38MC

Oh I agree, it’s the tribalism that’s stifling the ability to listen. Certain posters are living or dying by the sword and being dismissive of what should be to all a really concerning home performance where we were utterly outplayed and our reaction was to change personnel and not approach. That to me is a really concerning sign.

No he didn’t. He might have played two forwards, but he did not play two up front; he did not change the formation; he just put a square peg in a round hole.

It’s incredibly frustrating that commentary on tonight has reverted to Liam Manning v Nigel Pearson. This has nothing to do with which camp you are in. It’s just the observation that the team performed crap tonight (Max O Leary aside) and the weakest performance unfortunately was from the manager. That has nothing to do with Nigel Pearson and by calling it out is not harking back to a love affair with the predecessor. This ain’t the time for comparing records or calling out the board, I think it’s the time for calling out ‘Manning you lost us 3 points tonight for setting us up very poorly and not having the nouse to change it’. it’s not about harking back to the past, it’s about being concerned for the future now.

I ain’t surprised he has (clearly) decided to move on. He’s been starved of service, he’s had to create his own chances and goals, and his reward tonight was being shunted to a wide forward, and him a Pring looked on completely different wavelengths, unsurprisingly. He got treated like he’s Harry Cornick for 60 minutes.

You’re right we did. And Leeds are a bloody good side and worked out high press and quick turnovers and were absolutely up the creek without a paddle. As said in a separate post I can accept losing, but to not change our approach in game was extremely worrying, and like I said sticking Conway out wide for an hour was beyond excuse.

If Max wasn’t man of the match that was a cricket score. The result flattered us massively. It is worse. That’s not even really up for debate. Losing is fine, being so inept is not.

That was absolutely dreadful though and the OP is right to call out we have plan A and only plan A; a system that does not suit our squad at all. And Conway as a wide man is absolutely baffling, completely unjustifiable over-tinkering and makes me question his common sense let alone in game management to leave it so for an hour. Many more games like that and he’s going to lose the fan base. He’s got to move away from this system. It’s like SC dogmatically sticking with his when we came up.

You can’t rebuild in the championship though as your average tenure is 18 months. And you’ll lose your best players because they’ll get picked off for big money as chairmen can’t turn down bids due to FFP. it is such a poisoned chalice this league. That’s why I don’t like possession based teams; possession based sides with parachute payments - for sure; if you aren’t that you have to play differently in this league. Two horrible centre half’s, one maverick in the middle and a deadly pace merchant up top, Thats the recipe for getting yourselves in the mix for a playoff lottery. I truly believe otherwise you’re in a win/lose/draw cycle If Manning thinks he can rebuild he’s been sold a lie (and I think he has to be honest). He needs 5 years to go and get the best out of league one and two, to train them at the HPC (that’s what Tinnion wanted) and for us not to sell them. That’s pie in the sky. We’ll sell. Like we did semenyo, Webster, Scott. whats the point in a ‘training ground manager’ if you’re just going to rip the carpet from under their feet every window?

I can’t say I’m enamoured yet. In the cup against big opposition it’s undeniable we’ve done exceptionally well. I think Forest contributed to a really thrilling game because they didn’t want a replay so they encouraged us to go blow-for-blow. But then I watch the League games and I am reminded of Lee Johnson. Not necessarily in style, but in approach. And the approach is thinking you can install a Pep style of play with Salford standard players (I’m deliberately using hyperbole here). It is something I think most modern managers are guilty of and most fans are guilty of. They see what the best can do but forget pragmatism. Style over substance. If you want to progress from the championship you don’t actually have time to install that style of play unless you’re a parachute club. You need to do a Luton or a Blackpool and play pragmatic football. In the championship as a manager you do exceptionally well to last 3 years - you’ll be one of the longest serving - whilst losing your best players each 6 months at worst , 12 months at very best. Don’t fall into the trap you can coach your way there. You can’t, you won’t have the time or the stability. Modern managers try and get you playing a particular style but that takes investment which FFP no longer allows. And that’s why I’m not sure Manning is going to work. We gave Lee longer than we should have - based on spend - for romanticism. But Manning wont get that. If you exclude the parachute clubs going back up, it’s the elder statesman and pragmatic managers that get you out of this league. Generally. and just to add in league one a few technically gifted players can make alll the difference to you being a great footballing side on the eye, but that doesn’t cut it in this league as they’ll be average. The league one to championship gulf is absolutely massive in that in league one 3-4 quality players will get you playoffs, in this league you need 7-8 to achieve the same. And I think that leads to managers from league one being overrated.

