red panda

9 hours ago, Markthehorn said:

Mind you some managers we have lost or got rid of have done well elsewhere.

Dyche 

Edwards

Silva (eventually)

Jokanavic (at Fulham anyway )

Even Hodgson did well at Palace  for a bit.

Somewhere someone has got to get a chance but both owners and now fans want change at the first sign of trouble.

 

 

To be fair, just by the law of averages there must be lots of ex Watford managers out there doing well, as well as lots doing badly, lots doing just OK, and lots not working.  Ismael was their 11th manager since Jan 2018, and that's not counting caretakers  

12 hours ago, S_C said:

I absolutely believe that the manner in which he arrived is contributing to the current mood. That isn’t to say the mood would be dramatically different but I absolutely believe that if JL/BT had been more honest, if they’d thanked Pearson for his work in righting the ship and stated Manning is a promising young coach who will need time and understanding to adapt to the Championship, I think plenty would be more forgiving.

Everyone knew the top 6 squad stuff was nonsense, I’m not implying fans swallowed it and are now confused why we aren’t 5th, but they massively fumbled both Pearson's exit (in creating a false narrative about someone who had been hugely media savvy in the run up to his departure) and Manning’s appointment. It left a sour taste in a fanbase already sceptical of the hierarchy, whilst lumping Manning in their corner as their man. It created undue pressure. Had they not, I think for some the tone shifts to ‘we’ve had some good performances, look at Watford, look at Southampton, a nice win over PL West Ham, there are signs of potential, but he needs to improve if he’s going to take us forward' rather than ‘out of his depth, get rid.’

I do get the criticism regarding trying to impose his style of play on a set of players that aren’t suited to it, but managers come in with their own ideas and methods. He isn’t going to play the same style/system as his predecessor, and I think 10/15 games is probably around the mark you’d realise what you want to do might not work. It’s all well and good criticising that he isn’t being flexible but you don't get the green light to implement your methods, struggle for 4 games, and then revert to what the bloke who just got fired was doing. Clearly it will take time, either for it to work or realise it isn’t. Even if its acknowledged that the players don't quite fit, that must be known prior to appointment, otherwise BT/JL sat in an interview with LM and said 'What we're looking for is exactly how we're playing now..'

His first 10 games were W4 D3 L3. I’d say that’s pretty fine and argue, actually, that he’s therefore had 15 games to consider what he’s trying to do might be too much too soon. For what it’s worth, we’ve had 14 games between 1st Jan and 2nd Mar, several against PL teams, including an ET and demoralising penalties loss. That’s a lot of games, many against superior opposition. Though I don’t condone it and acknowledge its dangers, there’s been an air throughout that we’ll finish mid table. It's his responsibility to manage that of course, but it isnt hard to see how complacency and fatigue, both physically and mentally, can set in.

As has been said elsewhere, poor and lose to Swansea and the club are staring down both barrels. I can’t help but feel, though, that whilst both Pearson and Manning had their challenges, Pearson’s were used to excuse him whereas Manning’s are brushed aside.

 

12 hours ago, Davefevs said:

What are the comparative “challenges” you see that should’ve resulted in equal treatment?

For me, Nige inherited a mess and therefore needed a period of time to reset the club.

Liam took over a club in a “healthy state” - BT:

”best squad in a long time, well contracted, only 3 OOC in the summer”

In fairness he did say “when fit”.  Although we have seen a few more creep in over recent weeks, they’ve been spread across the positions, so he hasn’t had to play players out of position.

Depth has been an issue for both, but we are then back to budgets!

FWIW I don’t think Manning is shit, there are things I like about the way he’s done things.  But just too many areas I’m not convinced by.  I didn’t like everything Nige did either.

 

 

 

7 hours ago, Colemanballs said:

You have been sucked into a Manning vs Pearson debate which is a (deliberate) distraction from the issue at hand, namely whether Manning should be given more time. What Pearson did or not do and what challenges he faced are irrelevant to the decision we are faced with now which I think boils down to how one answers the following questions. 

