38MC

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.

Well then it's not a release fee in the true sense because you would only need to meet it, but then ensure your offer to the player iro personal terms was stronger than your competition. Something very weird. It's not a release fee at all if the club are not compelled to accept an offer which simply matches it.

Odd but my fav formation does include 3cb’s, wing backs, and the right forward players. With the right personnel it’s both solid and bums off the seat. it does crest solidity in that you know commit as you may there can and should be 3cbs at worst or even 2 specialist cbs and one cdm. I also think it suits our players. Cam Pring for instance is a frigging Ox. He needs to have licence to roam up and down the wing and be physical and involved. I see that in McRorie too. And I see some of our defenders - Zak for instance - as pretty useless past the half way line but effective behind it. I think Twine is a good player to help bed the formation. But I don’t see him as the solution. He’s not worth the cost. He needs more in the arsenal to justify the outlay. He’s not ‘worth £10m for his corners’ or what we SAF said in jest when Liverpool bought Charlie Adam

Trait wise he reminded me of more advanced playing Charlie Adam in a lot of ways - bloody good set piece, lots of desire, good brain. But a Charlie Adam whose limit is the Championship; not Liverpool. For a sensible price he’d be a very good addition. But I don’t think there’s any chance we’d get him for what I think would be a sensible price. I think it’s a clever loan move though. I think the way Manning wants us to play requires a player like him. Manning and Twine can start working with and training our forward players to adapt to the movement and running patterns that will be required of them, and then in the summer go and find a similar player at a more reasonable fee.

I wouldn’t ever wish to comment upon someone’s health or fitness for their role unless I was 100% certain; and as I ain’t doctor or patient, I wouldn’t comment.

Agree with this. We all want manning to do well because that means the club succeeds. It’s a non question. it’s nice to see his management skills affect the game too. He got his subs right. I’m warming. As said above it was a little more front footed tonight and Sunderland was an excellent watch - I think we were fortunate then to win when a draw was a fair result reflecting performances

He was though, to be fair. And to be fair at the time you’re looking at a club who’s admin was so shit that he was even able to walk away on a free Seems a strange game where some call us winners and some agree with Liam. Personally I had it as a score draw.

No manager in the world would agree to a clause like that, particularly at a club that shows no sign of re-investing

Fair play, I think me and you are on the same page and I don’t disagree with anything you’ve posted here. Perhaps I exaggerate ‘wholesale changes’. The wholesale I was talking about is taking us snails pace football. separating ‘fact from fiction’. Fact - this is crap. First half. Manning’s got 15 mins here to make an impact - that’s what I really want to see now.

Well then that’s the head coaches problem. He shouldn’t make wholesale changes to leave the players confused; it should be a gradual transition. That’s ego

That’s where I’m an outlier. It’s not lovely if it doesn’t achieve anything. Otherwise it’s just simple ball retention and that’s all I’m seeing; ball retention in non-dangerous areas. If I was opposition manager my tactic would be ‘let them **** around with the ball’

If making a civil claim through the courts - and ignorant of any EFL regs - 6 years*; although when the clock starts ticking would be a consideration for Villa in the hypothetical- for instance is it 6 years from the date the breach occurred, from accounting reporting date, from the land transaction you’ve posted about previously. * can be extended but very exceptionally.

99.9% certain Chelsea would be able to successfully challenge any fine or sanction that could come from backdating. How can you be punished for something that wasn't punishable at the time you did it? That breaks every principle of fairness and justice. It would be foolish for clubs to insist on this because all that it's going to achieve is lawyers getting massive fees for a test case virtually certain to fail.

I don’t think @SydneyCity was expressing their opinion, just stating there was a manager who said we are a clever club because we lost semenyo but replaced him with a ‘clever upgrade’ in Bell. Sydney isn’t wrong. That did happen and it’s a direct quote. It was Carlos Corberan. Currently still in work, probably not for long though.

I do understand and agree with the purpose. I’m not a hyperbolist that we pass back and forth with no intent, it is to drag out and to create space. But this should be not at the expense of mixing it up and also going direct when it takes us. Norwich game is case in point for that. I think we are running down the same line we ran with SOD. playing the game how we think it should be played, not how it should be played for the squad and the limitations our squad has. I’m seeing our tactical approach as a square peg in a round hole. Edit - I’m calling myself not a hyperbolist but I am probably very guilty of reacting to the thread title which I think is incredibly disingenuous and also patronising

Sorry. I just find fact from fiction antagonistic. The facts are the results, the points and the efficacy. All of which are poor. The footballing standard is poor, to the purist it looks good, but it’s poor. This is smelling or SOD MK II where apparently we have to believe in ineffectiveness because given enough time it might look good. where Harry and I totally agree is in expectations for LM and this is a lower mid table squad performing as such. Where we disagree is ‘this is encouraging’. I’m not encouraged. And that’s based on facts not fiction for how football should be played.