italian dave

12 minutes ago, spudski said:

QPR and Wednesday both fighting relegation...they have everything to play for. Both their results are improving.

Meanwhile we bob about in mid table obscurity... hopefully enough points gained from NPs time here. 

In the back of their heads, some know they won't be here next year, others will know there is nothing riding on results now. 

Yes, I think you’re right there. Although let’s not fall into a similar ‘everything Pearson good/everything Manning’ bad mindset either - we’ve still needed, and will still need, points post Pearson to stay up. 

7 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

If Nige had stepped down through ill-health, they’d have gone forward with Fleming or Euell or a set-up that Nige helped recommend.  I doubt Manning would’ve been a contender.

You're right it’s not LM’s fault, although you could argue like @Silvio Dante that he chose to come here.

Joe Sims BBCRB interview with Jon.

“Loose Lips” Tins (), is the only one who stuck to the Faulty Towers script - whatever you do don’t me promotion or top 6

JL - I mentioned it once, but I think I got away with it

. But I’d still maintain neither said ‘this season’.

The real point though is surely that it was a Fawlty Towers script. We’d all agree on that. And I just think that the quicker we all move on from that, and stop playing to that Fawlty Towers script, the better. 

@luke_bristol @Alessandro @1960maaan @Davefevs . See, I was right about the first bit, if nothing else!

Yes, Marshall said that. I’ve always acknowledged that and should have been clearer. But he’s not a football man, and it’s JL and BT who run the football side and who are the two who get constantly slated on here (rightly so in some instances) - and neither of them said that. I stand to be corrected @Davefevs but I’m not aware of JL having ever said promotion this season.

And, bigger picture, we all know that the real reasons for what happened weren’t just footballing ones and the quicker we all stop pretending that they were the better. 

3 minutes ago, Snufflelufagus said:

I would argue Max is not coached by Manning, more so the goalkeeper coach.

And don’t we have defensive coaches, set piece coaches, midfield coaches, and so on.

By that logic Manning isn’t responsible for anything or anyone, and the whole premise of this thread is irrelevant. (Which I don’t think it is). 

Nice summary as always @Olé.

Just some random thoughts from me.

A @BigTone style ‘condensed version’ might be “they wanted it more than we did”. That was my over-riding impression.

I don’t know why we started with an unfit Pring, given that Roberts has been decent recently. Physicality maybe - we certainly struggled with Wednesday’s.

I’m not sure Sykes was also unfit (as has been suggested elsewhere) - he took a very heavy knock from a nasty challenge (unpunished, as many were by the ref) and seemed to struggle after that. And, as when he picked up his last injury, LM seemed to struggle with how to replace him. Admittedly options are limited now - we will miss Bell I fear.

I thought Wednesdays first goal was a really good one, and more down to their good play than our bad. I think there was an element of good fortune with their second!

We seemed intent on playing everything wide second half, and I didn’t really understand why. We didn’t try to mix it up as we usually do. Not sure why.

Having said that, I felt TC got more and more ineffective (from a fairly low bar to start with) as the game went on. It’s not just about service; he gets that. It’s scraps, but that’s the case for most strikers at this level. He just lacks the physical presence or the guile - and I don’t know whether his confidence is just shot, or he’s thinking about where he’ll be next year, but to me there are starting to Diedhiou style signs of going through the motions just now.

It was poor, no denying. But on another day we’d have been playing against 10 for a lot longer and from a healthier starting position and we’d have had a penalty, although we’d probably have missed! 

I’m probably going to get battered even more so than @RedM for this, but for me this thread pretty much sums up the negativity and the determination to find fault with anything Manning that’s so prevalent on here at the moment.

There are ups and downs, pros and cons, black and white and various shades of grey in any club and any season and especially when managers change.

Yet reading through the posts so far what stands out is the determination to attribute every single negative to Manning and every single positive to something or someone else.

Thats not being critical of your question, @Dredd. It’s a reasonable one. It’s more about what follows.