I’d be a lot more cautious. I’m seeing some positive shoots but we are a long way away - notwithstanding a great team performance tonight. Let’s not do an MA and a backing of LJ just too early though. I’m glad Manning is having to prove himself over more than a dozen games before he gets a war chest. This is the highest level he’s ever managed and for me he’s still not showing he’s able to be flexible or showing very good in-game management skills. I am not being critical, I’m just asking him to show a bit more nouse before he gets trusted with too much. This season hinges on the forest replay as we aren’t going up and aren’t going down. The only money he gets -imo - should be if there’s a player that has is available at a reasonable fee,or if we want to tread water and give him a marquee loan player to see what he can do. Given that marquee is likely to be a striker - because we need goals - and would likely block Tommy, a depreciating asset who ain’t renewing,

I don’t think the type of striker is the problem, it’s how you feed the striker. For me XG and all the data analytics is killing football. Pre-nerds, generally you shoot on sight. Then analytics came in and it was ‘oh you’re better off shooting from this position so try and fashion it’. What that approach completely misses is compound effect. If you have an XG of say .33 in one position, improving XG dictates you try to create a better chance. but most footballers outside the elite just aren’t that capable. for me how is the current approach better if 9/10 you don’t create a better chance, which is often the case for non-elite players. For me the answer is it ain’t and you’re better off taking more lower XG chances than you are overplaying and losing the ball or the chance altogether. Football has been massively over complicated.

Same here. So many try to clone Man City’s way of playing when in reality it takes a £billion to get players capable of passing triangles and close control around the box. I don’t get why teams up and down the land try to persevere with it, and forget Liverpool aside the only team who knocked Man City off their perch were an all action Leicester.

I think that likely had more to do with a reluctance to move club than a limitation of ability to be fair. Plus I’m not sure the disparity in wages between leagues was necessarily there at the time. I can see why at that time in his shoes being paid well and being a fans favourite was worth more than upheaving family, relocating and gambling on fitting in for probably a relatively modest wage rise.

I think the wrong decisions are coming from how he’s being asked to play. Right now he’s meant to be an impact player. He made impact when he came into the side because his remit was ‘run towards goal and swing your boot’ and he created chaos. Obviously you’re never going to be a starter playing like that, but he needed /needs to get that freedom again, whilst on the training ground trying to finesse him. Right now he’s ineffective as a sub and surely draining confidence.

I don’t think we appreciate just how good he is as a fan base. He’s a bit of a throwback in the way he plays because his best attributes are his engine and his application. Whereas in the past we’ve been blessed at left back with some really strong technical players who maybe only played for us because their limitations were the physical attributes (think Mickey Bell). if your left back’s weakness is playing the final ball, I start to question is the issue the ability of the left back, or whether your left back should even be playing a high proportion of final balls in the first place?

I think that’s the problem. We try to create the perfect chance. Take more low percentage chances. If you’re Man City and have Rhodri and will win the ball back and recycle and go again numerous times you can walk the ball in, if you’re Bristol city, we’re better off taking more risks by having more pot shots and longer range efforts than trying to fashion one-on-ones. It’s why I don’t like a lot of modern football. It’s trying to replicate what the elite is capable of doing without adapting to your own limitations.

