IAmNick

Just the 4 wins and 2 draws at home in the last 6 then for them. Not great - I'd take a bit of being not great in that case then!

His control AND shot for the goal were both pretty awful I thought, but I admired the fact he was looking to get forward and take players on. That's what allowed it to happen and it was well deserved imo. Also a good bit of skill to make space for his shot from range - not too many others would have done that. A better performance overall going forward I agree.

That's not how rounding numbers works. We can also tell this because you didn't round the win percentage correctly either Mathematical masterpiece next time instead maybe?

Manning said pre-match that Pring wasn't 100%, and even the Sky commentators said Burns would come on before the end. We needed some kind of mitigation/plan there, and didn't really see it. 7/10 is probably fair I think though

PPG is 1.095 which should be rounded up to 1.1

Christ almighty we didn't just lose to Man City in the cup or something, we lost to a team who only got promoted from League 1 last year and soon won't even be able to see us in their rear view mirror. "We gave it a real go"...

Well done to Ipswich tbh

Ipswich third: https://streamin.one/v/2363c589

Awful pen, well done Max

Luckily we've got him at centre back rather than working on Fermat's Last Theroem then

Ipswich second: https://streamin.one/v/57b12c19

brother why would you say that

HAHAHAHAHAHHA oh ffs

City second (Conway): https://streamin.one/v/8c89f491

Hahahahahahah

:laugh: who is this Mehmeti guy

Agreed. There are enough sticks lying around to beat the club with at the moment - trying to find a "We should have held on to Wes Burns" one is ridiculous.

Ipswich goal: https://streamin.one/v/326eed76

Yeah it was great to see his drive forward. It's funny because his first touch was actually awful, and so was the shot - but the positive play won it as you said.

City goal (Mehmeti): https://streamin.one/v/f271362d

I'll tell you what he's not - he's not a striker, they score goals

Me too, but I've thought that a few times now. The "five pillars" seems to be gone from the website, but it's been archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20140811073302/https://www.bcfc.co.uk/news/article/20130206-lansdownfivepillars-641677.aspx They were: Some of it, arguably, we've been decent at. The community engagement is pretty good, and we have achieved Cat 2 status for the academy. The player recruitment seems very familiar to what they're now saying - "The club aims to sign players aged 24 and under more often than not, with older recruits becoming an exception, rather than the norm." but that's definiely not been our approach in the interim! Really I have no idea if I'm right here, but my assumption is we have no mechanism built in to course correct what we're doing. In theory, you'd want your plan and then to iterate on it gradually sensing if the bits you're implementing are moving you in the right direction or not. That needs to be built in, and for that to work you have to be getting honest feedback from everyone at the club, and that making it's way up to the most senior folk there (Tinnion, Lansdown x2). It sounds like we don't have that - the most senior people at the club don't seem terribly good at taking on board honest feedback on the stuff they've implemented (or tried to) so instead we stick with our plan, it gets way off track, then we panic, rip it up, and start again. We've seen that so many times. Then we end up with the beginnings of a plan that's working (Cotterill, Pearson), they try and adjust it or build on it, but the people in charge simply see something sort of working, assume that's job done, why is this bloke telling me I still need to change, and then don't accept the feedback they need to take it to the next level and it all comes unstuck. Rinse and repeat.

Agree with a lot of this thread, particularly @Harry's post above. I think there's a HUGE survivorship / confirmation bias when it comes to a "plan" for promotion. People tend to look at the couple of clubs we want to emulate, look at their plans, and assume that's the "right" way to do it. However there are many, many more clubs who went up in a completely different way. There are also no doubt many who had a similar plan and got relegated. All clubs think they plan is good - just saying we have a plan, and here it is... that's not enough. It's a bit of a cargo cult I think. We're building stadiums and HPCs (not out of wood on a pacific island, but sort of) and talking about our behaviours without really grasping the underlying theory. That's then manifested in the confusion of the actual implementation. Steve's at home watching yet another club pass us by, pointing at the things he's done and thinking no doubt we'll be next year, I've copied them exactly!

Yeah fair, I'm not sure I can ever remember wanting City to lose, but I can sort of see the logic in it.

If he thinks that's City's greatest chance of success why is it so mad? I'm not sure I agree by the way, but just wondering.