Harry

1 hour ago, Galley is our king said:

So it's just the 2 games before Cardiff you are critical of....

The game before was Ipswich. Lost 1-0. I thought at the time Max could have done better with their goal to be honest. From memory, the ball came from the middle of the park and "rolled" in to Max's left. So on the opposite side to any right sided defender.

Second half we played really well and were unlucky not to take a point. Our midfield played really well.

The game before that was Coventry. We won that game......

So this is why you criticise Pearson?

I think some context needs to be applied to your posts.

I’m not criticising Nige. You’ve clearly mis-read the whole thread. 
I’ve basically just been saying that the player availability was only a huge issue for the Cardiff game. For all the other games there were options. 
It’s the narrative that LM has had better availability than NP that I am challenging, not Nige himself. 
 

Another one that needs to re-read the context of the thread. 
Only Cardiff game was a big problem. The 2 games before Cardiff were limited in options but he did still have a RB option. 
 

But again, just to make it absolutely clear - I have not criticised Nige in this thread. Just challenging the ‘injuries’ narrative. It was bad for 1 game and limited for 2 games. 
Those 3 games aside, LM has had equal challenges with availability. 

7 hours ago, Galley is our king said:

So who would have played in midfield with Knight? Without King  James and Williams? ( Cardiff away) It wasn't just the defence that was devastated by injuries. 

Yes  so many injuries, but the ******** decided that was the time to sack and all the current negativity within the fan base is on them!!

4 hours ago, Galley is our king said:

Yes, forgot about Naismith! So bloody many. Also players having to play out of positions.

Still no reply from @Harry

 

Steady on now boss. I’ve had a busy day at work so only just came back to here! 
I’ve acknowledged many times that the Cardiff game was a totally impossible situation. 
When I mention TGH at RB it’s in the previous 2 matches when Knight & James were both available to play in midfield. With Tanner out, TGH should really have been the next logical option.

And Pearson has already played him there 3 times so I don’t see why he wouldn’t have done so on those 2 occasions?  

4 hours ago, Sir Geoff said:

Because he was 'all over' Manning when he was appointed, having scouted Oxford / MKD many times.

100% incorrect. 
I was watching MK that season as I was keen on Twine (and O’Reilly).  Nothing to do with Manning. 
And I think you’ll find that on the lengthy Manning thread which started a few days before he arrived, on the early pages I was the first person on this forum to raise the concern over the appointment because I didn’t feel his style would suit our squad. 
 

I have no particular love for Manning. I was the first to raise concerns over his appointment (as clearly evidenced in that first thread in November). I’m just of the opinion that it’s only fair to give him a fair crack of the whip, rather than want him out after 2 weeks (which some posters on here wanted and have never given him a chance). 

To be absolutely clear - I was never “Manning In” but I’m now “Just give the bloke an effing chance ffs”. 

52 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

You did on your first post on this thread, then backtracked and mentioned it in later posts, after it had been pointed out to you how selective you'd been regarding the injury situation.

I think you need to re-read it all. 
I mentioned TGH was an option at RB a number of times and didn’t backtrack on it. 
It was an option that I felt NP could and should have used when Tanner was out. I still believe that. I’m not backtracking on it. 

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

I must admit, when a poster resorts to getting personal it shows they've lost all the arguments and therefore it’s pointless engaging with that poster. 

I just think it’s a little odd that you’d message me privately and tell me to stop responding to you and then a few weeks later you start engaging with my posts again. 
Nothing personal. I just think that is rather odd behaviour. 
So, have you not got me on ignore any more? Am I now allowed to respond to you if I wish? Or does this only work one way? 

2 hours ago, Sir Geoff said:

You conveniently forget the games Tanner was out and TGH had to start his City career playing Right back.

Well no. I didn’t conveniently forget that. You’ll note that I’ve mentioned TGH at RB a number of times. 

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

You also proclaimed to the nation relentlessly that we are now well coached

*you didn't start this thread. 

 

Am I off of ignore now then? 
 

In answer to this point, I explained this to you weeks ago. 
I didn’t “relentlessly proclaim” that we were well coached. 
I mentioned it once. Yes. Once. After Watford away. 
And I went on to explain exactly what I meant - which was to do with the way we pressed in the 2nd half, which I thought was highly organised and was probably the best I’ve seen a City team press in a long long time. 
 

So yes. I said it once. That in that one half away at Watford how I thought it was a very well coached press.  And as a result you put me on ignore, DM me to tell me not to reply to you, and then a couple of weeks later start quoting me again and make up bull about me “relentlessly” saying something that I mentioned once. 
 