• Is the current squad suited to the style of play Manning prefers? My opinion: No. I think pretty much everyone agrees on this whether in the pro or anti Manning camps.
• Will Manning change style to a more pragmatic approach to suit the squad? My opinion: No. He has made it abundantly clear that he is wedded to this possession football.
• Can the current squad be easily transformed (bearing in mind our likely budget) into a squad that is suited to the style of play Manning prefers? My opinion: No. The squad has been built to play a fast, counterattacking style of play, the antithesis of the possession based style Manning favours. Transitioning to such a style would require a significant revamp of the existing squad requiring serious investment and excellent transfer dealings.
• Is the style of play Manning prefers likely to see us challenging for promotion? My opinion: No. To work, possession based football requires that you have players who are significantly better than the opposition. I cannot think of a single club that has been promoted from the Championship playing possession based football that has not had the benefit of parachute payments. Of the clubs that have not had the benefit of parachute payments that have been promoted from the Championship, they have generally played some kind of pragmatic style.
• Is the style of play Manning prefers likely to see us playing more attractive football? My opinion: No. I find all that sideways passing tedious. I appreciate that many appreciate that style of football though.

I don't like to see anyone fired, but based on my answers to the questions, I believe he should go now. Otherwise, the very real fear is that we waste substantial money rebuilding the squad over the summer and at best end up mid table and at worst are in a relegation battle. Obviously, my answers are all opinions and it may be that others would answer yes to some or all of them and therefore come to a different conclusion. Based on the evidence we have before us though, it is difficult for me to see how they would do so.

 

6 hours ago, Capman said:

For me context is everything. Those who say we need to ‘move on’ are missing the point. 
Pearson was fired because he was an experienced manager prepared to speak footballing ‘truth’ to an establishment who did not want to listen as it was not something they were wanting to hear. 
I agree, Manning is inexperienced and should normally be given more time. Problem is, if he is and by some miracle learns lots and learns it fast he will simply be an experienced manager who speaks truth to an establishment who do not want to hear it. The outcome of that is likely to simply be Deja vu. 
Unfortunately I think we have an establishment who are unprepared to face the challenging nature of climbing out of the championship and until that changes it really doesn’t matter who is in the head coach seat. The club just does not have the ambition. 
 

 

5 hours ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

You're making this a Manning Vs Pearson debate in order to distract from the current situation which is 4 losses in a row and 23 points from 21 games. If any manager delivered that sort of record then the mood is going to be exactly the same. 

Personally I can't see any situation where a 'give him time' with a squad already good enough for top 10 would have people be forgiven of our regression. 

Manning has shown absolutely nothing that even with time, he'll come good. 

You mention about excuses for Pearson but then 90% of your post is excuses for Manning. 

 

 

5 hours ago, TV Tom said:

Can't remember Pearson getting the same stick when he went 14 odd games without a home win

 

5 hours ago, Sir Geoff said:

The comments made about a style of play was made by Tinnion whilst Pearson was still here.

They then hired a manager that was alien to that style of play.

 

4 hours ago, Sir Geoff said:

You may well be right, but I thought I'd heard Tinnion talk about it earlier than that and thought that Pearson alluded to it in an interview a while back.

 

4 hours ago, IAmNick said:

Yeah you're right Tinnion did as well I think while Pearson was here. Confusing regardless!

 

4 hours ago, 1960maaan said:

I seem to remember some rumblings , but wasn't that during his early days as permanent Boss ?
Just after over seeing 14 departures , bringing in 4 . 
Because of the situation many fans were ok with Pearson getting time. It wasn't even just a shed load of OOC players and reducing the wage bill through necessity , the medical and coaching staff was rebuilt . There were a lot of moving parts.
Manning has come into a good situation for a new boss. 
Squad recovering health & availability .
Very good levels of fitness.
Good atmosphere and bond through the team. 
A decent squad and mix of players. 
There were infact none of the usual problems faced by new Managers, they wanted taking to the next level, some improvement on the pitch. 

This is my problem , he has seemingly been brought up with a single philosophy . He is so wedded to this he always wants to play that way and is convinced the plan is right.
This is fine to a point .
Take the Ipswich game;
He looks at Ipswich, how they play and set up . Makes a plan for that and is happy. The Plan seems to work , and now here's the problem. We are facing another team and another Manager who sees "HIS" plan isn't working so changes things. All of a sudden our plan isn't working, but Manning knows his plan WAS working and so sticks to it , because the Plan was working.

I criticised Pearson for everything from selection to set up to Subs at times. But he more than once made very early Subs because he got things wrong, that was because he was experienced and big enough to take it on the chin. I don't see that in Manning's make up.

Taking the Manning V Pearson thing out of it . 
Manning's inability to adjust is a worry, his willingness to blame everyone else is a worry , that he seems to get out thought with "in game tactics" is a worry , the fact the players look less fit than when he came in is a worry, the fact he seems to be playing players with injuries is a worry.  You can add we struggle against the same tactics week in week out. Because we do better against more open teams isn't an excuse. 

