Supersonic Robin

2 hours ago, LondonBristolian said:

We still don't know what the "true" Bristol City is. 

1 hour ago, Bristol Oil Services said:

Yeah we do, it's stuck somewhere between about 14th in the Championship/second tier, and just a little bit higher than where the Blue Few currently fester in L1. Letting in a little too many, not scoring quite enough. In front of about 12,000 people.

So we're doing alright, as things stand. Manning in (until ....)

And this is exactly the mindset that has kept us there whilst every other club of our size has achieved far more

54 minutes ago, Super said:

Standard meltdown on here. No idea why we should be winning these type of games on the road. Yes it wasn't the best but you make sure you get something out of the game which we did.

Is there a meltdown? Or are fans just expressing their concerns and frustrations about us looking poor against a team no higher than us in the table (again)?

49 minutes ago, Northern Red said:

"Performance is more important than the result"

Don't necessarily disagree, but let's see if that holds when we get the former but not the latter. Because it hasn't done previously on here.

That's true, but in fairness it depends where you are in the season.

Big difference between prioritising performances over results in the middle of the season, and prioritising performances at the end of the season with nothing to play for.

1 minute ago, winsaw said:

Max had been far and away our best player this season, another top performance today,

Amazing that some still don't rate him don't think there are many better keepers in the championship at the moment,

Dickie has been a long way ahead of O'Leary this season.

O'Leary has improved as of late and is currently performing well, but I think that's leading to some revisionist thinking about his less impressive performances earlier in the season.

7 minutes ago, mozo said:

I'm disappointed that we didn't make the most of our chances. James scuffed a shot from inside the box, Twine should have scored, Pring messed up a 4 on 3.

City were definitely off it today, but actually could have won.

True, though by the same logic Sunderland probably could have scored about 4.

On balance of chances, I don't think we can feel hard done by today.

Decent result, but poor performance.

We're fortunate not to have lost that one.

1 minute ago, 22A said:

That play towards the end of the 1st half; well worked positive team work. Just missing the culminating goal, but  great improvement on earlier in the season.

It's a bit misleading to sum up that 1st half using only the last 5 minutes of it 

1 minute ago, Supersonic Robin said:

Double save from O'Leary. Granted, 2 saves he'd expect to make.

MOL far busier than I'd like so far

This again 

Double save from O'Leary. Granted, 2 saves he'd expect to make.

MOL far busier than I'd like so far

Just now, And Its Smith said:

Max again. 

A very simple save, but yes, he's been busier than I'd like so far

4 minutes ago, old_eastender said:

Great run, awful final pass from Mehmeti

Slightly harsh. He put the ball into a decent area with no easy pass availabe.

Just because something doesn't come off, it doesn't mean it's awful.

8 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Anyone flying to a different country for RTV today…no joy in Frankfurt.

I'm in Frankfurt with no issues.

13 hours ago, Topper 123 said:

It would be great now if fans could come along to the gate in their thousands and support and enjoy the rest of season now the pressure is off , I’d also like to see the players enjoy it and play with a smile on their faces and interact with the fans more , come on let’s all enjoy it and get behind the lads 

As nice as that sounds, there is something slightly tinpot about us rallying to enjoy the fact that, errr......we no longer have to worry about the pressure of achieving anything

26 minutes ago, Crackers Corner said:

Very little difference in city population between bristol and Liverpool. 

As with most population estimates, it depends which source you look at. My understanding is that when you include the surrounding urban area, Liverpool is quite a bit bigger.

3 minutes ago, frenchred said:

Who plays in red and white hoops?

It's a shit kit, that reflects who designed it

Not saying I specifically like this kit - it looks badly made. But the general pinstripe theme is a good one IMO.

Doncaster play in red and white hoops, but in fairness not many others do in the UK. That's not really the point though, the point is that the pinstripes are relatively unique to us.

I quite like the pinstripes.

Given how many teams play in red shirts (or red shirts with thick white stripes), it's nice to have something that differentiates us a little bit. It feels like quite a Bristol City thing for me.

Same goes for the purple and lime away kit.

13 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Not sure about this to be honest. 

Firstly, Liverpool is far from one of the UK's biggest cities. Leeds is bigger, Glasgow is bigger, I'm pretty sure even Southampton is bigger. 

Secondly, if home city size is a determining factor then how do you account for the fact that all of these cities have many other teams that are nowhere near the size of the ones you quote.

It's perhaps more a case that home city size is a factor that gives a team the potential to be "big", but the more important factor is that they have the ability to capitalise on that potential. For example the Woolwich Arsenal are not a "big" team simply because they are based in London, they're big because long ago they became a franchise and moved from peripheral Woolwich to leafy Highbury, and disrupted Tottenham Hotspur's dominance of that area. They then used their connections to raise investment and became the first big spenders etc. They shrewdly, perhaps even nefariously, capitalised on the potential that their (new) location granted them, but it wasn't simply because of that location that they became "big".

