Spike

Arteta, Pearson, both strong with gameplan and tactics but took time to find what suited them, Manning is a paint by numbers manager, he's so generic and lacking. We could give Manning 5 years and at best I'd imagine us mid table of the Championship, more realistically I see us potentially dropping into League One with him being sacked with 3-4 months left in a season further into his position here. Mannings issues are that he blames players for not getting results when he's the reason they couldn't perform as he's set us up in a style that we don't have the suited players to play. That'll piss players off and quite possibly demotivate them as they know they're capable of better but they're being ha stringed. Mannng is also slow to read the game and makes any impactful changes. There are times when the commentary teams have picked up on what's going wrong and still, he doesn't react and then we go on the lose or give up a good lead. If the commentary teams are picking up on the issues when the coach is not then there is a real problem. I was thinking to myself the other day how maybe I'm just not seeing something so I asked a few of my mates who support other championship teams to join me on discord for a few of them and have them access us to get a non fan based view on our set up. They said when we don't have the ball we look more dangerous than when we do have it, asked to elaborate they said when we get the ball we just go side to side or backwards until we lose the ball or until the opposition get a foot on it but fail to retain which creates an opening. With the Ipswich game they all said we looked far better when the gameplay was "frantic" to which I think is what happens when the game is opened up by the opposition attacking us rather than getting men behind the ball. I mean the TLDR is Mannings tactics are not showing us signs of life, the left over instincts of Pearson spending years to teach our lads to play on the counter is where we show up, Mannings slow build, passing game is where we're falling apart.

It's got nothing to do with the players intensity, they're playing just as hard in both games. The difference is when the opposition attacks us we're fighting to get the ball back and get on that fast counter so we look more aggressive and determined. When we play a team who sit back and counter us we have more possession but can't actually do much with it so the slow passing, retaining possession football comes out where we look boring and lifeless. You see bursts of our best football when the opposition disposess us and we get the ball back quickly because then the transition is more open for our attack. The whole blaming the players thing doesn't sit well for me, we saw under Pearson that the players are driven, we've seen it in patches under Manning when they've been allowed to show it too but for the most part the laboured, "don't care" football is Mannings tactics being played as he's taught them. They're obviously uninspiring to the players as they struggle to break down teams who sit back but they're told to be patient in their build up and to retain the ball. Under Pearson it was more get it forward as quickly as possible and if the bank is lost fight for it high up the pitch again. I don't blame the players, I blame the tactics Manning is trying to play. We simply do not have the creativity or the shape to play a slow build up style, in fact I can't think of a single team in the Championship who do play a slow build up successfully. I mean even you look at the table the highest positioned team so play defensive football is Cardiff and even they hit on the counter attack rather than playing a slow build up style. We're going to keep getting contrasting performances as long as we try to play a slow build up, especially when we have so many players who shine when allowed to use their pace like Bell, Conway, Sykes, Pring and so many more.

I think the problem with this kind of appointment is he's still early career, I think our club needs someone who is confident and has the experience to demand respect from the players. I do see this as another issue that Liam Manning has, he's come in and replaced Nigel Pearson, Pearson who demands respect but it also respectful to those who earn his. I don't see why our players would respect Manning, he's not done anything of worth that the players can respect and he talks football like it's all very simple to figure out. I personally think we need someone with experience but also who can command respect. I think I'd actually rather stick with Manning, I can't stand Lampard as a manager, amazing player but I feel like his win percentages are very boosted by the fact that he managed Derby at a time when they had a squad more than capable of promotion, then Chelsea when they were a much stronger squad. My brother is an Everton fan and for me Everton was the first real job he had that was difficult and he barely kept them in the Premier League and then went on to only win 1 in 11 the following season before he was let go. I think Lampards name comes from playing and I don't think the players would see him as a manager, but more of a coach with a wealth of playing experience. I'm sure the media would take notice of us but do we want the media that Birmingham got recently with Rooney? Essentially that went down like a lead balloon. For me this is the best option we have and although his win percentage with Swansea was not great I think it was not the right club for him. Realistically there aren't a lot of better options and I think whilst his experience isn't the level we need he's still the best option as I don't see us getting another Pearson-like manager who is willing to stand up to the board and I don't think the board will hire another manager like that until we're really in a desperate situation.

