NickJ

7 minutes ago, Travis said:

Deny all you like I see you the whole how long someone was a member was mentioned numerous times. It means a lot to you clearly. I judge a manager after giving them a fair chance not just 22 League games that suggests a person is a bit simple.

There you again, "simple" - abusive/derogatory. I'm not, but anyway.

We were told this manager would have us playing front foot football with the existing top 6 quality sqaud, I think 22 games is ample time to demonstrate he's capable of doing that. But from his own admission, the post match interview, he's not even trying to achieve that - front foot - let alone capable of it.

I'm trying to make sense of the first sentence, are you saying that I've referred to how long somebody has been a member, a lot in previous posts?

29 minutes ago, Travis said:

Not being superior yet being fixated on how long someone has been a forum member

Fixated? I've mentioned it (thats not fixated) because it's a known fact that club employees have signed up on here, masquerading as fans, to defend club positions, which is quite sad and a tiny bit sinister.

As I say its odd that your first ever posts are to be very vocal in defending such a negative approach from our manager. Very odd, as is the fact that you have taken such an agressive stance on the issue with some of your replies.

I dont see how anybody could argue that yesterdays game was mind numbingly boring and the tactics of our manager - as stated by him - was a large part of that.

A fundamental problem is that you are interpreting criticism of the boring style of play as meaning that we expect City to win every game.

12 minutes ago, Travis said:

Mine was Bristol City v Liverpool in 1959 a 1-0 Victory to us. I back managers and follow City through thick and thin. You feel the need to be superior about football this is amusing. At least you won the day on the Forum in the past

Not being superior, I just noticed that pretty much all of your replies have been abusive/sarcastic/derogatory, there's no need.

If you back this manager to serve up dross like yesterday thats fine but its not just that it was dross, but from his post match interview it was actually the game plan to serve up dross, for the first half at least.

We won't ever agree that a manager with that attitude should be backed.

9 minutes ago, Travis said:

Well if you have a boring life I suppose it is. BTW been following City even before there was a Forum and likely before you ever were a fan but don't let that knock you off the soapbox.

You see, as I said originally, you feel the need to be abusive/sarcastic/derogatory.

It's odd that you seem to have started posting exclusively to defend the indefensible, a complete lack of effort by entertainers to entertain.

Out of interest what was your first City game and how many City games have you attended?

Mine was a thrilling 0-0 draw home to Middlesborough in 1967, been to hundreds home and away including most of the 92 and quite a few more no longer in the 92. The entertainment being served up by this guy is up there with the worst of all managers.

4 minutes ago, Travis said:

Well if you misunderstood people's posts that is up to you. It makes no difference whether someone is a member 3 months or 250 months anyway if you reply to multiple posts expect multiple replies.

I've explained, and demonstrated, that I havent misunderstood posts.

The difference in your length of being a member is that I'd suggest that you and the other guy almost certainly barely knew Ashton Gate prior to a few months ago, which may or may not be significant. Except to say, the posts for both of you are exclusively defending a boring game and a boring manager which the vast majorty of other posters are extremely pissed off with.

Said it was going to be fun!

1 hour ago, WeAreThePigs said:

Let’s be honest you judging BCFC performances on the entertainment value of the opposition is a unique take. 

But once again, as I have already explained, I'm not judging BCFC's performance, I'm judging the game, and both teams were culpable in serving up dross masquerading as entertainment.

City's 2 strikers didn't travel more than 10 yards over the half way line in the first half, allowing Swansea to pointlessly pass around their own half. Taking us paying punters as mugs.

23 minutes ago, Travis said:

So a total contradiction get the facts right before replying. "Again, I've looked through this entire thread and haven't seen one moan about winning. Granted, a couple have said winning was bad" 

Except you've (predictably) misquoted me. What I said:

Again, I've looked through this entire thread and haven't seen one moan about winning. Granted, a couple have said winning was bad because they hoped a loss would have resulted in Manning's sacking - which in any case I very much doubt would have happened.

That isn't moaning about winning, its a couple of posters lamenting the fact that because we won we are faced with similar boredom to come.

There is a difference.

Sparring with one poster who joined this week and another who joined less than 3 months ago is going to be fun, but at least I can be sure Liam is going to get the message.