As it stands I can't think of many reasons he shouldn't be sacked, apart from it doesn't show the decision makers in a good light. We have a few games against teams that will be a little more open, so we could pick up points Vs Swansea , WBA , Leicester , Plymouth & Sunderland . 6 points will not only probably see us safe, it will be enough to buy time for Manning and that add more worries.

Will he choose the players we bring in, will BT give him the players, as he will be effectively be on borrowed time. 
With a limited budget I'm not sure even if we spend £10M on this ( big , strong , quick , effective , potent ) striker we are after , will make any difference to the team . 
We buy a target man who can hold the ball up for runners, how does that fit with Manning ball ??

We are in a mess of our own making. Not Mannings fault he is here, but clearly not a good fit and incapable of being able to adapt , which doesn't look good for a young Coach. 

 

4 hours ago, Davefevs said:

@Colemanballs I’m beginning to think that’s the only thing they have left in their argument, to keep dragging it back to Pearson.  I rarely see anything detailing the pros of Manning.  In fact, I reckon I give more pros of Manning than they do!

guess why he didn’t, because into 21/22 he won games away.  Ultimately it matters not at which venue younein, but that you do win.  Oh, and he did get stick, tonnes of it.  Short memories.  It was probably the foundation of “Nige-out” at the time.

If they were to replace Manning, there wouldn’t need to be a(nother) rebuild if they got an adaptable manager in.

Without going through all the quotes, they appointed Manning because they thought all modern, progressive, on the grass coaches play high press, forward thinking football.  Possession and winning (MK season 1, Oxford early this season) do not equal high press, forward thinking football.  It’s incredible incompetence they thought that. 

 

4 hours ago, fisherrich said:

I don’t see it as a Manning v Nige debate. The boil needs to be lanced - ie the Lansdowns need to sell up. Getting rid of Manning will make no difference as those 2 Lansdown buffoons will just employ another YES man. No faith in Zippee and Bungle running this football club/aka Bristol Sport.
What I liked about Nige P was his absolute honesty and passion for the football club. What a loss!

 

3 hours ago, BCFC_Dan said:

Pearson took 9 points from 14 games during his initial short term contact, yet he was rewarded for that with a 3 year deal. I thought that a daft move at the time, and I still do. He then delivered 2.5 years of largely uninspiring football and mediocre results.

However, he was operating under restricted circumstances and there was, as he saw it, a lot of work to be done to get the club into a shape where it could succeed. I don't know if that means any manager would have to do that work in order to succeed, or if it was work that Pearson created. Nevertheless, he was getting on with it and making slow but steady progress. He had a number of runs of poor form, and also a few periods of personal ill health, but the club stuck by him and let him continue his work.

Then, suddenly, out of nowhere, the club hierarchy decided they didn't like the direction of travel that the club had been on for nearly 3 years and decided to impose a complete stylistic change, under a relatively inexperienced coach. Not only that, but they declared the squad, which was largely built for and by Pearson, and of mid table quality at best, to be capable of finishing in the top 6, something that was self-evidently not true, and did nothing but heap pressure on their new manager.

Personally, I like Manning, and I like the performances I've seen (I only see televised games and the odd away fixture, so I've been lucky in what I've witnessed). I think he's the right man to take the club forward. However, it's pretty obvious that the manner in which decisions have been made has made things about as difficult as possible to achieve success.

I don't hate the Lansdowns, or Brian Tinnion, and both have done plenty of good work, but the decisions taken over the management have been quite ridiculous. It was obvious at every stage what they were going to get from Nigel Pearson. He didn't even deliver particularly good results, and his style of play was well known. If they wanted that style of play, then fine, let him do the job. If they wanted him to steady the ship and build a platform, then fine, sack him in the summer of 2023, or let him run out his contract, then make a change. If they wanted a different style of play or better results, don't appoint the guy with 2 wins in 14 games, who doesn't play how you want to play, in the first place. Whatever the individual merits of Manning and Pearson may be, not one of those decisions really makes any sense.

 

3 hours ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

You just don't like to hear the truth that Pearson and Manning inherited vastly different squad's because it doesnt fit with your agenda. 

 

3 hours ago, pillred said:

I have said on another post-NP did not get particularly good results, now how much of that was down to reducing the wage bill getting rid of the dead wood etc I don't know. I have come in for some stick for even daring to point that out, he was working under some constraints but the way he is mourned on here anyone would think we had been successful and entertaining under his management, well I must have missed that part, as you have pointed out Manning seems to be on a hiding to nothing what frustrates me most is good results and performances followed by disappointment. I personally can see some improvement overall the team look more cohesive but again we have the curse of Bristol City with injuries which have impacted our progress, all this harking back to the "good old days" under Pearson is getting us nowhere. 