I must admit, I find you a little bit odd. 

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

Exactly. And when the other team can make 5 subs and bring on 5 non academy players, that puts you at a disadvantage. 

Manning however has not had this problem of late and here we are losing to QPR and Sheffield Wed. 

Are you still part of my conversation. I thought you didn’t want to be involved with me any more.  I thought we were over. Were we just on a break? I hadn’t realised.

5 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

I had no recollection of the name, but Googled him and then it clicked.
45 games ???? I wish I had a real memory that worked.

Don’t worry. Easily forgotten. You didn’t miss much. He wasn’t very good. 
I was actually banned for the majority of that period anyway so didn’t enjoy the full pleasure of his abilities. 

And for once I agree with Robbored. 
The injuries and availability are sideshow and are being used for pro/con arguments against each manager. When in fact overall it’s been somewhat negligible. 
We were an inconsistent team under Nige and we are still an inconsistent team under Liam. 
 

Whose fault is that? 
Well. BT and JL for making what seemed like an unnecessary change but making it worse with their reasons for doing so and their expectations of this squad. 
And secondly, BT and his recruiting team for putting together a squad of footballers with many flaws. 
 

50 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

And that is the point of my post re injuries.  CB is a pretty fundamental position.

It wasn’t about volume of injuries it was about availability to cover impacts in key positions.

 

Again, aside from the Cardiff debacle, there were only 2 games where he only had 1 fit CB. And we had to fill in with a combo of Pring & King. 
And we got 3 points from those 2 games. 
 

As said, LM has only had 2 fit CB’s now for 23 games! He hasn’t been able to rotate these. 
But the rotation across the rest of the team has been there, almost equally, for both managers. 

We’re basically just talking about only having 1 CB fit for 2 games. That’s the only real difference and hence why I’m not willing to hear that injuries and availability were so much worse for Nige. 
Yes - it was the case for 3 games. 

14 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

Manning has had injuries to contend with yes - but the rate at which he’s been able to rotate the first 11 and the depth of his bench has been on another level to that which Pearson could have (he couldn’t)

I’m not sure on that to be honest. 
Have another look at Dave’s injury data on page 1. 
 

Let’s take out the Cardiff game as it’s absolutely acknowledged that we were screwed in that game. 
If we take NP’s other 13 games he’s had :

Midfield : 11 of 13 games where he had James, Williams, Knight, TGH & King all available. 
 

Front 3 : 11 of 13 games where he had Wells, Cornick, Bell, Sykes, Mehmeti, plus Yeboah (who he was using). Add Weimann too for 7 of those 13 games. 
 

Left back : He had Pring & Roberts available for all games. 
 

Centre backs : Yes this was a problem area. He only had Vyner, Dickie & Naismith for 4 of those 13 games. 
So we were down to 2 fit CB’s for the majority of NP’s games. 
However - LM has only had 2 fit CB’s for every single one of his games. 
 

Right back : the only area where we technically didn’t have proper cover, however, TGH has played there plenty so there was always an option. 
 

The rotation options were definitely there for every position expect CB. Which is the same for LM. 
 

I think we’re getting a bit carried away by the ‘availability and rotation’ argument. Yes, the Cardiff game was horrendous for us, but in the other 13 games NP presided over there were rotation options in every position. 
 

9 minutes ago, Cole Not Gas said:

Good first two calls; i cant remember Jamie Smith - at all

Right back. Signed by Tinnion. Bombed by GJ. 
He was at Sheff as assistant to Darren Moore 

Bakinson. Hunt. Jamie Smith 

6 hours ago, FNQ said:

Lots of well thought through points there Harry based on what’s happened so far this season and past performance predictions. But honestly based on our last couple of actual performances where do you see us picking up another 15 points? Five of our remaining 12 games are against teams above us who will have too much to play for, if we lose those games and pick up dour draws against the two Welsh sides we’ll need to win the remaining 5 to reach the heady heights of 59 points. 

As noted in the stats I presented, we pick up most points against that ‘middle 9’ sides. Based on the games played so far, if the same PPG rings true then we hit 59. 
Not saying it’ll happen, just saying that at the moment we are on course for that, based on all games played so far and where in the table those other teams sit. 

10 minutes ago, cidered abroad said:

Harry, I hope that your points estimate at end of season is what we'll end up on. But, having seen seven relegations in my time, I have a nasty feeling that the team spirit built by Pearson and his managerial colleagues, is no longer with us. That spirit over the last two seasons has kept us well away from the bottom five, but what will happen if I'm correct in my assessment? It only needs another two or three poor, losing, games to leave us facing a real problem. Those in the bottom five have been battling to get out of bottom three all season; most of our squad will not even see it coming!