14 hours ago, Barrs Court Red said:

They’ll say Birmingham. 
 

Which funnily enough a lot of new accounts/low post accounts mention.  Almost like a set of talking points were circulated. 

Looks like you were right, although as you will see I don't agree Birmingham was worse.

13 hours ago, WeAreThePigs said:

Birmingham H, Leeds H, Cardiff H, Millwall H, QPR H/A. 

Don't agree Birmingham was worse. I'm talking about entertainment, from both teams, not the performance from Bristol Cty. Birmingham fans would have been happy. The game against Swansea was dire with no effort from either team to entertain and frankly an insult to people who are paid a fraction of the so called entertainers.

13 hours ago, Numero Uno said:

Five of those matches with the progressive young coach in charge……add today, that’s half a dozen. Preston (a), Sheffield Weds (a) etc. etc. That’s a lot of crap he’s delivered so far……..:

Yes, exactly. Front foot, thats what weve been told, from a top 6 quality squad.

13 hours ago, Travis said:

Think a lot fans need to glory hunt and support the top 4 sides of the Prem. Bristol City is not for you.

That isn't a conclusion you can sensibly reach from posts on here. We won, that isn't the issue. The issue is the dire "entertainment".

13 hours ago, Travis said:

Ones moaning about winning?

Again, I've looked through this entire thread and haven't seen one moan about winning. Granted, a couple have said winning was bad because they hoped a loss would have resulted in Manning's sacking - which in any case I very much doubt would have happened.

I can honestly say that game was even worse than some of the dross served up under SOD, although I suspect you probably didn't see any of that, count yourself lucky.

From what I've seen from your other posts, you are probably going to respond with an abusive/sarcastic/derogatory irrelevance. 

1 hour ago, WeAreThePigs said:

Worse games than that this season.

Which ones?

Cotts was slated for just having one game with one too few subs

2 hours ago, Monkeh said:

Because he's still living off 1 goal in 1994, he has nothing else

Stupid comment 

Give me Colin over our Lee frickin Johnson or the current bore any time of the week, proper bloke, knows how to man manage

12 hours ago, ExiledAjax said:

No. He didn't say that.

Problem is, he did. Actually said, we can set the players up for free kicks, corners, thrown ins etc, but when on the pitch he can’t affect it.

He’s clearly not saying he can’t affect a game with substitutions or changing formations etc, but what he is saying is, we’ve set the players up and it’s not our fault if they don’t do it.

So he’s blaming a top 6 quality squad of players, to divert failings away from himself. 
 

Shades of Johnson, as is comments like the processes are more important than the outcomes. 
 

He also thinks we are going in the right direction (in terms of processes not outcomes, obviously). In other words he’s saying that he’s improving the “processes” that the previous manager had in place. I’d really like the interviewer to drill down into that and ask him what he’s improving relative to the previous manager.

I do agree with @Jimbo76 some of the criticism and negativity is OTT, but fact is blaming players and talking in coaching manual riddles is not a great way to win over the fans.

1 hour ago, Cole Not Gas said:

Staggering insight as to how some people think Pearson's win rate of 30% was anywhere near as good as 'Litlle Lee's of 40%. Maths, extenuating circumstance, whatever.

Under Little lee we looked like getting to the P.Os until Covid struck. Under Pearson we fell asleep and then all died of 'frustration' as we continually conceded late goals.

Well you're not very bright are you, "covid struck". What, just us?

Moreover, Lee fricking Johnson was 38.7% and NP was 32.1%.

And see post of the decade above as to the best, but of many examples as to why NP did a great job, and as to why Lee fricking Johnson will 100% never ever be manager of a Championship club again.

32 minutes ago, bearded_red said:

Hi Nigel, Steve Lansdown here, just wondered if you'd be interested in the vacancy we currently have?

Ok, slight heads up, we have an uninterested, unmotivated and unfit squad which is currently suffering a quite preposterous injury crisis. Eleven players are out of contract and leaving at the end of the season as we desperately need to reduce both the size of our squad and wage bill. We are currently on a run of losing seven straight games (and twelve of the last fifteen). After the game on Saturday one of our caretaker managers basically pleaded for help as soon as possible and made it clear he had no idea how we would get out of this slump. Our captain and record transfer fee was holding back tears while telling the media that he had never played in a team like this and admitted that every game we spend ninety minutes desperately defending and trying to keep the score down.

