The Journalist

This might seem weirdly vague, but I just hope that, whatever potential is in this group, as a fanbase we feel like we've fulfilled it by the end of May. For me, at this stage I'm not really sure across a 46-game season what our ceiling is... but after 10 matches I do feel like we deserve to be higher than ninth. Instinctively I feel like we're better than that - how much better, I'm not sure. I do think Nigel's done a fantastic job and we look as good a side currently as we have in years. It's really fun to watch. All that said, I also think there's every chance the core of this squad could be ripped apart next summer, hence my opening comment - I just hope we have no regrets by the time that happens. (No idea if any of the above will make sense to anyone other than me).

Does feel a bit like It is starting to feel a bit like a lone man shouting at the rain hoping it'll stop, at this point. As I say, hope you get something sorted, but it feels to me like you've had one bad ticket experience, missed out on tickets for this fixture because of your own fault and now you're trying to come up with a solution for a problem that doesn't really exist. Hope you have a better afternoon.

How many people do you really think are buying tickets without planning to go? You genuinely think that is the thing costing you a chance to get to that game?! Nonetheless, I get that you're annoyed and hope somehow a ticket lands your way and you're able to get to the match.

But doesn't being able to get the ground and queue place you at an unfair advantage over people who live further afield/work during opening hours?! I completely take your point, but if I went to near enough every away game but then missed out on tickets to this one - one of the plumb away games - because I couldn't get to the ground to get a ticket in person or they decided to share them around I'd be equally miffed. I realise it's annoying but I think you're looking at it from a very specific point of view.

Many of you will have watched a lot more of us and studied this much more closely than I have, I'm sure, but I did think our throw-ins were so poor down our right side against Norwich. There's a good chance Mark Sykes has never had to take throw-ins in his career before and it was pretty clear he wasn't particularly comfortable doing so. It's funny that they're never really talked about, but when you think about it they're such an important and fundamental part of full-back/wing-back's game.

Imagine comparing El-Abd with Naismith! One a limited, physical clogger at centre-half and the other a genuine quality player. Sure, he's made a few mistakes but it's obvious he's a proper footballer. Glad you've got your tin hat on because that is an absolutely horrendous comparison. Enjoyable.

I can't remember the last time we were that genuinely competitive against one of the division's top sides at this level. And when I say competitive, I mean in a football sense rather than simply out-running the opposition and hanging in there, keeping it tight.

One thing that would be madness (and I'm not sure anyone's suggesting this necessarily) would be to remove him from the back three. I thought the last 10-15 minutes last night were interesting, as Norwich continually closed his passing angles and forced him to switch across to Vyner, whose passing range is just nowhere near Naismith's. His mid/long-range passing is absolutely top class for this level. As a broader point, (and this is partly because we've got three ball-playing centre-halves) this current team reminds me a lot of the 2002-03 side. Ridiculously open, often you're left tearing your hair out, but so good going forward and genuinely a pleasure to watch. We're never out of any game.

I think we’ve played pretty well against a really good team.

I also very much suspect they're just taking a wild punt to be first with the story. That page will be getting bucket loads of traffic, if it happens they can claim the exclusive and if not they'll bill it as a u-turn.

I think that is the one thing - I imagine everything will be off or everything will be on and it'll be a decision taken jointly along with the DCMS. That will, at least, protect (for want of a better word) the Premier League from the obvious "typical football, think they're above everything..." accusation.

For what it's worth (nothing, really), I do think the Premier League and English Football League are on a bit of a hiding to nothing with this decision. They're going to upset people - and open themselves up to criticism - either way.

I’m not reigning anything in. That doesn’t mean I’m going to be shouting from the rooftops that we’re going to win the league, but after several seasons of mediocrity and then decline we absolutely should be excited by what’s happening. Life’s too short. We’ve got a genuine chance - no more, no less, let’s enjoy it!

The last time we had this many points after seven games was under Dean Holden. ?

“I just see something in Semenyo, the way he strikes the ball off both feet, the power he generates with little backlift... I don't think finishing is going to be a problem for him.” Posted this in December 2020. Still don’t think finishing is going to be a problem for him.

This has died for me ?

https://bristolcitypayments.streamamg.com/account/register/step1 Where it says "£10 - INT"... does that mean international only?

I think if Pearson was to answer my question (publicly at least) he’d almost certainly say “too many individual mistakes”, which is never an untrue statement when you’re conceding goals, but it’s happening too frequently and over a sustained period of time to put it down solely to that isn’t it? What are we doing tactically when trying to see a game out? What’s the strategy? What’s our decision-making process like when in front? What are the players doing instinctively when placed under pressure? It’s almost become an embedded issue. I don’t know how anyone could just dismiss this in the way some have re: Harry’s original point. We’ve all seen City teams in the past who, when they go in front, you just know they’re in control of the situation. It works both ways.

I don’t really understand why Harry is copping it here - it’s a fact that in 15 of our past 16 games we’ve led but only won seven. We keep getting ourselves into a winning position but don’t see it out. Now, we can all ignore that, put our fingers in our ears and hope it goes away, but I don’t think that’s a ‘normal’ record and suggests to me we’re not matching results up with performances. This team is capable of more. What I would be interested to know… is there a particular substitution we keep making when leading, either positional and personnel? Are we doing something tactically when ahead? Others who watch us more often and more closely may be able to answer this, but the general consensus seems to be that we tend to retreat back into our shell when in front? Perhaps we need to keep the game more open so we can keep playing to our strengths? FWIW, I think Pearson has done a tremendous job in his 18 months or so - when you think about what he inherited and the absolute apathy surrounding the club at that time, he’s done exactly what I hoped. We now have a more balanced squad and a genuinely quite exciting group of players. For the first time, though, his job is starting to become more about making sure results match the quality we’ve got rather than just fire fighting, building and nursing us through. For me, we’re entering the next phase of our development under Pearson - which is absolutely a compliment to him that we’re even in this position and should fill us all with excitement… but it also brings a bit more pressure. We shouldn’t shy away from that or be afraid to call it out - let’s take the next step forward!

I just think he's really trying to drive home that mentality of judging performances over results. Whether that's us or the officials, he's almost made a point of being contrary post-match and not saying the obvious thing (ie we won so we played well, we lost so we played badly, the referee was shit but we won so it's fine).

Loved his performance today. He had an absolute stinker first half, constantly giving the ball away and generally just having a bit of an afternoon of it, but he came out after half-time (presumably having now put his boots on the right feet) and just fought his way out of it. Looked a hard quicker, a yard more aggressive and did everything with greater purpose. Hard not to really warm to that.

I think the difference is fairly obvious - a player could be encouraged (or want) to play on despite showing signs of concussion, thus doing themselves serious damage without knowing it, when this is a bit more difficult if you’ve broken your leg! I guess where it really comes into play is when a team has used up all their allotted subs at the time the player suffers that head injury. By allowing the extra sub it takes away some of that temptation to try to continue in order to avoid going down to 10 men. And, going back to Graham’s point, there’s a good argument this is the ONLY time the rule should come into play, rather than when the team can still call upon their allotted five.

Joe Williams is having an absolute stinker here.

On the contrary - Garth’s problem is that he calls him “Linton” on second mention!

Even now he thinks the Newcastle player is called “Joel Linton” (I’m not making that up either).