Harry

32 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Yeah, was gonna say at least £150k p.a.

Ashton earned £540,897 in 2018/19

Does that include the contents of brown envelopes??

1 hour ago, Silvio Dante said:

Piercy has got his piece up now - kudos to JP for putting “community notes” amongst Tinnions speeches to correct him…

Notably not much around the youth piece so I expect he’s planning a second bit on that:

 

Community Notes from Piercy. 
Superb. 
 

Just now, Super said:

Punching...

Nah. Cheltenham. Punchestown is in Ireland. 
 

8 hours ago, Harry said:

30 years eh?? That reminds me…..

We’re crap at home, we’re crap at home, for years now, City’s crap at home  

…….

cuz I remember..

A Robin on a shirt, Johnson’s Paint still gleaming, 30 years of hurt, never my pants I’m creaming  

 

12 minutes ago, Bazooka Joe said:

So the (self) highly esteemed Brian Tinnion has been with us for 30 years.

Reminds me of lyrics from a popular song.

”Thirty years of hurt

Never stopped me dreaming”

 

 

 

Already on that one Joe.  

Periodisation is a method of training where you break this down to 3 cycles, macro, meso and micro. 
It’s about designing training plans to achieve goals but breaking it down into constituent parts to account for heavy workloads and lighter workloads. 
 

Maybe some of you ought to register on the course to be able to get a grasp of this methodology.  

1 hour ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Just listened to the start again.

"Steve and Jon decided they wanted a good run in the u-18 youth Cup this season"

So, as a result, Brian explained:

1) It's part of the reason why we can't fill a full bench for the first team; and

2) U-18s are deliberately being held back from progressing into the u-21s so that we can do well in the youth Cup.

So we are sabotaging the first team, u-21s and development of u-18s because on a whim Steve and Jon decided they wanted a good cup run for the u-18s?

I think this is up there with one of the most absurd things I've ever heard come out of the club. 

Yep. 
I had a conversation with Tinnion back in early September and he mentioned this. 

Basically for a number of years now we’ve been playing our kids ‘up a level’. 
The 16’s play in the 18’s, the 18’s play in the 21’s etc. 

It’s designed around a progressive pathway and affording the kids opportunity at higher age groups and thus higher quality levels. You could argue it’s been quite successful. 
It’s also allowed us to loan out players from our 21’s, because we’ll have the 18’s playing for the 21’s instead. 
 

In September, I asked about the reason there weren’t so many 21’s out on loan this year as yet. The answer was because the focus this year was on winning the 18’s Youth Cup. 
Further reasoning was that, and I quote “we’re really proud of the academy and what we’ve done, but we’ve got nothing to actually show for it, so we want some silverware”. 
 

So yes, Kid, we have purposely sabotaged our successful youth model (with knock on effect to the 21’s loan opportunities and 1st team experience opportunity) because we want to win the cup. 
Who was it said that at that level it’s not about winning it’s about the development of the players? We seem to have said “bollox to that this year, we want the cup”. 

30 years eh?? That reminds me…..

We’re crap at home, we’re crap at home, for years now, City’s crap at home  

…….

cuz I remember..

A Robin on a shirt, Johnson’s Paint still gleaming, 30 years of hurt, never my pants I’m creaming  

3 hours ago, JP Hampton said:

There seems to be a few players guilty of that as part and parcel of this footballing style. Mehmeti far too many touches, even Dickie at times, but as said before I think we saw talent in TGH on arrival and some of the things he’s doing now he wasn’t doing originally. 
 Unfortunately it feels as though there’s a good few players who aren’t performing as they used to. 

I don’t think Dickie takes too many touches very often. He occasionally may have 3 or 4 when an immediate pass forward isn’t available and he thus shifts to the left for a pass to Pring or the right to Vyner. 
Re Mehmeti. Very different. He’s a winger. I’d expect wingers to take more touches of the ball as they are attempting to dribble and beat a man or create space. 
TGH takes too many touches for a CM.  It slows us down massively. CM’s at this level should be 1 or 2 touch, 3 at max. 
He did this under the previous manager too so it’s not instruction. This thread has been on my radar ever since he arrived but I didn’t want to ‘go early’ as it were. So when someone else has notified this too I now find it’s time for me to say my piece. It’s happened all season, it’s not a regression under the new manager. 

