Capman

I said when Pearson left that the culture of the club appears to be rotten to the core. Decisions seem to be made based on saying and doing what ‘the establishment’ want to be true and what they need to happen, rather than being open and honest. To be fair to Tinnion (and Manning) that really makes them victims as well. They will be dispensed with when that outcome suits the club establishment whose only objective is to protect themselves. It is probably a dreadful place to work, but when people have bills to pay, they get sucked into that culture and put up with it. For me that means success on the pitch is very unlikely. It’s a bit like the infinite monkey theory, if we go through every manager and every model we might eventually be lucky. But that might take a thousand years. A far better solution would be for the board to go and put in place a new board who understand how to really run a football club. Unfortunately until that happens I do not see things getting better on the pitch. In fact I suspect they will get worse.

Simply not good enough.

Excellent result and well deserved in the end. Apart from a crazy 5 minutes a good days work.

It was a professional footballer’s penalty for me. Matty knew the challenge was coming and if he could get to the ball first it should be a pen. He did and the referee made the right call. It was good play by Matty. Draw the foul and take the penalty.

It’s an unfortunate reality that successful organisations are open, inclusive and welcoming of differing views and challenge. Organisations which try to stifle debate, refuse to listen to challenge and close down discussions all too often fail to deliver their objectives. If you think about it the reasons are obvious. it is pretty clear to me which Bristol City has become and the likely consequences for success in the pitch. I hope I am wrong, but I don’t expect much under the current regime.

I wonder if it is possible that the board have lost the dressing room! Certainly I would be reluctant to stick with City as a player at the moment. Loyalty needs to go both ways.

Good job we have a top 6 squad.

I suspect that they have been waiting for a window where they could argue that NP was failing. To me there really is no other logical explanation. Can you image it, the board of an organisation, starving it of funds in the hope that the manager fails so they have an excuse to fire him? It is almost beyond belief, but unfortunately I can find no better explanation. It is why I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that the board are unfit for the role.

I wonder if there will be any kind of protest against the board. There is a lot of anger online but we are all being very Bristol like about it. Complain on the forum but don’t actually do much else. Would be nice to get a minute’s applause for Nige at some point at the game or maybe a silent protest against the board at half time.

The problem for the club is simple. It’s trying to post justify a decision which is based not on football but on personal ego. Everything they say makes it worse because they are trying to rewrite history. The only thing he could say which would give me any respect is ‘I fired Nigel because he was rude to me and it’s my club and I didn’t like it’. At least that would sound like the truth. I would still consider him unsuitable to chair anything but at least I could respect the honesty. But the more the club wriggles and avoids the less respect I have and the more it damages our reputation.

I get the very real sense of panic coming from Ashton Gate now. No plan, just a desperation to find something to deflect from the malaise.

I agree with this assessment and think it would be useful to pin for future reference. I wonder if there is also something about the commitment to youth development. I worry that the board will be so desperate for a quick return they may put pressure on a manager to try to loan our way to success. Even though that goes against a commitment to bring young players through.

So can someone more intelligent explain this to me? Having sacked Pearson two days ago and having said today we have a clear idea of what we want we have completed a complete review of all the best candidates, interviewed the best of them and concluded who is the right person within 48 hours? Or could it be that in order to try and move the conversation on, deflect attention from the board and protect Jon from further criticism the first credible candidate who is both cheap and available has been appointed in the random hope that it might not be catastrophic? This might work, but it probably won’t and if it does it is just blind luck. This is an incompetent board following one bad decision with another. The club has become a cluster fudge. Steve, step up, do something.

No manager of substance is likely to want the gig. The board have made it clear, the criteria for success is to pander to the wishes of the footballing illiterate board. Why would anyone with a reputation want to submit their future to the whims of the ignorant?

I appreciate others may feel different but for me there is a very simple ‘truth’ here. Successful organisations are open, inclusive and encourage criticism. They want to know what is wrong, they want to work with those who think differently because through new and different views they progress and improve. The board of Bristol City is not open, it does not want to hear criticism and is not prepared to learn. To criticise them puts a mark on your back. They are unprepared to be open but are now seeking to post rationalise a decision which has nothing what so ever to do with football but is all about the fragile egos of those who do not understand the sport. I am sorry to say this as broadly I have been a Steve supporter until now. But the board need to be gone. The decision about Pearson is wrong, but the more concerning fact is that it is merely a symptom of the total malaise at the club.

Maybe but I am sorry I think that misses the point. It is pretty clear to me that this decision was made for non football reasons. It is about the ego of the chairman of the board and Pearson being prepared to stand up to him and call it out. No successful organisation can run itself like that. No one is always right and Pearson, the fans and everyone else has to have the right to challenge those in power without fear of persecution. Once that is lost the organisation as a whole is in deep trouble. JL and the board clearly cannot accept criticism will need to either change or go. No manager of substance will put up with them.

The problem is it is almost impossible to have a rational discussion about this decision, when the decision is clearly not based on footballing matters. The board have been looking for an excuse to sack Pearson for some time because he has challenged their authority and criticised their actions (or lack of actions). Frankly if Jon does not have the balls to justify the position of the club with Pearson and the fans he is not fit to chair the board. So in some ways this is not about Pearson as such. It is about the state of the club. When you have a chairman and an owner who consider their ego more important than the future of the club the best you can hope for is mediocrity and more realistically an endless spiral of decline. Jon needs to go. It’s a simple as that and until he does I do not see how anything changes. He does not appear to have the managerial talent to do the job so needs to be replaced. It’s interesting to consider the parallels between this and the sacking of Steve Cotterill. He was another who was not prepared to follow the party line.

The sad thing is I am not even surprised. The board have wanted Pearson out for a year. Just been running down his contract and looking for an excuse. Incredibly spineless. I have been prepared to give Steve some credit until now. But he has lost it now. The club is toxic while he is the owner. Just go Steve. Just go.

The only logical conclusion is that the board are building up a fund to give to a new manager. They will let Pearson’s contract run out this season and want to save the funds he has created for his successor. Assuming that is his plan it would suit their agenda if the team actually does badly this year, a bottom half, but not bottom 3, finish would be ideal. Frankly I think that is disgusting. If they don’t want Pearson long term grow a spine and pay him off. I would still disagree the decision, but I would have a modicum of respect that at least they had made it.

Well deserved equaliser

Cornick changed the game then. That will upset a few. Great result, good performance.

Good job Cornick is playing.

Great assist from Cornick. Been outstanding going forward and defending in this half.

No idea why you would be on a social media board then. They are all about opinions. If you know the only and right answer you have nothing to interest you here.

And two points off 14th.