If we get relegated then Manning will rightly be sacked and I’d also suggest that Tinnion should be too. And Jon relieved of any input whatsoever. 
 

If we end up on less than 59, then we’ve ended up worse than last season and therefore questions would need to be asked about Manning’s future but again also Brian & Jon too. 

29 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I didn’t say it had to reach the point of “crisis” for it to be an impact.  The impact was felt before Cardiff.

Okay I’ll compromise

The Cardiff game was a crisis. There were 9 players out. 
The previous 2 games were a challenge, with 6 players out. 
But I still think TGH could have been deployed at RB to help matters. 
 

But, as an overall comparison based on your chart :

Nige had 2 games with 6 missing, 1 game with 9 missing and 1 game with 4 missing. 
Liam has had 5 games with 5 missing and 7 games with 4 missing. 
 

I’d say that, Cardiff game aside, it’s a pretty even record overall. 

8 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Manning has in no way had the injury issues that Nige had in the 3 games leading to his dismissal?  He’s always been able to field each of the 3 units with senior players throughout his time here.

 

 

it’s not about numbers, it’s about when those hit, and the impact when they did.

It was only the Cardiff game in which he had to play a kid. 
The other 2 games listed above he had 3 first teamers on the bench plus Yeboah who he’d already used a number of times. 
In the Cov & Ipswich games, yes we had a shortage of CB’s. But as said earlier, he then weakened us at RB as well. He should have played TGH there (who he’d already played there 3 times before). Knight & James in CM. 
Yes we were a bit short at CB but it was only the Cardiff game in which we had a ‘crisis’. 

7 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

We had no adequate right back for at least 4 successive games under NP.

McCrorie and his issues, Tanner missed a month or so iirc. Indeed just checked, 7..Leicester away to Cardiff away- that can unbalance a side. 7 games in succession.

That aside, 18/14 53 injuries, 17/14, 55..

..Factors such as penalties, penalties in 3 Home Games such as 4 should be factored.

Cardiff away who am I missing? I distinctly recall 11 outfield players missing there yet the graph unless I misread shows 9?

Ah I see we discount e.g. Atkinson and Benarous as they've been out all season and beyond?

TGH was available for all those games to play right back but he chose not to. 
Even though he’d played him at right back 3 times before and he’d had experience at right back for West Brom. 
Please don’t tell me we “didn’t have a right back for 4 games” when we clearly did. 

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

The point is that with better availability Nige had us top half.

That period where he dropped from 8th (after Cov) to 12th then 15th then sacked was without Naismith, Tanner, Vyner…then Roberts, from our defence.  Let alone Williams.  Wells wasn’t an issue because we had other options.

But we’d pretty much established ourselves in the top-half through that opening dozen games.

Of course Manning has had to deal with injuries, but not as impactful as the ones Nige did that took him to a convenient sacking point.

So if we take NP’s 14 games and then LM’s first 14 games to make an even representation. NP had players unavailable 53 counts. LM had players unavailable 55 counts. 
So. More unavailability for LM. 
The only biggies during NP’s 14 games was Conway (during which we actually gained good results without him) and Vyner. 
The only game that injuries seriously hampered us was Cardiff. Thats the only one in which there were no defensive options. 
 

Ultimately I’m not having ‘squad availability’ as an excuse. It’s not a factor, apart from 1 game v Cardiff. They’ve both had injuries to players that have hampered them. 

41 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

A couple of points:

1. LM has had better squad availability (but he’s also trying to embed a different style - I’m not gonna go into that)

2. 59 points wasn’t the aim for Nige or LM

Re Point 2. I agree. We should be aiming higher this season. We finished on 59 last year and so we’d want improvement. So neither is good enough. 
 

Re point 1, I’m not having that. 
Nige was without Conway for 7 games. A period in which he got 11 points. 
Nige was without Wells for 3 games whilst Liam was without him for 7 games. 
Liam has had Pring missing at times.  Hasn’t had a single minute out of Naismith. Has had Twine out. Has had Sykes out. 
The only major change really is that Nige had Vyner out for 6 or 7 games I think. 
 

Ultimately though, none of that matters. End of the day, current trend would suggest 59 points. The same as it was trending for Nige. 
As I mentioned the other day, we are basically getting the same results overall but just in a slightly different way. 