I have to disagree, I think he'll be a player that leaves and hits the ground running and all of our fans will be asking "Why didn't he play like that for us?". The only reason he doesn't look as sharp for us atm is because his best football is played on the counter and we don't do much of that now, when we do like last night you see the best of him but he's very much a player who likes to run alongside defenders, cause problems and score chances. We don't create a lot of him, we don't play passes for him to run onto alongside his defender and that's why none of our forwards look sharp, because we don't play the football that suits them. I think Conway will go on to do very well given that he's signed by a club that wants to be aggressive in their attack and to attack at pace with low direct passes.

Probably the first time I can agree with Manning if he says we weren't clinical enough. I feel for Max, saves a penalty and been let down so many times today.

This is funny to watch because we're essentially playing the way we're best, soaking up pressure and countering quickly, much as Pearson set us up to play. It would seem we're still capable of playing football, so long as our opposition doesn't sit back on us, which was the problem Pearson had singing, albeit we were a little better than ever seen under Manning recently. Exactly what I thought would happen if they tried to come at us though, we're able to get into the game. If Manning can actually get past his non budging attitude and create a gameplan that works against teams who suit back against us we'd probably start getting more results.

Any touches of confidence I have is because we can play decent against teams that come to take the game to us and Ipswich will do that, I think I'd probably be more worried if I thought they'd be sitting back ready to catch us on the counter, if they do that the game is over because we can't work an opportunity of worth in open play against teams who sit back against us.

Yeah I realised after I chucked it all together, was very drunk after last night and hung over this morning, only something City can do to a man.

Pressing - As Dave said but our press is a reactive press, we send a player to press the ball carrier and position our players within range of the passing options to the ball carrier. For example, if the opposition are playing 3 at the back and the central center back is in possession of the ball then Well/Conway would run down the ball carrier whilst our wide players would position themselves away from the other two center backs but close enough that they can close down the space at the right time. When the center back in possession chooses his pass and makes contact with the ball our player would then trigger his run to close down the receiving player as he receives the ball in an attempt to either directly take it from him on first touch or to force him into a position where he cannot get off a pass quickly causing him to clear or to make a mistake that we can close down on. I'm not great at explaining it but I refer to it as bait pressing because you're essentially baiting a pass with intent to cause problems as it's received. Attacking - What Dave said is spot on and to elaborate we've become very wide position dependent under Manning so far as we spread out our players far too much. One tactic that Manning has spelled out himself is that he likes us to switch the ball to create openings in for us to exploit, however in practice it is not working against teams who sit back in a compact manner with intent to counter attack and Manning's build-up passing is just not working. I tried to mock up our attacking issue in an image, it's not the best but I hope it explains a little of where we are going wrong in our approach. So this is an example of a position we found ourselves in countless times in the previous 3 matches. The ball carried (1) either tries to push the ball down the wing (orange) at which point we would find ourselves in a dead end as 5 and 3 on the opposition would double up to prevent us getting down the line and their 9 would cover the inside option against our 6 at which point we would play the ball back to 1 or 2 and take the green passing lane of trying to either play a cross field pass to our wide men on the other side of the pitch, or it would come back to our 3 where we would pass amongst the back line until we could get a pass back out to a wide position and thus the pattern repeats. When we try to play out from the back line we tend to set up like so: so when the green pass is triggered opposition 9 and 10 will attempt to press and our 6 has no viable option as opposition 6 and 10 have immediate pressure on our 7 forcing our 6 to play a pass straight back into the back line at which point we return to trying to push the wings. When you consider Manning likes a build up play style of football we must be able to play through the middle as well as the wide positions so I don't understand why Manning isn't telling our players to do the following: Our 9 and 10 should be told to come narrow and deeper so as the green pass is played 6 can turn with options to play to our 7, 9 or bypass directly to 10. If the ball moves to 9 or 10 then our 5 or 1 would be triggered into overlapping runs and 6 and 7 would offer passes back inside allowing us to move up the pitch in central positions but with options to transition into the wing play having already bypassed the doubling up on the wide men. For a team who want to play the build up style of football this is what we lack, our 9 and 10 always stay out wide, our 8 (AM) barely gets involved in plays because the ball is pinned out wide but if we came narrow and compacted the opposition to cover these central passing options it would then create the space to use on the wings instead of our current move it around the back line and try to trigger a wide push from a deep position. Right now we are currently failing to play enough football through the middle of the pitch meaning the opposition just needs to cover passing lanes and use a two man block to prevent us from pushing down the wings into the final third. Defence - Agree with Dave again but would also add our defence is better partially because we tend to lose possession in the middle of the pitch but when we lose it in the opposition final third our back 3 are prone to being caught out with a long direct pass. This comes down to Vyners positioning and Dickies reading of a high ball over the top. Dickie struggles to read the long looping over-the-top passes at times and Vyner is prone to moving too far from his position forcing Dickie to have to come across and cover for him. Largely this seems to be a far bigger problem with teams with high quality, fast runners but as a whole I would say our defence is better, certainly on set pieces. Overall - Dave summed it up perfectly. Southampton was very much a Pearson-like performance where we would soak up pressure, allowing the opposition to attack us and then punching back with fast, direct counters. The passing was not build up, it was with purpose and pace because Southampton were far more open when losing the ball, something QPR, Wednesday and Cardiff did not do, they attacked on the counter keeping their players in a position to defend upon losing the ball. Our transition game is awful under Manning from my personal point of view, we focus far too much on trying to retain the ball rather than using it, so we go back, we move the ball from side to side, attempt the odd move through the middle but ultimately there is no directness at all and in open play we fail to have any bite to our attacks. Summary Manning football doesn't work for us because it's too "safe" which ironically has led us to 3 straight defeats and a reliance on luck or loose ball situations to trigger us into a direct attack which is where a lot of our best moments came from against Cardiff.