 

3 hours ago, AshtonGreat said:

Pearson managed 12 points from his first 15 games?

 

3 hours ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

This season (which is the only fair comparison) Pearson managed 18 points from 14 games. 

 

3 hours ago, Galley is our king said:

If people are told the truth, it helps but..... the rationale for sacking Pearson is just a tissue of LIES.

People who deliberately lie, lose respect.

When those same lies actually make us worse, you end up where we currently are. 

Now, JL and BT can not expect any, or little respect.

They also seem not to be able to do anything about it nor indeed put out any comms (another lie which they said would improve).

They are in a hole of their own making.

 

 

3 hours ago, 1960maaan said:

Before that we got 9 from 14 games and 6 defeats on the trot . Do you think there might be some context needed here ?

Pearson inherited a shitshow with no transfer window. 10 points away from PO's -13 GD 

Manning inherited a reasonable team , window approaching ,5 points from the Playoffs. -1 GD

 

 

3 hours ago, bearded_red said:

If your only defence of Liam Manning is that we’re not doing as badly as when Pearson took over that complete omnishambles I’d suggest that in itself speaks volumes for what a job he’s doing.

 

2 hours ago, RollsRoyce said:

Let's talk about Manning. Pearson has gone, and Manning being unsuited has nothing to do with Pearson. Two hugely different scenarios.

So, why did we appoint Manning? What are the attributes you see, with the squad that we have, that suit the way Manning wants to play? What youth players have been developed under Manning? What players have improved under Manning? Why, when Luton and possibly Ipswich get promoted to the Prem playing a certain way, with a budget closer to ours than say Leeds/Burnley/Leicester do you think the Manning 's approach to playing football is superior to that of McKenna and Edwards? How many players does Manning need to sign? Particularly when 2 players already signed, we tried to sign before he got here, a powerful forward we tried to sign before he got here, and the number 10 position, filled by Scott and not replaced, would have been filled if the money was available. So we already know the squad for next year, bar Twine (or his replacement) and a Semenyo replacement. Is that enough to give Manning the players he would want to play his way? Is that way of playing as. a non-parachute payment club going to bring success? As we would be the first club to do that, nothing like being first of course, but it does not follow any other path to success by any other club. 

In any case, when, who, has said we are now going on a different path? The club have never said it, fans have created this narrative to explain Mannings's failure. 

In my view, the club did not do their due diligence and hired a Russel Martin replacement, when what we needed was a McKenna or Edwards if we wanted to utilise better the players at our disposal. 

It will be faster and more economical to cut our losses with Manning now before we enter into a blind faith, or an attempt at face-saving , path that will be destructive and carries a high risk of relegation next season. 

Whilst 10 games left can change the mood and take Manning into next season with positive energy, something stupendous will need to happen to lift what would appear to be increasing doubts. An empty ground at full-time for a derby I had never seen before, and the atmosphere was the worst I can recall for a derby. There is no faith or belief. Those are worrying traits. Anger would be better, really, as it shows passion. But people have stopped caring. As it is a lost cause. 

So, please, try and explain what it is that you believe Manning has that I and maybe a few others are struggling to grasp. 

 

2 hours ago, Sheltons Army said:

It’s called doubling down Gull

The loudest anti Pearson screamers are feeling a bit vulnerable 

 

2 hours ago, pillred said:

It was a bit of an unnecessary mess wasn't it, there does seem to be a common denominator in all this and I'm not sure if just changing the manager will ever improve it, I just wish there was less negativity towards Mannings's appointment as he hasn't exactly had a lot of luck as far as injuries and recruitment have gone, I also agree we were not told the real reason Pearson was sacked personally I think it was a combination of poor results, his overall health, and of course him calling a Spade a Spade.

 

2 hours ago, italian dave said:

I think maybe you’ve answered your own question Dave!

I guess we’ll see whether the January window was about budgets or about who’s available come the summer.

One thing I think is often overlooked - because it’s out of sight and off the field - is the issue of relationships and trust. If the assumptions on here are correct, then that was NPs downfall at the end of the day. I have no idea what goes on behind the scenes, but you’d imagine/hope that relationship and trust between senior people is now better. And that has to be a good thing for the club.

I know you can debate whether the right people ended up leaving when those relationships broke down - but that’s a fairly pointless debate: it’s just about being realistic!

And I know you can make the case @Capman  makes above about speaking truth to power. And I don’t argue with that. But there are ways of doing that. And doing it in a way that ends up with a complete breakdown of the relationship isn’t the way.