30 minutes ago, Major Isewater said:

Perhaps he’s under instruction to slow the game down and play the safe possession ball ? 
When he arrived he added positivity to our midfield and his set pieces were miles better than any other player. He was however criticised for his lack of consistency but this is his first full season as a first teamer so it’s to be expected. He’s not the finished product and he’s gone backwards under Manning ( like the majority of our lads) . I still think he’s a good footballer . 
 

It’s not instruction. That’s a terrible excuse. You can’t blame a manager for a player taking 6 touches to think about his next move. It also happened under the previous manager. It’s not instruction, it’s the players speed of thought. 

1 hour ago, Henry said:

He’s trying good at taking 3-4 touches, when 1 would do,  before releasing the ball.

Yes yes yes. 
That was the bit I forgot to add to my post earlier. 
He regularly takes 4, 5 or 6 touches before moving the ball on. 
Watch the best midfielders in this division, it’s all 1 or 2 touch. Occasionally 3. 
Generally the best CM’s in this league take 1 touch to control it and manoeuvre the ball where they want it, and the 2nd touch to pass. It keeps the play uptempo. 
TGH slows the game down like no CM I’ve seen before. When he does the 1 and 2 touch stuff he’s fine, but more often than not it’s 4,5 or 6 touches. 
It bugs the bloody hell out of me! 

2 minutes ago, Major Isewater said:

He has potential but he’s still very inexperienced at this level and the new coach has clearly changed his game and not for the better. 

I don’t think he was very good under the old one either. 
But that’s just my opinion. 

As @Davefevs will know from our WhatsApp chats, I’m not a big fan of TGH. 
He’s a player with decent technique but I don’t see much more than that. 
He’s not very quick. He doesn’t tackle well (he’s often easily manoeuvred past and resorts to attempting to grab or pull or soft fouls). He often switches off in terms of defensive positioning (there’s been a few goals conceded from this lately). He gives the ball away very easily too often - there’s been a few incidents lately where he’s not played the easy pass in an attacking position and the opposition have broken away and had a chance or a goal). 
His set pieces are kind of okayish. Not brilliant but acceptable. 
He occasionally sees a good forward pass but it’s all too rare and he’s mostly just a very ‘safe’ passer. 
 

Think about this - West Brom were willing to pretty much swap a 22 year old academy product for a 34 year old ageing Weimann. 
I think there were some who suggested that West Brom sold because they needed the money - but what’s £1.3m? They could have made that sort of money up in numerous different ways. 
Ultimately, Corberan plays a high tempo style and TGH simply didn’t fit. Corberan was happy to sell. 
I personally don’t see TGH as a regular in any other top 12 team in this league. Sorry. I think we could have spent that money better. 
He’s not a ‘bad’ player by any means, but he is rather ineffective and just very ‘meh’. 

On 08/03/2024 at 13:31, Harry said:

I guess what I’d say (and this is no defence of Manning by the way), is that you haven’t really factored in the relativity. 
 

Relatively speaking, if we were 4 points off the playoffs after 15 games, then under the same trends we’d be 8 points off the playoffs after 30 games. 
Now on 36 games, under the same trends, we’d be roughly 9.5 to 10 points off the playoffs (well, 10 would be after 37.5 games in that 15 game model). 
 

So we are currently 13 points off the playoffs, so the relative regression is only 3 points. 

9 hours ago, Olé said:

People rightly pointing out that a 4 point gap will widen with the additional games played (as just extrapolation rather  than anything to do with Liam Manning) missing the point that @Mr Popodopolous specifically posted only the period Liam Manning has been in charge for which shows us 15 points off 6th from 21 games vs 4 points off from 15.