I think it's simple and I don't understand why people can't see what the issue is. Southampton were full of confidence and came out playing a very open and aggressive set up, they didn't sit back in numbers, they didn't overload their wide positions when defending and simply put it suited us down to the ground as we got success in the areas we've been coached to play, down the sides and switching the play. Southampton didn't close down either of these areas which opened up the game and allowed us to play the style of football Manning likes us to play. With QPR and Wednesday they both set up to nullify our space on the wings by doubling up and denying the inside passing lanes forcing us to keep going backwards and switch the side we attacked on. As we switched sides they would transition with the ball keeping their shape and denying us space to play our attacking football. After watching those two games I thought to myself, that's our issue, we can't attack if we don't mix it up through the middle rather than the bring it back to the back line and switch sides until something opens up so I presumed that Manning would identify the issue and change our approach if Cardiff set up the same way. I was completely wrong, Cardiff set up the same way and we spent the entirety of the match trying the same thing over and over again until we got desperate in the last 10 minutes and started throwing ourselves forward which then changed how Cardiff had to defend and gave us more success in getting forward and applying pressure. Yesterday summed up Mannings lack of ability to read the game for me, to play two full matches and struggle due to the way the opposition set up and then go into a third game and not have any kind of counter-plan for the same situation just screams inept. We had chances yesterday and when I watched the game and when I look back on them they're largely from loose ball situations turning into a fast direct line to goal which was what Pearson put into place, our best moments came from playing the football that Manning is trying to replace and for me that's the most frustrating part. I'm oddly optimistic about the Ipswich game as I think they may actually look to bring the game to us which, in turn, would benefit us because then they wouldn't be set up to defend the wide positions and look to disposses us coming inside. It would also give us more space to work the ball in the manner that Manning sets us up to play. I do think we're going to find more luck against the better teams because they focus more on attacking than their defending whereas teams like QPR, Wednesday and Cardiff were all about defending in numbers, cutting off options and trying to pinch a goal on the counter. The one thing I worry about more than anything right now is the players, there are signs that they are not enjoying the new system and I can see them losing faith in it quickly at this rate and Manning has already made it clear that he has no desire to change anything he does.

Who's fault is it when you have a good job and it's going well and then you decide to go for another job and then it turns out to be shit? Did you look up the job, did you do the research? Manning jumped at this job and it was made pretty clear to all what was expected. I don't feel sorry for someone who takes a shit job and then performs poorly at it.

No point in our fans trying to arrange a protest, many will accept any old shit, many have seen us under perform for so long they've come to accept it, many couldn't agree on the colour of shite. Our fanbase is about as coordinated as the attending drunks at a piss up on ice.