I think you’ve made the point in the past about Gould having been the buffer between NP and JL and it’s possibly his departure that’s been more of a problem for the club than anything else.

Whether LM is just a ‘yes man’, or whether he has different skills in terms of speaking that truth - I’ve no idea, and I’m not sure anyone on here really does? 

 

2 hours ago, TV Tom said:

To be honest I really don't know what Manning has or doesn't have yet but like it or not he is our manager so i'm willing to give him a chance and a bit of time and get behind him, the good games have been good and the bad games have been bad so much the status quo of the last five years, since xmas i've really enjoyed a few games (the 4 cup games, Cov' Middlesbrough, Southampton and even Ipswich the other night, the bad games were atrocious as were many games under NP (i still break out into a cold sweat with our away performance at Reading last season)

 

2 hours ago, MarcusX said:

Pearson got loads of stick early in his first full season, and some wanted him gone before Xmas that year.

Doesnt matter what side of the “divide” you are on, its re-writing history to pretend Pearson had it easy or didn’t get any stick from fans at the same stage of his tenure as Manning is in.

Difference js, Nige should have been in credit to some extent after keeping us up.

 

 

 

 

 

2 hours ago, TV Tom said:

I'm happy to give Pearson plenty of credit and am fully appreciative of some of the things he did under difficult circumstances but after two and a half years i think the time was right to go, again this is only my opinion and i appreciate fully and i understand why some people have the opposite opinion

 

2 hours ago, RedRock said:

As said many times previously, if you want to get promoted playing fast-paced, front-foot possession football you need a team made up of the division’s best and most skilled players at that style. Man City are successful as they can buy the best. 

We simply don’t have those players because they cost £££. Pearson adopted an all together different and pragmatic approach of trying to weld a successful team.  A ‘band of brothers’ approach. His problem - aside from the off the field issues - was that recruitment was pretty poor. As a consequence, we weren’t improving - at least not at a fast enough pace. 

With a great deal of luck you might be able to develop a Man City style of play on the cheap and develop your own youngsters, or buy in young players for elsewhere - the strategy we’re, seemingly, now employing but that will take time and possibly, a relegation. No guarantees of eventual success though and the likelihood is if we do develop any decent players they’ll be snaffled up by bigger Clubs - unless by some stroke of good luck they develop all at the same time so we can offer players a realistic vision of them as a collective going on to the Prem. 

While I can see some logic in ditching Pearson, I struggle massively with flip-flopping to an entirely different approach and reversion back to the failed LJ type model. 

Think we’re right in a hole now. Stick or twist? 

Gamble either way. Do I trust our recruitment ‘team’ to deliver quality, physically resilient players in the Summer that can deliver ‘Pep’ football?  No. Do I think that Manning can adapt his style of play, get the players on board and become a quality in-game manager in the last ten games? No. Do I think the Lansdown’s will press the button. No, at least not until October at the earliest. 

The next few months are going to be hard for us supporters. Relegation, I fear, is a distinct possibly.
 

 

2 hours ago, Steve Watts said:

He doesn't throw the team under the bus at all.  I know this because he tells us he's not doing this......usually just before throwing the team under the bus...but he's assured us he's not doing that......

Whether the change was needed or not it was absolutely not the case that the time was right for him to go.  It was either too early or too late, but to sack him when they did was wrong on all levels.

 

1 hour ago, Meh said:

When Nigel was here and things were bad he was honest with fans and detract blame from his players, he tried tinkering with the system slightly, personnel slightly and maybe switched the speed of play and where the line was to press.

Liam is sticking to the same tactics, same formation generally, putting blame on the players already under pressure and changing the team regularly and it does not seem to be representative of who fans are seeing having a bad patch.

It reminds me so much of LJ and what became known as his tombola team selection. Manning does not seem to know his strongest team and is not changing our style to combat the system of the opposition.

Experience over inexperience I guess.

 

34 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

I think the vast majority of us agree that sacking Pearson was unnecessary and short-sighted and yet another reason why the Lansdown family need to be away from this club as soon as possible. 

However, we can't turn the clock back, that's old history and in the short-term I'm interested in how we can make the team more competitive now.

Sacking Manning with 10 games to go would be a big roll of the dice. Unless the new guy hits the ground running it'll take a while for him to know the players and work out where they best perform. LJ pulled off a rescue package when he came in, SOD did the opposite. Both had more than 10 games however.

