tin

I definitely think this decision unnecessarily jeopardises our second-tier status. 

We were a team quietly progressing up the table, but now with the sentiment against the owners, the injuries, no medical lead, the transfer window closed (not that it matters as the budget is maxed out), and don’t rule out players who loved Nige downing tools, I would not be at all surprised if we’re down in the bottom six come May. 

The only positive I have is that when everyone’s fit, we have a team that’s competitive against anyone on their day. 

11 minutes ago, Bcfcshags said:

Possibly, but it was a matter of when. Problem is they don’t like that Nige is outspoken. 

Aww, bless those Lansdowns. How dare Nige have opinions that aren’t shared in the boardroom (or should I say around the family dining table).

Welcome back, @Bcfcshags

29 minutes ago, Jeez said:

None whatsoever - more a case of luck than judgement. 

I sense you’re too dug in to accept there were games where Pearson didn’t get it right.

He wasn’t perfect and occasionally made mistakes, just like anyone else does. But don’t try and kid yourself this decision was made for footballing reasons.

36 minutes ago, SecretSam said:

He's almost as big a loss as Pearson. I despair.

Agreed. A real specialist in his field who we were very lucky to have. 

While we have 12 players out currently, only one of them is non-contact and could be pointed at him if someone wanted to use that as a stick to beat him with. 

7 minutes ago, headhunter said:

Dave, that bit about the fall out being caused by a row over bringing in free agents, such players would be experienced such that he wouldn't have to "expose the youngsters". What would Nige's objection be? Unless he wanted the free agents and the ****s wouldn't cough up the cash.

The wage budget was at its limit, so sounds like they moved the goalposts again. 

Only Rennie and Nige would know how close Atkinson, Vyner and Naismith are to returning. It would take just as long for those to get fit as it would for any free agent with no pre-season, so what’s the point?

Sounds like bullshit to me, and why wasn’t that cash made available in the summer when the window was open? As is increasingly becoming clear, the Lansdown are clueless *****.

10 minutes ago, italian dave said:

But we all know there’s little morality in the way the incomings and outgoings of managers (and players for that matter) are dealt with in football. And it’s quite common, as we all know, for new managers to be lined up and ready to go in advance of a sacking being announced.
I’m just struck that in the past Lansdown has been criticised on here for being too ‘gentlemanly’ in the way he’s managed appointments, and now he’s being criticised for the opposite.

I don’t want to start speculating about the health issues. I’ve heard various stories about concerns for several reasons and for a fair period of time, but I don’t know the truth, and none of us do. We don’t know what’s currently known, what the potential diagnoses might be, how co-operative either party has been with the other, or even whether that’s part of the decision or not. Which is kind of the point I’m making - lots and lots goes on in the background and within the club about which we know nothing. 

Let’s be frank, when has SL ever known what he’s doing when it comes to managerial appointments? Very rarely if ever, and I doubt it’s any different now. He wants a lap dog, that’s what he’ll get. SL is the problem and until he goes, nothing will ever change. 

7 minutes ago, italian dave said:

 

When I first read Champs’ post I wasn’t sure whether he was being critical or not. Tin, you’ve clearly interpreted it as critical. 
Problem is, in the past when they didn’t have anyone lined up in these circumstances we’d criticise that too. I can clearly remember that happening.

Its football, that’s how it works, rightly or wrongly. 

No harm in succession planning, Davide. But there’s a big difference between having a list of targets and being ready to try and get them after a manager’s left, and plotting behind someone’s back while they’re incapacitated and awaiting diagnosis for a health issue. That shows no respect, no class. End of.

Time is up for the Lansdowns. They are utterless clueless, lack any class, know jack shit about football after more than two decades, egotistical, incompetent, inept and arrogant.

I’ve had enough of their deluded footballing decisions, fake ambition, the contempt with which they treat the fans, abysmal lack of communication, and they can shove their nest egg up their arses. 

Very obvious parallels, on a much smaller scale, with the Glazers.

Doesn’t matter who’s next, they’ll still have to deal with the interference, ineptitude and incompetence of those above them. 

For what it’s worth, I wouldn’t be all surprised if it’s Nathan Jones given SL’s waxed lyrical about Luton, or Luke Williams at Notts County (ex-City U23 head coach). 

The best man for the job, though, is the one who’s left the building. 

4 hours ago, Champs said:

The fact it has leaked for weeks says that they have something planned- in the past they would always not do any donkey world while someone employed….

What that leak shows us all is that they were hawking around Nige’s job while he was still in office, dealing with a ridiculous injury crisis (all bar one of which were contact injuries) and crucially awaiting a medical diagnosis. The fact is that gives everyone an insight into the Lansdowns and the classless ***** they really are. 

I’ve listened to SL for more than 20 years. He had me hook, line and sinker for the first seven or eight of those years. But, while I’ve continued to listen, I’m wise to his contradictions, false ambition, arrogance and the ability to ignore all context whatsoever. I don’t want to hear what he has to say anymore and I’ll sit up and take notice again once he sells up — and that can’t come soon enough IMO.

1 hour ago, LondonBristolian said:

What I wonder - and this might be nonsense - is whether the number of injuries we’re getting is the direct result of the number of injuries we have. By which I mean that the lack of options means we can’t rotate and rest players who are either tired or carrying minor knocks and that is then leading to those players developing injuries which result in them missing games.

Agree with a lot of that. I think it’s down to a lack of strength in depth and that’s partially down to long-term injuries. 

What I struggle to get my head around is we had the option to add a couple of players post-Scott and we didn’t. Thats really costing us now. 

