Winning Ugly

[Esmond Million's Bung]

So does that view invalidate this thread?

I don't know how many times (maybe at least 15) I've replied to similair comments by pointing out that under Johnson it was dire every week for the best part of two seasons. Millen has been in charge for about a quarter of one season and has had to deal with a very disrupted squad after Copples exit.

Thats the difference.

Millen has tried to set up an attacking formation, home and away every game since he took over. The only exception was the first half on saturday.

The reason I get behind Millen is because I like the way he tries to play. Ok, it doesn't always come off but he tries to entertain. Something his former boss rarely did.

But you very conveniently forget that Millen was the assistant manager/head coach during these dire 2 years, yet you have given him total immunity from ANY blame whatsoever in fact you claim he was keeping his head down, which in my book makes him a YES man.

and come on 4-5-1 at home, ENTERTAINING?.

However if he learns from saturdays near debacle and does'nt try it again at home, then that's a plus and what would be another plus is realising Elliott and Skuse does not a good midfield make, I would have thought our form over the games that Skuse was absent would have told him that.

[SE23Red]

I don't know how many times (maybe at least 15) I've replied to similair comments by pointing out that under Johnson it was dire every week for the best part of two seasons. Millen has been in charge for about a quarter of one season and has had to deal with a very disrupted squad after Copples exit.

Thats the difference.

Millen's record this season is slightly worse than Johnson's first 17 games in charge - 20 points to 23. Both had a very poor run of form initially but picked up markedly in the later games. By this stage of Johnson's reign the Conference Manager post had already happened so you are definitely giving Millen much greater credit than Johnson for a worse start.

The situation Johnson had to deal with was hardly a bundle of laughs either - coming in with us 23rd in the table and having lost 7-1 to Swansea a few games earlier.

I'm not going to criticise anyone for getting behind the City manager...I just find it quite bizarre that you attempt to rationalise why you can do it now and not during the reign of our most successful manager in my memory.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

Millen's record this season is slightly worse than Johnson's first 17 games in charge - 20 points to 23. Both had a very poor run of form initially but picked up markedly in the later games. By this stage of Johnson's reign the Conference Manager post had already happened so you are definitely giving Millen much greater credit than Johnson for a worse start.

The situation Johnson had to deal with was hardly a bundle of laughs either - coming in with us 23rd in the table and having lost 7-1 to Swansea a few games earlier.

I'm not going to criticise anyone for getting behind the City manager...I just find it quite bizarre that you attempt to rationalise why you can do it now and not during the reign of our most successful manager in my memory.

Good point, well put.

[Galley is our king]

Good point, well put.

Hence no reply.

[Robbored]

Hence no reply.

Has it occured to you that I might have been out this evening?

Hence no reply....yet.

[tinman-is-god]

So does that view invalidate this thread?

I don't know how many times (maybe at least 15) I've replied to similair comments by pointing out that under Johnson it was dire every week for the best part of two seasons. Millen has been in charge for about a quarter of one season and has had to deal with a very disrupted squad after Copples exit.

Thats the difference.

Millen has tried to set up an attacking formation, home and away every game since he took over. The only exception was the first half on saturday.

The reason I get behind Millen is because I like the way he tries to play. Ok, it doesn't always come off but he tries to entertain. Something his former boss rarely did.

Did you go to Swansea? Are you telling me we were 'attacking' in that match? And away to Middlesbrough? Home to QPR we were very compact to say the least...we haven't been attacking!

[Robbored]

Millen's record this season is slightly worse than Johnson's first 17 games in charge - 20 points to 23. Both had a very poor run of form initially but picked up markedly in the later games. By this stage of Johnson's reign the Conference Manager post had already happened so you are definitely giving Millen much greater credit than Johnson for a worse start.

The situation Johnson had to deal with was hardly a bundle of laughs either - coming in with us 23rd in the table and having lost 7-1 to Swansea a few games earlier.

I'm not going to criticise anyone for getting behind the City manager...I just find it quite bizarre that you attempt to rationalise why you can do it now and not during the reign of our most successful manager in my memory.

What you seem to handily overlook is that Millen in a Championship manager whereas when Johnson took over City were in Division 1. Different era, different players,different expectations.

Hardly an equal comparison.

[A Horse With No Name]

Did you go to Swansea? Are you telling me we were 'attacking' in that match? And away to Middlesbrough? Home to QPR we were very compact to say the least...we haven't been attacking!

I went to Swansea, and agree that it was fantastic away performance, defending in numbers and then hitting on the break occasionally. Thing is, that wasn't an away performance because that is how we play at home as well.

[Alex_BCFC]

The reason I get behind Millen is because I like the way he tries to play. Ok, it doesn't always come off but he tries to entertain. Something his former boss rarely did.

He does not to try to entertain.