For me, rather than take that particular gamble now, removing the malign influence of our unofficial DOF might be a quick fix to allow this coach more flexibility in how he sets up. The entire logic of putting a bloke in as DOF whose management career amounts to failing at one club is crazy. "Brian is in overall charge of all football matters" was the most chilling thing I've read on the OS. You might as well ring up Liz Truss to get her advice on balancing your household budget. 

We might have a shot at bringing in a genuine wise advisor before the season end or perhaps it's just time for the club to realise that the Tinnion as DOF experiment isn't working and just let Manning stand or fall on his own merits. 

 

22 minutes ago, Capman said:

I agree with that summary by the way. NP should certainly be reflecting on his own responsibilities to build relationships, but ultimately that is not the supporters problem. The supporters, I suspect, want an experienced manager who can build a successful team. They do not need over delicate egos (in the board room or the dug out) thinking they are more important than getting points on the board and getting the team promoted. 

 

21 minutes ago, cheese said:

As I see it, Nige created a team of greyhounds (runners) whereas Manning (also read Tinnion) wants a team of intelligent footballers.  Not enough of our current squad fit into that category.  Now you can argue until you're blue in the face that Manning should adapt to the squad he has and play to their strengths but that's not what he was brought in to do.  It will be painful until he has the players he wants.  The hierarchy decided that we were safe from relegation this season and so November was the best time to press the button.  Whether they were right on timing we shall see.  Whether they were right on the appointment depends on us staying up and then seeing what happens next season.

 

7 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Do you honestly think “safety from relegation” was their tipping point in making the decision to sack Nige?  They were looking upwards not downwards!  How far upwards we can only guess, but relegation was nowhere near being in their mindset.

Where I’m at, if you hadn’t guessed () is that even giving him his own players won’t make the difference the outlay will need.

Only 34 posts so far that explicitly mention Nige (I didn't pick those where the reference was only implicit, even if it was obvious)

2 hours ago, SecretSam said:

That's pretty grim reading

 

Agree 100%

1 hour ago, 1960maaan said:

Interesting read , I liked this bit ....

      " Duff praised predecessor Martin, but admitted he saw the game "slightly" differently and spoke of adding physicality and pace, to be more progressive."

We should try that .

That's what he might have said, but he didn't seem to achieve it.  That quote is one of the very few potentially favourable bits from a really damning verdict.  It goes on to say "Seasoned Swansea watchers not only struggled to see that, they struggled to see what the game plan was from week to week. The consensus was there was no discernible feature of the team, nothing to make the side stand out or encourage hope.  Players were said to be equally unconvinced."

43 minutes ago, ROKERITE said:

Swansea's supporters took against Duff six league matches into the season. Quite ridiculous but there's a lot of ridiculousness around these days. I think he'd be an excellent appointment for Bristol City and you have an advantage over other clubs. Duff loves the town of Cheltenham and, I'd presume, he could commute easily from there to Ashton Gate. So yours could be just the club where he can create something over a longer period. And your Welsh neighbours can gnash their teeth regretting their impatience as you reach The PL before they get back there.

Six matches is luxury.  The pitchforks were out for LM well before that

Some of the posts on here are embarrassing.  No Ipswich are not Man City or Real Madrid, but they are second, have comfortably more than 2ppg, and were in good form (having won their last five) with lots of confidence.  From where we started - three really depressing and disjointed performances - a competitive performance away to Ipswich is progress.

8 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Tim you've said some right crap before but this tops it all. 

Ipswich made changes, Manning didn't react. No plan b yet again. 

So who scored our second goal? And who provided the cross? But don't let me dampen your celebrations

Looks risky. Larsson as head coach AND part owner. Would he sack himself? Roles for others as well (presumably involved in football matters).  Could get messy, with a y! 

34 minutes ago, MelksRed said:

Thanks (genuinely) for your response.

How is it that that the same group of players can play out of their skins against Southampton / West Ham but not against teams at the bottom of the league? Is it arrogance, an unwillingness to dig deep and grind something out or some thing else?

Could it be frustration that aspects of their life are controlled generating a negative mindset?

I don't think they intend to lose or underperform - merely looking to stoke the fires of conversation. 

Is it resilience? Is it just inconsistencies- if so how could we iron these out?

Just because clubs are near the bottom of the league doesn't mean they're crap at the moment!  Wednesday had a really dreadful start with 6 points from their first 17 games, but then picked up 26 points from the next 17 which is pretty decent form.  Similarly, QPR got 10 points from their first 17 games and then 25 from the next 17.  Over the last 5 games (arbitrary I know, but easy to find as the BBC's league tables show this), both QPR and Wednesday have better records that either Southampton or Boro.