4 points off the playoffs from 15 extrapolated to 21 games is still 5.6 points off the playoffs not 15 points. 15 points off from Manning’s 21 games is a 9.4 point negative swing in less than half a season and almost half a point worse off per match. That is huge regression - stop doing the clubs work for them by defending the return on their decision.

8 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Don’t you add 4.0 to 5.6 and say 9.6 is the extrapolated difference to playoffs after 36 games?

And he’s 13 points off, therefore he’s regressed 3.4 points over 21 games from point of appointment in comparison to pre-appointment trajectory!

For me it’s speed of regression that worries me, because for some of that early 21 game period, he was tracking / even above that trajectory.  But the drop-off is speeding up.

Just a little xG trending below / inc 6 game rolling averages:

The downturn of xG goal difference and widening of the gap between xG for and xG against (6-game rolling) is a worry.

Rob - Fevs has done my work for me

It’s the 4 plus the 5.6 = 9.6. As I said in my initial post. 10 points would be the XD (expected deficit) and we are 13, so a 3.4 difference. 
But also Fevs is very correct in that it’s the speed of the downturn which is a concern. 
With which I wholeheartedly agree - hence why last week I nailed my colours to the mast and said that it was time for LM to go. 
I’ve lost total confidence in him. 

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I'll check the team from that evening.

Bench.

I think but don't quote me by process of elimination. .

McCrorie, Tanner, Vyner.

Naismith, Williams

Wells

Atkinson and Benarous haven't kicked a ball or even made the bench this season yet.

King started, went off injured, Roberts was the sub for him but also went off injured.

As I’ve said before. That game we were short at CB. So in my mind you don’t then play others in unfamiliar roles which then weakens further areas of the team. 
Hickman should have played RB. He’d done it plenty before. That means Knight would be CM. Sykes RM and move Weimann inside to the AM. 
 

That would have ensured we weren’t weakening the whole right side of defence. 

4 hours ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

But football ain't mathematics!

Correct. But good teams tend to win more, bad teams tend to lose more and middling teams tend to be inconsistent. 

3 hours ago, Slack Bladder said:

I like this theory. If only we could win our first five games. Then we should win the league without dropping a point.

Of course, but we’re not taking a 5 game sample; it’s a 15 game sample. 
 

After 1 match, some teams will have 3 points and some 0 points. 
Would you expect that same 3 point gap between top and bottom after 15 games? Of course not. The gaps will gradually grow as the season progresses. 
 

In the 15 game example given, we were 18 points behind Leicester. 
Do you expect us to still be only 18 points behind Leicester after 36 games? If so then we’d be on 63 points. That’s 19 better than we are now. 
We’d be 5th. 

If that is your expectation then great. 
 

Truth is, the gap between teams will gradually grow as the season progresses. So a 4 point gap after 15 games will likely be a 8 point gap after 30 games. 
It’s just plain logic. 
 

Unless we had some crazy run of form, which for an inconsistent team like ours is highly unlikely, then I’d probably expected us to only be around 3 or 4 points better off than we are now. 
 

So yes, we have certainly regressed, but it’s not to a drastic level, it’s about 3 or 4 points worse off than we were after 15 games. 
 

By the way, I’ve nailed my colours to the mast - I don’t want Manning here any more. So again this isn’t a defence of him. But it’s just logic that over a reasonable block of games, most teams will probably consistently hit around about a similar number of points. 

1 hour ago, Galley is our king said:

Well it certainly doesn't show anything remotely positive does it?

I cannot agree with the way @Harry has worked this. If you went back to that moment in time and did the same calculation for all the teams in the league  no one would have changed positions! Some teams in the relegation places would probably now be on mimus points!

Ppg is the only real barometer and yes, we HAVE regressed!

Funny now we want " context" now but lots poo pood the injuries under Pearson eh?

Sorry @Harry looks like you are trying to spin Mannings stats higher than they actually are.

I’ve not said it’s a positive by any means but I also don’t think you can actually argue with my stats. 
 

