Vidal

It’s absolute bollocks.

Embarrassing. Yes mistakes have been made by our ownership but undoubtedly the good outweighs the bad significantly. I agree with a good protest but this is sad.

Which proves my point entirely.

I don’t really see the comparison tbh, other than that are both centre midfielders and of a similar build. Brownhill is far more dynamic than Scott, both on and off the ball.

What stream is it?

No stream?

Completely agree with this.

Touch wood it seems he is over the worst of his injuries with us. I can’t help but feel that they have had a long last legacy though, he doesn’t seem to have the dynamism he had at Wigan, and has lost some pace.

Fancy us today .

It’s all great in principle, this idea that there is too much focus on formations, but as you state in your last paragraph, it didn’t work. Why would it against Matt Phillips someone who is aggressive, direct, quick and experienced. Alternatively, if you want him on the pitch why not play him upfront as a striker? That would be more logical. The reason he went back to Weimann in midfield is because of how dire we were against West Brom. At least he is learning from the mistake. This 352 2+1 point you’re trying to make is irrelevant as Weimann didn’t play in front of the 2 midfielders.

Playing Weimann at wing back is trying to be clever and lacks any sense of logic, especially when Sykes and Tanner both fit. The fact he started Tanner just 3 days later is testament to this. Im not sure how you equate King’s performances to a 50% success rate, either way that’s a pretty horrendous rating but unsurprising when considering his Blackpool, Stoke and West Brom performances.

NP trying to be too clever. It also helped that we had two natural full/wing backs in Tanner and Pring, both are defensively minded (even though Pring can bomb on). I have mentioned in other threads that NP has created rods for his own back with some of his selection decisions, only he will see the logic.

There are a number of flaws with your Argument. Firstly, there was little training done between Tuesday and Thursday, and the decision to play Tanner wasn’t based on a change in performance, training levels (which are good) and attitude (which is I’m told is also good), but due to the failings against West Brom. Secondly, if the players in their natural position are hopelessly out of form than it’s up to NP to get the right square peg in the round hole, again Weimann proved to be the wrong one. Thirdly, where has NP said anything about Tanner and Sykes and their quality of training? Can you point me to a link highlighting that they haven’t been the “required standard”?

Yes but it doesn’t mean those decision were right. We all know that he has more knowledge than any of us as fans however some of his calls have been pretty bizarre and lacked sense. An example is playing Weimann at wing back despite both Sykes and Tanner being fit and available. Genuinely defies belief considering 1) 20+ goals last season. 2) both players were Pearson signings 3) a defence that has leaked too many goals. Pearson is not used to this situation and managing a team with the challenges we face, and I think it shows.

Nigel Pearson is an experienced manager who is proven at this level, and there have definitely been some successes along with the obvious failings. The question with NP is whether he is now past his prime - recent stints with us, Leuvren and Derby do point towards that, where success on the pitch has been limited. This idea of “prime” and managers is an interesting one in my view - the likes of Hughes, Clough, Brown, Adkins, Jacket, Grayson etc were all proven in the Champ, now finding themselves in the lower leagues, should Pearson be in the same category? Once a top championship manager now past his best? Pearson successes here include (in my view) - Balancing the books, playing young players and adding considerable value to them, clarity to fan base, good individual results negatives (in my view) - league position, win ratio, rigidity of formation, players played out of position when alternatives available, relations with players in the press, individual signings. I am not calling for his removal, I can’t think of a better person to sort us out off the pitch, however I do not necessarily have faith in his decision making and coaching. For me it’s about survival, like he has said, perhaps his job is about doing the dirty work that builds the foundations for who comes next.

Worth noting that Pearson, Shakespeare, Euell and King all have the same agent

Seems to be the case that his BCFC career is ending in a similar vain to his time at Brentford. Signed by them from Southend as their number 1 before losing his place before a sideways/backwards move. He could move upwards to the prem but certainly wouldn’t be number 1, too many flaws in his game. Weak in the air, poor with the ball at his feet, has been known to have some absolute howlers. An outstanding shot stopper but we know there is so much more to goalkeeping than that.

I thought it was a pretty good away performance in that we created the better chances and played the better football, especially when our central players drifted out wide creating the overload and the crosses coming in. Mill wall goalkeeper was man of the match.