Exactly, so many fans are still saying how Pearson wasn't so great but Pearson had the qualities we need and are not easy to find. He could work on a budget, he would try and test players until he found where they were best suited and could get the best out of their game. More than anything he formed relationships with the players, had their well being at the forefront and they respected him for it. As a player who would you prefer to play for? Pearson who wants to get you at your best and will adapt tactics to make it happen. A man who will be there for you and talk you up to the media when you've earned it but will always be fair in dressing you down. Or, Liam Manning, a man who will throw you under the bus so long as he's not getting thrown under it too. A man who will blast you to the media for being the reason his gameplan doesn't work and also reiterate how he's not willing to change his way of doing things? The players must hate this right now, they're getting the blame from the media, some fans and even their own manager when previously they had a man who brought people together and was very fair in his assessments.

I worry the same but also thought that after Coppel, Pearson came after that whole shit show so I think what it comes down to with the "named managers" is how desperate our board get. If we find ourselves in a bad financial situation and needing quality I think they'd be tempted to bring in a manager with a lot of contacts because an 'up and coming' manager just doesn't have those links or that weight behind them. I really hope there is a point where they have a "**** it, we've had enough" appointment and give us a big name hoping it'll go bad so the fans stop demanding big name managers. In many ways I wonder if that was what Pearson was and then they found out how yes men only work if the people above them know what they're doing.

I think that Sporting quarter is his legacy, he gets that finished and up and then he can pass the Gate, look at the stadium and surroundings and think to himself "I did that". I do think he's still a City fan, I just think he knows all he has to offer is his financial strengths and that he'll not get us to the Premier League in his lifetime so he's looking to get out without losing too much and trying to move it on to someone he thinks cares.

Our main saving grace is the sheer volume of teams that would need to be better than us picking up points where we don't. I don't see us going the rest of the season without picking up points, I think some teams will try to out pass us rather than frustrate and they seem to be the teams we look better against. What concerns me is Manning blaming players for his poor gameplaning. A few more losses on the trot and they may just reach the "I'm done with this guy" situation and then how do you get any fight out of the players. I don't think we'll be relegated, but it's certainly not something I'd fully dismiss right now.

I'll bite... Agreed Unlike previous managers he was not hired for a rebuild, he was hired because we had a "competitive squad" who Jon said were "Top 6". Now, putting aside the stupidity of the top 6 comment it still doesn't change that Manning took on the role, replacing a very knowledgeable and capable man who had got the team playing with identify and a bite to them. We're they top 6... probably not, however, they were very much competitive and the job role of Manning was to take on a competitive squad and make them compete. There was no mention of a rebuild and when it comes to "his players" out was Manning who wanted to buy Mehmeti for Oxford before we got him. He is a fan of Mehmeti and yet he plays a system whereby Mehmeti is nullified and arguably looks worse than he did when he struggled under Pearson. The simple fact is that in the last 3 games the players are not the issue at all, it is Mannings inability to see the shortcoming of his tactics and why they are failing. What's worse is that he could sign a whole squad of his "own players" but it won't change that he can't see where we are being tactically outplayed. Yes, yes they do and yes they will still be here and they will still be idiots but that doesn't mean we should stick with a tactically inept manager/coach who can't even identify what's wrong so he just keeps blamimg the players for not playing well enough. As much as I hate the ownership I will say this, they appointed Pearson. I feel that appointment was very much by trying to deliver something the fans wanted, an experienced, logical manager and so I will take a shot at the manager appointment lottery at the chance of having a Pearson-like manager than sticking with a guy who has one idea and would blame his own players over admitting he doesn't have what it takes. You've just said he doesn't have his players, how do you think he's going to get them if it's not by spending money? Surely taking that hit is better financially than watching the value of the squad slowly deplete with awful football and spending on more players that are his? If anything we could stick with him and get relegated next season and then we'd be on one of our worst financial situations in the last decade. If you genuinely believe we showed signs of progress today I'm going to assume you watched the wrong team? We've been playing the pace press to pick possession off of the opposition since Pearson implimented it. Manning has taken that pace press and added a dimension of doing a triggered pace press based on passes by the opposition, it's not bad, but it's also not reliable in chance creation. Yes we created chances using it today, but we also conceded multiple chances through Cardiff doing the same to us which meant the game was very much a 50/50 crap shoot on who would capitalise on it first. That is not a reliable base for chance creation and relies heavily on the opposition making multiple mistakes. We were the better team for patches, but as a whole Cardiff neutralised all of our build up play by simply forcing us wide and pinning us in, then we'd be forced back where they could trigger a press to try and make us lose possession in a dangerous position. This is also how QPR and Wednesday set up and took advantage of Manning refusing to adapt to it. We created next to nothing in these situations and that's purely down to how Manning has is set up with large gaps between players so we can't generate a fast counter if we do win the ball as we don't have any quick passing options anywhere but on the wings. We're always spread far too wide across the pitch with no good inside options despite playing with 3 in the middle. It genuinely concerns me how little some people last attention to these details because they are what cause many of the player complaints such as "Mehmeti is crap" or "our attackers are rubbish". They're not and Mehmeti could be a hell of a player in the right system but whilst we continue to force the wings and have no ability to go through the middle the opposition will continue to invite us wide, pin us there and dispossess and nullify our attacking players. The gameplan is why we're seeing so many players who shone under Pearson look like shadows of their former selves. Pearson set up to get the best out of players individual strengths in a team manner, Manning sets up a team gameplan and tries to force the players to play roles they're not suited in. Imagine having a player like DeBruyne and telling him to keep his passing simple... it may suit the tactics you want to play but imagine how much talent you're wasting. We may be safe, but this is the Charmpionship, results are never what you expect and finishing on a high is far more appealing to players coming in than seeing a club who dropped from a competitive position at one point to a lower half position under a new manager. We may not have to worry about relegation now but if we keep Manning and he's to stubborn to change his ways then we could find ourselves down there next season with the board sacking him and needing to replace with us in a far worse position. Ignoring one problem because there is another problem isn't how you solve problems, it's how they escalate and become a real situation. We can't just accept Manning, that's why this club is where it is, accepting mediocrity. I'm tired of this thing the club does of hiring 'up and coming', I want another Pearson, I want a manager who isn't a one trick pony, I want experience and tactical knowledge, not this modern coaching but the numbers bullshit we've got now.