1 hour ago, Ivorguy said:

Disagree.  Full of long time supporters who have seen it all, and recognise a downward projectory when they see it.

Let's see if we can recognise the trajectory.  At the risk of slight arbitrariness, let's take each group of 10 years since we were relegated from what was then Div 1:

1980s 1 season in 2nd tier, 7 seasons in 3rd tier, 2 seasons in 4th tier

1990s 6 seasons in 2nd tier, 4 seasons in 3rd tier

2000s 3 seasons in 2nd tier, 7 seasons in 3rd tier

2010s 8 seasons in 2nd tier, 2 seaons in 3rd tier

2020s 4 seasons in 2nd tier

It's not that long ago at all that we spent 8 consecutive seasons in the third tier.  We've now spent 15 out of the last 17 seasons in the second tier.  Things could certainly be better, but they could also be (and have been) an awful lot worse.

1 hour ago, Banjo Island said:

With lashings of bang average managers

Silly idiots, they used the wrong rolodex.  They should have used the "guaranteed promotion-winning managers just itching to come and work at Ashton Gate" list.

Most of our recent appointments have fallen into three main categories:

• up and coming managers, probably with experience mainly in lower leagues - Manning, L Johnson and McInnes are recent examples
• more experienced managers - either with moderate track records or perhaps some with good records who have hit a rocky patch (or why else would they be available and willing to consider us?) - e.g. Pearson, Cotterill, O'Driscoll, Coppell , G Johnson and Wilson
• a rookie appointed from within (e.g. Holden and Tinnion).  It worked for Bournemouth with Eddie Howe, but it's a very, very long shot.

We're absolutely not alone in trying different approaches from time to time.  Looking across the Championship, the 'up and coming' route has quite a good track record recently - Vincent Kompany, Paul Heckingbottom and Rob Edwards won promotion last year, Scott Parker and Steve Cooper the previous year, alongside exception Marco Dasilva.

The main option we haven't tried recently (since Benny!) is bringing in an overseas coach - this has had a few successes, but also a large number of failures and is really difficult to get right.

Some haven't worked, but not many have been complete disasters and I'd say Cotterill and both Johnsons were quite successful in their own ways.

They just need to look around the office to try a bit harder to find that "guaranteed promotion-winning managers" list.

I thought I'd resurrect this thread (I could have chosen many others) just to illustrate how much our collective mood can change in the course of just two games.

I don't want to come across too happy clappy, as yesterday was bad.  But .....

• football is a often game of very fine margins, and that includes many of our matches.  I think we've played 23 games in all competitions under LM and only 3 have been decided by more than one goal (our wins over Watford & Southamption, and defeat to Preston); and
• it's easy to look at the league table and think that victories over Boro and Southampton (plus West Ham and holding Forest over 210 mins) make us world beaters, and then defeats to QPR and Wednesday make us relegation candidates.  But over the last 5 games, QPR and Wednesday have actually picked up more points than either Boro or Southampton (others can hunt around for other form tables if they want - I just chose 5 games because my goto league table - the BBC's - also shows form over the last 5 games).

My conclusion is that things might not be quite as bad as they seem right now, just as they probably weren't quite as good as they might have seemed after the Southampton match.  Boring, I know ....

17 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

You're the only one that's mentioning Nige mate. 

I'm talking about the fact players keep breaking down upon being close to playing again. That has absolutely zero to do with Nige so why you mentioning him? I suspect you're doing so to try and take the light off of this obvious reoccurring issue. 

I think you've got confused about which of your toxic posts these exchanges started with.  No problem, it can't be easy keeping up with all that negative stuff.

2 minutes ago, Lavington Robin said:

Or a sickness bug if not you do have to wonder why Twine was on the bunch last week !

Or just that it's easier to put him on the bench for a home match?

46 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Apparently we are not allowed to hold them to account for this because we knew they were talking bs and telling lies.

The fact we're supposed to over look the fact they lied to us is bizarre in itself. 

 

6 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

This is getting ridiculous now. 

I didn't mention Nige. 

This conversation has nothing to do with Nige and yet here you are mentioning Nige. 

Technically you are correct, you didn't explicitly mention Nige.  But yet again you refer back to one specific aspirational statement that was mentioned at the time of Nige's departure.

I think most posters know what's really ridiculous here ....

4 minutes ago, italian dave said:

Interesting you say that. I’d never have guessed you felt that way.

 

Wouldn't have happened under Nige 

Shame the game lasted 97 minutes.  Gutted not to keep a clean sheet 

8 hours ago, Dr Balls said:

But we still get the media fluff, promoted by the club, that Manning is a “bright young coach”, while of course the club were quite happy for Pearson to be painted as an aging dinosaur, when the truth was nothing of the sort. Personally I would prefer experience over promise, but of course that doesn’t suit the owners!