It's a clear trend across almost every football league in the world that the biggest teams are from the biggest cities.

Granted, I agree it would be more accurate to say that *technically* it gives you the potential to be big, but nevertheless, the biggest and most successful teams are almost exclusively from the biggest cities.

Firstly:

Re your point on the size of different cities in the UK, this is my source - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_primary_urban_areas_in_England_by_population

In fairness, you can probably find 20 different answers to which cities are the biggest depending on how exactly the size of the city is being measured and where you're drawing your boundaries.

I'm not bothering to include Glasgow since they don't play in the English football league system, but Glasgow serves as an example of this being true for Scotland.

Secondly:

Of course, I'm referring to the most dominant team in each of these cities, since they're the main beneficiary of that city's size. For clubs who aren't the biggest team in their city, you'd need to analyse it a bit differently. In the case of these clubs, an assessment of their "geographical dominance" might be a suitable way to amend the point being made.

Fortunately, we're not a club who have to worry about not being the biggest team in our city 

As noted, you'd be right to suggest that "potential to be big" would be a slightly more accurate statement. I think this is fairly obvious though - I'm not suggesting that I could move to London and start a Sunday League team who would suddenly become the biggest team in the country, simply because I happened to be stood in Westminster when I founded them 

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I would also say WBA are a bigger club than us historically but how much difference that makes Idk.

I always find that argument flawed in these discussions.......
 

Person 1: Why have WBA achieved more than us?

Person 2: Becuase they're a bigger club.

Person 1: But how/why are they a bigger club?

Person 2: Because they've achieved more than us.

In the long term, the biggest off-field metric is the size of the city the club is based in.

If you look throughout any football league system in the world, there's a strong trend that the biggest/best teams are those based in the biggest cities.

For instance, in the UK, the 4 biggest cities are responsible for 8 of the 10 biggest teams in the country:

• London (Arsenal, Tottenham, Chelsea)
• Manchester (Man U, Man C)
• Liverpool (Liverpool, Everton)
• Birmingham (Aston VIlla)

1 hour ago, Curr Avon said:

One of the best keepers in the Championship.

11 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

He's always been good enough. This season a decent screen in front of him is allowing him the space to breath and demonstrate his ability. That helping him post the kind of numbers that make him look like one of the best in the league. It's nuanced but my reading of it is that he's good, but the defence helps him to be really good. Almost as though football is a team game.

My opinion is also that having CBs who are confident on the ball - Dickie in particular - help him with the recycle and the out. 

I've always said we don't need to upgrade the goalkeeper to finish in the top 6 and it's great that he's currently demonstrating that.

Really? Is there evidence to support this view? Which numbers are you referring to - is it simply save percentage?

Agree MOL has improved in recent times and that he's fine for where we are, but to say he's one of the best goalkeepers in the league feels like a bit of a stretch.

8 minutes ago, Ian M said:

I think you’re being harsh on Mehmeti, I like that he wants to shoot when in those positions. Don’t forget that we scored following the keeper saving his initial effort.

Agreed.

Mehmeti is primarily in the team to provide threat, creativity, and goal contributions. He's been doing exactly that recently.
Naturally, performing such a role means he's also liable to giving the ball away more than other players. If he 'got it right' every time then he'd be playing for Real Madrid. 

I think Mehmeti is looking really promising in that '2' behind the striker at the moment.

Good performance (bar first 30 mins) and a good result.

IMO, a more meaningful win than the victory over Leicester. Our form against bottom half sides has been awful under Manning - these are the games in which we need to see big improvements. Much better today in fairness.

8 minutes ago, Jimbo76 said:

Need to sub Conway. Don't mind trying anyone else up front. Twine? Cornick?

Something not right with Conway. Either confidence or unsettled at the club but not been at it for a while.

Think Conway is fine, and has received quite a bit of unfair criticism recently.

Biggest issue with Conway in recent times has simply been our inability to get the ball to him and to create chances for him.

Great ball from James

2 minutes ago, Pip King said:

Why are we wearing our knockoff Norwich kit? Surely our shorts will be indistinguishable to the oppositions?

Especially strange given that this combination of kits has both teams playing in green shorts.

Somehow, our yellow and green kit looks even more disgusting today.

1 hour ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

If we continue with 3 at the back and 2 10s, where does Sam Bell even fit in?

Because unlike other wide players, such as Sykes and Mehmeti, he can't play as an ACM.

He might play in a 2 up front - eventually - but our dogmatic Coachbot seems to be wedded, indeed welded, to playing just a lone striker. And that will never be Sam Bell at this level.

Agreed, when I look at the 3-4-2-1 (which seems to be Manning's preference when all are fit), I don't see any role for Bell at all.

I'd suggest the most appropriate role for him might be as a RWB, but it still feels like a square peg in a round hole.

I have similar views on Cornick - I don't see where he fits into that system either. He could potentially do a job in one of the attacking midfield roles, but isn't really the style of player you'd want in there.