kids I see suffering with blisters, and at times severe blisters caused by the ill fitting sock. 

Puma Kings are still a popular boot, still particularly wide fitting. Still well protected, and still soft. If you return to football in some form do not wear Kings on 4G unless they are King astro trainers, the soft leather wears out remarkable quickly v the synthetic grass.