Fortunately we only need a two or three wins to see us safe this season so we would like you to achieve them as quickly as you possibly can. Should we stay up we would be interested in offering you a three year deal. We have to be honest and say that the first two of those years we will be operating under austerity measures due to the threat of points deductions and transfer embargoes for failing FFP, the squad will have to be small and we will have to rely on young unproven players from the academy. It goes without saying that we cannot get relegated as the financial issues we have would be massively exaggerated should we end up playing League 1 football. After these two seasons are up and all contracts from our previous big spending have came to an end you will have an opportunity to start looking forwards and targeting competing for playoff places.

Its not all bad though, you will be 'inheriting' a 17 year old that hasn't played a minute of professional football and a 21 year old forward that hasn't scored a goal in 43 Championship appearances. If you could provide the opportunities, coaching and guidance that help turn these two into assets we can sell to the Premier League for around 35 million that would really help our current financial plight.

Should you achieve all these things while building a spirited, professional and committed squad, we will thankyou for your efforts by firing you as soon as we (wrongly) believe we have an excuse and someone on our most used fans forum will call you a failure.

That post should be pinned.

6 minutes ago, Tim Monaghan said:

Sorry, I forgot about the terrible team that Pearson inherited that included Scott, Semenyo, Wiemann, Kalas, Palmer, DaSilva, Bentley, Wells. 

I get that he ran some contracts down, but he still had one of the best squads we've had in YEARS scrapping a midtable finish and a 17th place. If that's success, then I'm out. Do you think the squad he inherited vs the team now was worse? Anyway, I'm not having this Pearson argument again.  

But, lets say he was a success then! 

He gave Scott his debut, fairly sure Semenyo too or at least developed him.

Wasnt Kalas injured most of the time?

Palmer was a waste of space but hey Lee frickin Johnson paid £4m for him so he must be good.

Nakhi is so good he's scored one goal this season.

Will give you Weimann, DaSilva and Bentley, but your conclusion on NP is way off.

Agree with everything else you say though, and BTW @Kid in the Riot isn't the only one thats been saying it for years. 

2 hours ago, Harry said:

They scored 10 seconds after the 4 subs. We’d brought Sykes on and he switched off. 
Not sure how LM could have reacted to the 4 subs when they literally scored immediately after 

I think the point being made Harry is that with a Top 6 quality squad at his disposal, he could have impacted the effect of their 4 subs before they even made them. 

7 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

Nice summary. The last question is answered by yes!

There's always hope. Or, as I always said to my kids, there aren't problems, just solutions waiting to be discovered.

47 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

Maybe, but it was slanted to your bias, which you clearly gave away with the crayon boy comment

Wrong again mate, no slant, just my opinion. Crayon Boy isn't a bias, its sympotmatic of my disdain and contempt.

5 hours ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

So tainted with you bias opinion to match an agenda

Gary Johnson, great lower division manager, agree about nepotism, but his management style was to bully, which you can only get away with up to a certain level

Lee Johnson, never liked him as a player, but done OK as a manager, just stuck with him too long which is often SL's way

You missed Holden - I never believe the story about how he was appointed, always think we had someone lined up which eventually fell thru

Steve Cotterill - my favorite manager along with Nige, but cotts went all gung ho wanting to sign players on massive money which I remember SL said he would back, but they did not come off

Nige, the truth is none of us really know why he was sacked, it was certainly not the reasons given, which suggests some sort of cover story. The breakdown had obviously gone on for some time, hence the nestegg statement by SL as cleary did not want to give NP the Scott funds, maybe there is a very good reason why he was sacked, one that most businesses would have done the same thing, the problem is we can only see 1 side, that is a popular manager sacked for apparently no reason as what was said did not add up. Whilst a lot of things can be said about SL, sacking someone for the sake of it if they could see he was doing a good job and harming their club and investment, makes no sense.