And, as a slight aside but another example of the negativity, @Merrick's Marvels - apart from the generic aspiration that any club in the Championship would have promotion as an ambition, who has ever said that promotion this season is or was our objective?? 

It’s the top half that’s interesting; all those wins mean lots of defeats in the top half, keeping us just as close to the top 6.

Seriously, what’s slightly odd is that even if we’d beaten QPR and Wednesday, we’d still be only two places higher. 

43 minutes ago, Red Shadow said:

Before Eight - Kathy Thompson Band

Time……David Bowie

I thought that throughout the game he struggled with the concept that ‘being vaguely near the ball’ and ‘making an attempt to play the ball’ are two different things. I lost count of the number of times he allowed Wednesday players to push, shove, and simply run into our players to knock them off the ball.

And that incident near the end when McCrorie was barged off the ball - that wasn’t a shoulder to shoulder challenge, it was a shoulder barge on a player running with the ball. 

6 hours ago, Davefevs said:

You’ll probably be stood next to WSM today without knowing it!

I don’t think so. The bloke next to me stayed astonishingly positive right up to the 94th minute!

However, a couple of rows back there was a very loud cry, on the final whistle, of ‘don’t think I’m staying behind to clap that, Manning’………so, maybe

32 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

My enthusiasm has waned big time since travelling to QPR, Huddersfield and Blackburn before Christmas to witness boring sideways passing football. In fairness I also went to Southampton and that wasn't too bad. 

I can not comment on Watford Away or Southampton at home as I did not see those games.

Sunderland, Millwall, Leeds, QPR at home have been 4 of the worst I have seen for years (ok Lincoln and WBA, last year were terrible too). Watford wasn't great.

I have stopped being excited on a Saturday match day and now dread what is going to happen (a 4 hour round tri doesn't help).

On the current trajectory and looking at the teams likely to come up from League one, together with those being relegated from this league I can only see a long relegation scrap next season.

I would give him until the end of the season, but honestly wouldn't care too much if he was gone tomorrow.

Without wishing to get too personal, could you stay away more often please?

16 minutes ago, MarcusX said:

I’ll start by saying I thought todays ref was dreadful even by usual standards. He seemed to give us very little, but equally gave them against us for similar offences.

I’ve seen some say Bernard’s first yellow could have been red but it seemed to me he had cover, I thought it was a standard yellow tbh for a professional foul.

Now the red… this caused a fair amount of confusion amongst some of us today because in part half of us missed the actual card being shown.

I was fairly certain at the time the ref got this wrong - potentially for two reasons.

1. Stopping a promising attack is only a yellow if it actually stops the attack, if advantage is played the ref shouldn’t go back and show a yellow unless the challenge was otherwise worthy of one - eg a bad tackle.

It didn’t stop the play evidently because advantage was played (and I thought it was just another pull not a yellow tackle but I could be wrong!) which leads to the second mistake…

2. Referee shouldn’t play advantage in the event of a second yellow incident, unless there’s a clear goal scoring opportunity - which i don’t think there was really (ie we weren’t through on goal). 

If the ref does play on, and the offending player plays the ball or interferes with an opponent then the ref should stop the game immediately - which he also didn’t do I don’t think? It seemed like a good few minutes later.

Id have to watch the highlights again to see if this is all how I remember it, but a very weird set of events.

Oh, and blowing the full time whistle when we’ve just won a corner too, which seemed to cause it to kick off a bit at the end.

Very minor in the grand scheme of things but thought it was something else to discuss rather than Manning/Lansdown/Tinnian etc

I thought it was a bad tackle.

I’m saying that without the benefit of having seen it again, but at the time I thought so.

My surprise was that, after play had continued for so long, he didn’t bottle it. I said as play went on that I’d wager he wouldn’t bother with a card, especially as I had a feeling it had been the same player booked in the first half.

Fair play, he didn’t, and I thought he got that spot on. Even though it was about the only thing he did get right all game!