Does that mean Liam should be under scrutiny. Yes. To an extent. But it certainly doesn’t mean “get rid” like many on here are ridiculously shouting for. 
It basically means we are where we are and neither manager was able to get any more out of it. We’re a 59 point team, whether Nige or Liam is in charge. 
 

And that is purely down to the players we have. 2 managers playing different ways are getting roughly the same results in different ways. We have a 12th place squad of players. That’s where we are. 

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

Yes it’s very clear that our problem is that we are not very well coached. 

Why are you replying to me? 
You told me I wasn’t allowed to reply to you. 
Does this only work one way? 
 

3 hours ago, Ziderarmy said:

Hi

Am I correct in my sums ? League only 

Played = 19

Won = 6

Drew = 5

Lost = 8

Points per game = 1.21

Over a 46 game seasons that’s 55 points 

Win percentage = 31.58% 

Doesn’t make particularly good reading as he’s now played most clubs at least once so it’s a good sample size.

Interesting. 
I would caveat this with the fact that LM has not yet faced all of the teams. 
There are 7 teams he’s yet to face as he’s had 2 games against 4 opponents (Southampton, Watford, Middlesbrough & QPR). 
 

it’s quite interesting to split these games up against Top 7, Bottom 7 and Middle 9.
 

Against the bottom 7 he’s
Played 6, Won 0, Drawn 3, Lost 3. Points 3  PPG 0.5

Against the top 7 he’s
Played 5, Won 2, Lost 3. Points 6. PPG 1.2
 

Against the middle 9 he’s
Played 8, Won 4, Drawn 2, Lost 2. Points 14.  PPG 1.75

Its very clear where our problems lie. 
Against the top 7 and middle 9 we’d be on course for approx 71 points a season (a playoff contender perhaps). 
Against the bottom 7 we’d be on course for 23 points in a season = relegation before Christmas!! 
 

Our remains fixtures are 4 vs the top 7, 3 vs the bottom 7 and 5 vs the middle 9. 
 

If we keep up the same PPG (I know, unscientific but hey ho), we’d finish on around 59 points. 
Funnily enough, when Nige left, we had 18 points from 14 games which would end us up on 59 points. 
 

So basically, at the moment there is no difference in the extrapolated final position/points. 
 

But as I say, it’s very clear where our problems lie. 

Bernard yellow was correct. 
Bernard second yellow was correct. 
Should have been a penalty. 
He should have allowed the corner as it was he himself who wasted precious seconds on the previous corner by stopping play and speaking to the players. 
I think he did ok with everything else and didn’t get fooled by players falling too easily. Allowed the physical stuff too (we were just too weak).
I thought he did ok. Aside from the penalty and the final (non) corner 

1 hour ago, Oh Louie louie said:

Brimsons full of it, he wrote once Watford turned city over at the hole in the wall, in the late 90s, laughable, you know what he does now? Chip shop reviews on youtube, I kid you not,

In fairness, my recollection of that incident was that Watford did actually give it a bloody good go. 
I think it went on for quite a while, no old bill arrived for a long time, and there were bodies strewn everywhere. 
City certainly came out on top, but Watford were ‘game’ as they say, on that day. 

13 hours ago, 1960maaan said:

On a side note, Charlton are one of those movable trips. Saw us lose 2-1 at Palace when they were there, 2-1 at WHU when they were there and 2-0 at the Valley.

 

Yep. I would guess that you and I are amongst a very small number of City fans who have seen us play Charlton at 4 different grounds. Ashton Gate, Selhurst Park, Upton Park & The Valley. 
I can’t remember there being very many of us at Selhurst and probably only 1,000 or so at Upton Park, so there won’t be many fans who can say they were at all 4 grounds. 
I always fancied playing Charlton in the playoff final as it would then be 5 different grounds, which I’m sure would be a very unique phenomenon. 

There was a few Millwall in there too. 
I know - as I encountered some of them afterwards!! 

29 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

https://www.bcfc.co.uk/video/goals-patos-stunning-freekick-gives-city-the-win-bristol-city-21-hull-city/

Paterson in 2020 apparently.

So maybe up to one every two years if we can find one from 2022 as well.

Woo-hoo. Now we’re cooking

19 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

Didn't Joe Williams have a bit of a dead ball reputation, TBF I thought the corners were better Saturday. 
I'd ban Nahki and give TGH, Twine or even Pring ahead of Wells.

If Twine is on the pitch and either TGH or anyone else goes anywhere near a free kick, I’m going to be immediately leaving the ground in absolute and painful disgust, and not returning until I receive a personal apology from the King.