It’s one thing I am starting to see in Manning’s short era, there are some real partnerships and understandings being created. Pring and Mehmeti seem to get each other and know when to overload on the left or defend as a unit, Tanner and McCrorie the exact same. Vyner being the lynchpin in the whole of defence. The partnerships that aren’t being created is up top. And maybe that’s the last piece in the jigsaw. Conway is just far too isolated at the moment. He’s dangerous when he’s being a Lone Ranger and creating his own chaos, when we attack as a team he’s just not around. I don’t know yet if it’s incompatibility or something that can be improved. Wells isn’t the answer either. We don’t look any better when we swap them. im not yet jumping on the bandwagon that we don’t create chances. I think we do create dangerous ‘situations’, we’re just getting blocked out as I think we overplay and try to walk the ball in. I think our forwards need more freedom to just hit the bloody ball towards goal rather than try to create a high xg chance. Ain’t there a phrase ‘it’s the chances you don’t take that you lose’ or something. I think applies to us - and often to most ‘new wave’ managers. You can fanny around to create a high xg chance, or you can pot shot at a higher proportion of lower xg chances. I much favour the latter.

Yeah I thought I’d missed something there which is why I said ‘maybe it was me’

I agree with you. I think mehmeti is having his bedding in season and will be a menace next season. I think each week we all seem to say ‘he’s getting better’ and I think Manning is going to give him the chance to play his way into being a key player. Bell is the one for me I’m still less certain on. Earlier on he seemed more instinctive, which made him dangerous, but now he’s being coached, he’s losing something. I’m less convinced he’s going to carve out a career at this level. I hope I’m wrong though.

There were mistakes but that’s human. There was one instance late in the game where cam Pring had his ankle scythed by their player and he didn’t give a thing. That was such a blatant foul. I didn’t see the reason they got a free kick in injury time but could have been my eye sight playing tricks. Agree that it was nice he was composed enough to give himself and his assistants time to come to each decision though. It appeared indecisive and reactionary to crowd initially but it soon became clear what he was doing.

I think we lost something for a short spell when he went off and tanner was left exposed for a short while. The same when mehmeti went off. He and Pring are really starting to develop an understanding and then Cornick came on and for me Pring had too much defensive responsibility as cornick’s instinct is to play more narrow. Pring being as good as he is was able to compensate for a bit less support

I feel for Tommy. He’s just not suited to the way we play unfortunately. He’ll still contribute because he has that touch of class, but if he’s going to be a lone striker with quote ‘wing-hugging’ forwards either side, I understand why he might want to move on. And I have no rebuttal to that. It’s true we need to do more. I think it comes down to us having a really good striker, who doesn’t quite fit in with our team unfortunately.

3 of those games against Premier League opposition? 2 against current Europe League conference champions and fighting for European spots… Is that not worth bearing in mind - and 2 goals were against said premier league opposition. I agree we aren’t creating clear cut chances, but we are close. It’s the final killer ball/finish. take bell soon after his intro coming in from the right. No goal, no shot on target, didn’t half worry forest though. It’s too easy to measure chances created when they lead to a shot on target but it’s the ‘chaos’ that you create which should be measured imo. But that’s like beauty in the eye of the beholder. I personally see Darwin Nunez for the reasoning above as a top striker, and some see him as a donkey.

Spot on. He was immense tonight. The whole defence was. Vyner deserves a special mention too. Cool as a cucumber.

That’s not true re only accepting one offer. The reality is that the offer is only accepted upon conclusion of a transfer. Terms may be agreed ‘in principle’ which will mean the selling club will grant the player permission to meet the buyer and hopefully negotiate personal terms. Or even a club could grant that permission whilst terms of the transfer are still being ironed out - that is typical on deadline day for instance; and puts the seller in a strong negotiation position because the player and their representatives could pressure the buying club into meeting the seller’s terms. I suspect what happened here is rovers made an offer above the release clause but the terms were exclusivity to talk to the player over a short time frame. IE our offer is £x more but we want 48 hours to conclude the deal, if player talks to another club our offer is reduced to £y. That’s not true re only accepting one offer. The reality is that the offer is only accepted upon conclusion of a transfer. Terms may be agreed ‘in principle’ which will mean the selling club will grant the player permission to meet the buyer and hopefully negotiate personal terms. Or even a club could grant that permission whilst terms of the transfer are still being ironed out - that is typical on deadline day for instance; and puts the seller in a strong negotiation position because the player and their representatives could pressure the buying club into meeting the seller’s terms. I suspect what happened here is rovers made an offer above the release clause but the terms were exclusivity to talk to the player over a short time frame. IE our offer is £x more but we want 48 hours to conclude the deal, if player talks to another club our offer is reduced to £y.