It's kind of funny how after we lost 2-0 to Cardiff with half a squad we were more optimistic as fans and very few calling for Pearson to be sacked yet he was. Fast forward and we've just lost to Cardiff with a squad with far less injuries, more backing for the manager from the board, tons of fans saying they want him gone and what do we get... "not my fault, players need to play better".... I wonder how much of a raise Jon will give him.

I actually think we've got a better chance of getting points from those games, not because we'll play better/different but because a few of those teams will look at our results and do what Southampton did and come in over-confident and think they can simply outplay us and in doing so will open up themselves to Mannings football. However, if those teams are sensible and do what our opposition has done in the past three games and focus on defending the wings and pushing to pinch the ball in the middle of the park we'll not win a single point. At this point we're relying on teams to under-estimate us, something no team that is struggling for points will do.

We lost 2-0 to Cardiff away and put on a better performance than that under Pearson and he had half a squad out injured and he got sacked for it. I don't blame the players, they played as they were instructed to and you could see it was not working, what did Manning do.... nothing. In my eyes Manning had the players to win that game, he had double the squad depth his predecessor had, he had the backing of the board unlike his predecessor and he still refused to adapt and it resulted in a worse performance. I'm done with Manning, for the first time in a very very long time I can comfortably say I actually want a manager gone early into his time here. I'd rather have O'Driscoll, Millen, even McInnes over Manning. I'm sure many people will say that's a knee-jerk reaction but I will say this, not one of those men played the same tactics, same gameplan and refused to adapt for three straight games as we were completely nullified. Manning isn't ever going to accept he's responsible so we'll continue on with the same shit, getting excited when teams open up against us allowing Mannings football to work and maybe picking up surprise wins and losing the rest to teams who identify our playstyle, nullify it and laugh at Manning on the sideline looking lost.

Gutless and clueless applies to Manning, I watched players throw themselves at the ball, work hard but ultimately have had their wings clipped by a god-awful management situation. People can argue all they like about win percentage and so on but Pearson was fired off of the back of a better performance against Cardiff than that and he had literally half of his squad out injured....

I agree fully. LM was guilty of tinkering too much but you could see that he could see the faults and try to adapt to them, Manning would watch the same film 3 times and wonder why it always ends the same way.

I agree, it'll be all about how the players just didn't execute the plan correctly. Manning is exposing himself as the type of bloke who would shoot himself in the foot and blame the gun.

Exactly, same thing every game. He can't read the game and is lost when his tactics are;t working. Most one-dimensional manager we've had, even LJ would try to coach a different style for us to play when he realised it was failing.

Why? It's the third game in a row where he's set up the team the exact same way, exact same gameplan, exact same mistakes. That's what is frustrating me more than anything, the man only seems to know one thing and when it doesn't work he just blames everything but the problem, his management.