It's amazing how successful the club has been in spreading this myth that LM is well-respected, sought-after, bright young coach etc right across all of our independent national media. Especially as in all other respects, many posters seem to think those running the club are completely useless.

Or, just a thought, may be all of those independent media outlets actually say what they think. Surely not? 

3 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

You, as much as anyone should know that Nigel didn't actually sign the large majority of those players. They would have been ones the club had been watching for a while and who's names would have been put forward to Nigel as possible signings if he wanted them. No way did he personally scout them and insist on signing them.

In the same way the Manning was brought in as Head Coach so should have even less of a say over players brought in. Surely his remit is to coach the players presented to him and pick the team on a match day. In the same way that Swansea worked for years, the Head Coach is only there to maintain the style of play adopted by the club and improve players within that framework.

So it's pure coincidence that Twine ended up here??

21 minutes ago, Harry said:

The Seagull is blinded by his love for Nige. 
He thinks that because we now have Liam in that we don’t need to sign any more players and that the academy kids should all be ‘coached up’ to top level championship players. 
 

He conveniently forgets that Nigel signed the following players :

Danny Simpson, Matty James, Andy King, Rob Atkinson, Timm Klose, Duncan Idehen, George Tanner, Tim ApSion, Ben Acey, Ewan Clark, Kane Wilson, Kal Naismith, Mark Sykes, Stefan Bajic, Nikita Haikin, Anis Mehmeti, Harry Cornick, Rob Dickie, Ross McCrorie, Haydon Roberts, Jason Knight, Taylor GardnerHickman & Lewis Thomas. 
 

I can only assume that he thinks that none of those players should have been signed because we should have ‘coached up’ the academy lads and that we should now be starting with Zac Bell, Araoye, KnightLebel, Kadji, Casa Grande, Leeson, Rose, Yeboah, Joseph James, Nelson etc etc. 

So yeah, I’m pretty sure the Seagull thinks that having hired Manning we shouldn’t have to sign any more players ever again. 

Sorry if this has been asked before, but is there any chance the Seagull is Nige (or a close friend or relative)?

I honestly think if we had signed Erling Haaland and/or Kevin de Bruyne on loan that would be wrong in some posters' views:

• because Nige wasn't given those funds;
• because they won't be our player when the loan expires;
• because they won't fit in with the Liam Manning/Brian Tinnion [delete whichever suits your argument] style of play;
• because they will block the pathway of a wunderkind playing for our under 16s;
• because Manning inherited a "top 6 squad" and therefore doesn't need any new signings;
• because it's inconsistent with some random off-the-cuff comment from Tinnion or a Lansdown that the poster will remember and hold them to for ever and ever;
• because some or all of the above means WE WERE LIED TO;
• or lots of similar reasons but you get the gist

I don't know the context for LM's comments, but we could have certaintly done with a bit more focus after Nakhi's goal on Tuesday

1 minute ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

I'm baffled how anyone could not see that was the plan and that it was a well executed plan by all involved. 

10 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

In what world is this a lie? 

The plan was to get rid of the wasters such as Palmer etc, high earners off the wage bill and to cut costs so we could comply with ffp whilst bringing through young players and building a culture within the club all whilst not getting relegated. 

I don't know how you didn't see how that didn't work. 

You said "we all".  I didn't.  So it's not we all.  Simples

"Bird is a Robin"

 

See what they did there?

54 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

The past few years we could all knew the situation, we all knew the plan. We could see the plan working. Sometimes it didn't always go smoothly but by and large we all remained patient because we could see what we were trying to do. 

I'm struggling to see the plan now and because I can't see it that means I'm unfortunately struggling to get behind it. Maybe if the club could use their fantastic communication skills that they've so say recently found we would know the plan and be able to buy into that plan. 

It's kinda reminiscent of the LJ days. 

Sorry, this is a lie. I did not know the plan and could certainly not see it working

OTIB at its finest   When considering the likes of Tinnion and Jon Lansdown (and even Scott Murray FFS ) the pitchfork-wielding mob cry "jobs for the boys!"  But fast forward to King and suddenly they shout "continuity!"  Obviously nothing to do with King's connections with a certain ex manager?

7 minutes ago, Southport Red said:

Sorry, I know I’m being an arch pedant here, but I always smile when people say damp Squid

But did they "say" it?  It's possible they were dictating the message.  But more likely they typed it.  Call yourself a pedant???