1 minute ago, MarcusX said:

Which was that? I must have missed that too

City players were claiming a handball second half. Too far away and the area was too crowded to see really. 

Just now, Big C said:

He played 26 times for Hull this season. So his availability isn't that bad

Used up his ‘fit’ allowance for the season?

5 hours ago, Red-Robbo said:

Those slo-mo canters up to the ball are a nightmare for keepers. The vast majority commit themselves one way or another before the penalty taker has reached the ball. Surprised we don't see more of them. 

Yep, 100%. I used to say that at the time…it was a genuinely good technique. It still needs the confidence though, and some speed of thought. And the ability to hit the ball exactly where you want to. But do all that and it’s pretty much nailed on to score. 

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

Do you not consider that questioning why all these players keep getting injured again when they are close to coming back is supporting the team? 

Because I want us to have our best players available? 

Not the way you do it, no. I don’t. 

But as I said, not going over all that yet again. 

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

Not wrong tho am I? 

Well, it’s your opinion. I disagree.

But I’m not going to go through all that yet again and go on and on and on and on and on and on about it.

I’m just going to get on with supporting the team and the manager

COYR

32 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. 

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

2 minutes ago, Eddie Hitler said:

 

Yes, the ruthless discipline of diet and fitness as Ronaldo displays is not for everyone.

If you were good enough to play pro football at a decent level whilst dossing about all week and going to the pub several times a week then that would be a very enjoyable ride.

Whilst pro footballer is most people's dream job it is still a job. Few of us dedicate ourselves wholly to our careers.

My most memorable JET moment was when the ball came to him on the edge of a crowded penalty area and he appeared to slowly walk past two defenders before whacking the ball into the net.

I'm sure there was all manner of technically excellent close control going on to make it appear like that.

I guess that’s the thing. If you’re as talented as he is then you can still get so far without putting in the effort and the discipline. And if he’s happy with that, which he seemed to be, then good luck to him.

9 hours ago, formerly known as ivan said:

In flashes, yes. However, when he was on the pitch it was like playing with 10 men for 90% of the time. He was as much of the issue as he was the solution. We played much of our better football during the promotion season when Wilbs and Agard were on the pitch. He was a luxury to have waiting to come on.

But if it wasn’t in flashes he’d have been playing at Barcelona, not City.

I’d still rather have that 10% and enjoy the ride than 11 100% but boring and predictable players.

And it doesn’t seem to make a lot of difference in terms of City actually achieving anything !!

27 minutes ago, TDarwall said:

If I hear that Kidderminster have a penalty, I'll jump in the car. By the time I get to the ground JET will be about half way through his "run" up.

The first time he took one, up at Notts County, still ranks right up there in my most memorable moments watching City!

19 minutes ago, AppyDAZE said:

Dumb - Silver Sun

Blue Moon…..Billie Holiday

1 hour ago, Super said:

I always got the impression he wasn't overly bothered. What happened to his Swazzy business he had?

I think there’s a huge difference between not loving the game and not having the level of commitment to put in the hours and the pain to become the best you possibly can at it.

He may not have been overly bothered with the pattern but that doesn’t necessarily mean that he doesn’t love the game and want to carry on playing it. 

34 minutes ago, TV Tom said:

My god i didn't realise you wanted Lampard, everything's becoming clearer 

Not only that; I’ve a feeling he still wants Lampard! 

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

On paper Pearson inherited more established players. (Baker, Kalas to name 2, a younger Weimann and others).

In reality, the squad was a broken mess, morale was on the floor, many of the players had run their race.. and 18 months of downsizing was about to hit and hit hard.

I think that's exactly the point - and why that particular argument is all a bit pointless!

He inherited what was, on paper, a better group of players. But he inherited them with a brief to get rid, to reduce the size of the squad, to reduce costs massively.

Manning inherits what may, man for man, not be as good on paper, but with the brief to build on what's already there.