That’s meant we haven’t been able to rotate the players we’ve got, and as such we can’t protect those coming back from injury either. 

A totally avoidable catch 22.

25 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

Although I'm generally happy with Max, he just has to have meaningful competition - and if that means paying for an experienced loan keeper to come, the case must be made.

Bajic seems only to be here to cover for injury or suspension for Max - not to provide an alternative.

Keeper is a strange position, and there are usually a few decent and experienced ones sitting about at clubs waiting their chance.

Agreed. Daniel Iversen would be my main target if SL opened the nest egg, and he’d go straight in as No.1 IMO.

I don’t think Max is the answer at this level unless the question is we want a cheap, hopeful punt. 

Just now, nickolas said:

Oh, i thought he was better than Bentley at that?! Costs us so many points. 
I will be astonished if we dont go looking for an experienced GK in January. 

I’m sure we’ve got a list of targets already, but there won’t be anything anyone can do about it unless SL loosens the purse strings. 

Max has to come for their first goal; anything in the six-yard box from a set piece should be keeper’s. The second’s another soft goal which Cornick or Knight should’ve stopped. 

2-0 defeat was better than I expected before kick-off. Pray we get a few off the treatment table for next week, which we simply must win. The sad fact, again, is our first XI probably wins that today. 

A mate’s just text me to say Conway’s out today as well. We’ll know for sure at 2pm

19 minutes ago, italian dave said:

Just to play devil’s advocate for a minute: and I don’t want to reopen the whole Lansdown thread or to disagree with the proposition that we should/could have brought in another one or two.

But I think SL might argue that the Scott money IS his, or at least that it provides money he’d otherwise have had to stump up himself.

You can debate the rights and wrongs, the implications and the consequences, of his stated aim of making the club self sufficient. But if that’s what going to happen then it requires a) a small squad and b) a significant net transfer profit to do so. And the Scott money isn’t some wad of cash that’s floating around as a surplus or profit: it just means we’ll lose that much less money this year, and SL will have to subsidise us by that much less. 

As SL once said: “It’s my club and I’ll do what I want” or words to that effect. That’s exactly what he did and let’s see at 5pm to see whether he’s right or wrong. 

Playing devil’s advocate myself, it’s not beyond the realms that we get thrashed today and Nige gets sacked as a result. That would really show how ******* clueless and inept he really is. 

Just now, GrahamC said:

Possibly, but the injuries have decimated us defensively, only Dickie is a starter there in his natural position & in midfield the absence of both James & Williams is huge, King I accept not so much but he would add vital experience.

Today’s bench will be the true reflection, highly likely that 7 or 8 of the 9 won’t ever have started a Championship game, just a ridiculous lack of depth.

And yet the chance was there to strengthen before the window closed using the Scott cash, not his own, but no. The buck stops with SL.

Roberts should be fit, King’s out, Conway should be rested. My (bare bones) XI:

With a fully fit squad, I’d be very confident of extending our good record there. But with eight or nine first-teamers likely to be out, I’d take a point right now. 

I can’t see the sense in starting Conway for a third time in seven days when it’s clear he’s easing back from injury and he was anonymous on Weds. Weimann and Bell were poor too, but they have to start due to the lack of depth or trust in Mehmeti. 

My XI: O’Leary; TGH, Dickie, Pring, Roberts; James, Knight; Sykes, Weimann, Bell; Cornick. 

10 minutes ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

Eh? Their football first half was light years ahead of ours and some of the best I've seen at The Gate in ages - positive, direct, pacy, technical football. They didn't even bother time wasting second half, which was a more even 45 but the right team won. We are pedestrian in comparison to them.

I agree about OLeary and Cornick.

Our keeper just fell over backwards for their goal. A deflection? Who cares  they had someone who could shot accurately from outside the box! Can't believe Cornick"s effort didn't cross the line but we didn't deserve it over the 90 because we have far, far too many players who follow one good piece of play with a poor one.

Even though we've patched up side, that's not good enough.

I thought we were marginally better than them before the goal, during which time I’d have put my mortgage on Conway burying that free header, and they looked the better side until half time. After the break, O’Leary only had one proper save to make but I agree we were pedestrian. Our lack of movement off the ball in particular irritated me.

Wasn’t impressed with Ipswich and I don’t get the hype. While we were down to the bare bones are fairly disjointed, their goal was another error from Max and we should really have got a point. Conway should’ve scored and Cornick was unlucky (he had a real impact by the way).

I’d back our full strength XI to beat them, but with seven out tonight it was always going to be a big ask. 
Fine margins and when the luck’s with you, it’s with you as was the case for them.

1 minute ago, GrahamC said:

Be interested in what you think Conway & Bell have done that Weimann hasn’t.

Don’t think any of them have been better than the other two.

Fair point. At least Conway and Bell took up a few promising positions, even if they did waste them. 

Conway looks a bit lost up top on his own, mind. 

Thought we were the better side before they scored, Conway had to score with a free header from six yards out and Bell got in behind on the left a few times only to predictably waste it. 

Initial thought was Max must do better for the goal, but I haven’t seen it back. The goal gave them confidence and they were on top thereafter. Weimann’s been a passenger. 

Definitely not out of it. COYR.

EDIT: Just seen Fordy62’s post and Max 100% at fault. Very poor.

Ipswich are definitely on the crest of a wave but they’re beatable, especially if we are up for it — and with the Pearson rumours added to the snake’s return, I really hope all of us in the stands are up for it too.