LM - I was hoping for Eustace, but we don't know if we approached him and it did not happen, but ending up with Manning, my concern always was if we hit a bad run would the players trust his vision due to lack of experience, hopefully he turns it around quickly and becomes a great manager as showed some early promise, but that looks a long way off and fear a few more losses and dragged into a relegation fight will need a change

Just FYI mate an opinion isn’t a bias 

Danny Wilson

Good manager, 48% win ratio for us. I personally felt pride watching his team from 2000-2004 which often had 5 Bristolians sometimes 7, playing attractive football.

Castigated for the play off disater, but it was one mistake and he was steadily building and improving each season.

Persuaded by Brian "trust me on Tins" Tinnion that Danny was a wrong un. What might have been.

Gary Johnson

Good manager, good apppointment.

Victim of his own nepotism which Lansdown should have stepped in and sorted but didn't, culminating in that incident at Plymouth.

Steve Coppell

The coup that never was. Allegedly realised the owner would be a meddler and left with his bags before even unpacking them.

Steve Cotterill

What can you say. Don't need to. Except, shafted. Should have been supported but by then nepo boy was on the horizon and Crayon Boy was his mate, and so it came to pass that a managerial imbecile with a win rate of 37% in the 3rd division was showered with gifts in the Championship.

Nigel Pearson

Achieved different things in different ways. On paper, given mediocre results, unprecedented support from a fan base that recognised what he was doing and had done. Treated disgraefully, replaced though by a manager who apparently would get the most out of our "top 6 quality" squad.

And so now Liam Manning.

Didn't want him, hard to warm to him. And yet. Win rate of 48% at Lommel, MK and Oxford. 29% for us. Why? Is the step up too much? Has Crayon Boy put too much expectation on him? Will he come good?

Is there hope?

2 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Have you heard the Cotts/Mark Ashton in David Lloyd story tho??

Sort of Will if we both heard the same thing but doesn't change the Maguire/Gray situation.

Just now, Glasgow Red said:

Do you have any proof of this? Otherwise I'm not really sure how you can say I'm wrong. 

Cotts had deals lined up to sign Harry Maguire and Andre Gray, the fees agreed were very high by our standards at the time but bargains, both subsequently scuppered by the directors.

Some will say we couldnt afford the fees - but we subsequently paid more for Massengo, for Kalas, for Baker, and so on.

You want proof? 

4 minutes ago, Glasgow Red said:

Steve Cotterill was sacked because he was about to get us relegated from this division. The amazing League One season seems to alter peoples memory.

2 minutes ago, Harry said:

If you read carefully you’ll see that I said he left at the right time. 
 

You are both wrong, Cotts was shafted, big time, because he was too popular for the Lansdowns liking, and because Crayon Boy wanted his mate in charge. Backed properly as he deserved to be we wouldn't have been in that position.

8 minutes ago, Harry said:

Cotterill worked with an experienced Chief Scout and identified the best available players and signed them to fit a way of playing that HE wanted. 

Get out there and employ a manager with cahuna’s, one with a CV that demands respect from his players, 

We need a board of directors who can appoint a respected manager, who in turn will be empowered to bring in his own trusted recruitment team or chief scout, sign his own players and have zero meddling from unqualified  nobodies. 
 

Our model is shit. And we will get nowhere with it. 

Agree mate but too wordy, cut it down to what it boils down to.

"Cotterill worked with an experienced Chief Scout and identified the best available players and signed them to fit a way of playing that HE wanted". 

Cotts was the best manager we've had since Terry Cooper or maybe Gary Johnson, our idiot directors shafted him sacked him and appointed a clown.

"Get out there and employ a manager with cahuna’s, one with a CV that demands respect from his players, "

Did that with Cotts, did that with Nige, couldn't wait to get rid of both of them.

"We need a board of directors"

Repeat repeat repeat - We need a board of directors We need a board of directors We need a board of directors We need a board of directors - and that doesnt mean Crayon Boy who thinks appointing "young and upcoming managers" - Lee fricking Johnson and Liam for ***** sake" is clever. It isn't, it's idiotic.

Our model is shit. And we will get nowhere with it. 

Nige summed up our model perfecetly when he called out the idiocy of a football club whose stated raison d'etre is to sign players from lower clubs and sell them at a profit.