If after 15 games we were 4 points off the playoffs, then, if the next set of 15 games carried on the same trend then you’d be a further 4 points off, equals 8 points off after 30. 
So on the same trend after 38 games you’d be 10 points off. 
There’s nothing to dispute - it’s just mathematics. 

We are currently 13 points off. So presently we are 3 points behind the trend set after 15 games. 

Is that good? Nope. 
Am I defending Manning? Nope. 
But the math is the math. 

I guess what I’d say (and this is no defence of Manning by the way), is that you haven’t really factored in the relativity. 
 

Relatively speaking, if we were 4 points off the playoffs after 15 games, then under the same trends we’d be 8 points off the playoffs after 30 games. 
Now on 36 games, under the same trends, we’d be roughly 9.5 to 10 points off the playoffs (well, 10 would be after 37.5 games in that 15 game model). 
 

So we are currently 13 points off the playoffs, so the relative regression is only 3 points. 

Sad news and thoughts with Scott and his family.
 

I do have a question. I appreciate that flying is out of the question for 6 months but is there another way to get her home? Would she be allowed to travel by train or car? 
Just wondering if there can be a huge cost saving here rather than forking out thousands to a Spanish care home? 

Someone with experience of these matters may put me right, but would travel by another means than flight be possible? 

10 hours ago, The Original OTIB said:

Pinning?

Just along from Severn Beach, yeah? 

1 minute ago, GrahamC said:

Re TGH again he faded badly & I’d have taken him off for King at 2-2 & hoped his experience could help see us hold on for a point.

Maybe it would have been seen as negative but I’d have taken off Mehmeti too who was tiring by then & put Roberts in front of Pring to support.

Wouldn’t have minded a few strong challenges well up the pitch to slow their flow.

Yep. Agree on both. 
 

1 minute ago, Chrizzler said:

None of our strikers can play up front on their own. Not once has he played Wells & Conway together in a two man forward line. If he'd studied  footage he would know that it's worked previously & the players are happy with it. 

Because Conway doesn’t block or press the same way Wells and Knight do. 
If you lose Knight from that position you basically have to change the whole defensive set up 

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

We have a good group of pros, they have pride.  They will always try, they’ll always work hard.

The stupid thing is having gone 2-1 up with 13 mins to go, we looked like we wanted another.  Burns was giving Pring a tough time.  Mehmeti who’d had a good game was struggling.  Just back him up with Roberts, close that side down.

@Harry I’m gonna be harsh here, you or I could come up with that game plan.  I’ve said this week that we should block not press.  I’ve said you need to be aware of Davis playing high.  I think it’s generous to give his credit for the set up.  There was nothing fantastic about it.

Maybe. But it was still the correct plan. And it was what he put out there. 
We’d knock him if he hadn’t played that way so we surely have to credit when he did actually do the right thing. 

10 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

Just watching on Sky. He’s saying that the 4 subs by them made a huge impact - but it’s him that can impact that, surely????

They scored 10 seconds after the 4 subs. We’d brought Sykes on and he switched off. 
Not sure how LM could have reacted to the 4 subs when they literally scored immediately after 

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

Considering how well Manning knows McKenna and how well know it is that Ipswich are very strong in the final stages of the game then its actually criminal that we were not prepared for Ipwichs changes. 

Plan a worked against Ipswichs plan a. Plan a didn't work against Ipswichs plan b. We had no plan other than plan a. 

 

Plan A wasn’t executed by the substitutes. 

1 minute ago, Silvio Dante said:

I think we’re saying broadly the same thing here - great setup, well executed then a turning point post subs (both ours and theirs). The bit I think you haven’t mentioned is that Burns coming on with a half fit Pring should have let Roberts coming in instead. That potentially avoids the penalty and the opening up of that attacking front as Burns had him on toast (that doesn’t happen to a fit Cam). Other than that I agree.

Agree. Roberts perhaps could / should have come on for Pring 

Although Pring is quicker than Roberts. So Burns would have had Roberts on toast too