I can't remember a match under his guidance where we have entertained. Most of them we have been set up negatively and tried to contain the opposition. We haven't controlled a match yet this season- it has usually been a hanging on job like a lot of GJ matches really.

[Red]

Millen is doing what SL wants. He is doing his best for us to scrape results no matter what the style of play.

He is trying to keep us floating in this division.

If and when the stadium gets the go ahead, we will see a new manager come in, that could make a challenge for the prem.

If we dont get the go ahead, SL will walk away and let Millen get on with it.

Millen is not an up and coming prem manager, or a championship manager, he is here to hold the fort.

We all have different views, but this is how i see his role!

Perhaps thats why im just a supporter.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

What you seem to handily overlook is that Millen in a Championship manager whereas when Johnson took over City were in Division 1. Different era, different players,different expectations.

Hardly an equal comparison.

and you handily overlook that Millen was the assistant manager/head coach during these dire 2 years, yet you have given him total immunity from ANY blame whatsoever in fact you claim he was keeping his head down, which in my book makes him a YES man.

[CiderHider]

I don't think playing boring or ugly is a choice anyone can make as an alternative to playing entertaining or something.

I think scrapping for points and getting them is a sign of a team working hard for each other, who are more interested in the 'team' doing well, rather than being a ball hog and trying step overs or something selfish and retarded, screw that. No, winning ugly is what Liverpool, Man U and all the great teams do so its pointless and unnecessary to start looking to place blame.

[SE23Red]

What you seem to handily overlook is that Millen in a Championship manager whereas when Johnson took over City were in Division 1. Different era, different players,different expectations.

Hardly an equal comparison.

When you are bottom of the league - any league - surely the only expectation you can have is to turn the corner and lift the club up the table? Johnson achieved this and followed it with a promotion the following season. You're not telling me the expectations you had were higher than that?

[CiderArmyy]

I don't think playing boring or ugly is a choice anyone can make as an alternative to playing entertaining or something.

I think scrapping for points and getting them is a sign of a team working hard for each other, who are more interested in the 'team' doing well, rather than being a ball hog and trying step overs or something selfish and retarded, screw that. No, winning ugly is what Liverpool, Man U and all the great teams do so its pointless and unnecessary to start looking to place blame.

sorry to be off topic, but your avatar nearly had me in stitches..

[tinman-is-god]

I went to Swansea, and agree that it was fantastic away performance, defending in numbers and then hitting on the break occasionally. Thing is, that wasn't an away performance because that is how we play at home as well.

Indeed. We are better away because we set up to sit deep and hit them with pace - how on earth can Robbored think we are attacking?!

[Robbored]

Indeed. We are better away because we set up to sit deep and hit them with pace - how on earth can Robbored think we are attacking?!

How does a team score goals without attacking?

Any team that sets up with two wingers and two up front is an indication that said team will have the intention to attack.

When the opposition are on the front foot that obviouisly inhibits attacking play but the potential to break out quickly, as at Swansea remains.

[SC_Red]

How does a team score goals without attacking?

so by your own logic only 3 teams are worse at attacking than us.

seems like we're the 21st most entertaining side in the division using your guage.

[Robbored]

so by your own logic only 3 teams are worse at attacking than us.

seems like we're the 21st most entertaining side in the division using your guage.

I think you'll find that City have had more shots at goal than most teams. City are second/third in the Championship with that particular stat.

I guess you'll say that City must be shooting from their own half as you think City don't attack much.

[SC_Red]

I think you'll find that City have had more shots at goal than most teams. City are second/third in the Championship with that particular stat.

I guess you'll say that City must be shooting from their own half as you think City don't attack much.

I'm not the one making up the rules on how you judge how attacking a team is.

I havent said how attacking we are. I think Millens doing well in the circumstances and he has my full support just as the last manager did.

Werent city top of the shots at goal stats under Johnson too?

[Robbored]

Werent city top of the shots at goal stats under Johnson too?

I wouldn't know. I can't remember stats from that far back.

[SC_Red]

I wouldn't know. I can't remember stats from that far back.

strange for someone who uses that stat to decide how attacking a team is.

[NickJ]

I think you'll find that City have had more shots at goal than most teams. City are second/third in the Championship with that particular stat.

In the interests of factual accuracy, just to confirm that City are in fact not 2nd/3rd, but 22nd, in the shots on goal table, with 179 goals.

Lower are Sheff Utd and Palace with 175 and 165 respectively.

http://www.football-...4~20107,00.html

EDIT: In 2009/10 Bristol City finished 5th in the shots on goal table.

http://www.football-league.co.uk/page/ClubShooting/0,,10794~20097,00.html

[SC_Red]

In the interests of factual accuracy, just to confirm that City are in fact not 2nd/3rd, but 22nd, in the shots on goal table, with 179 goals.

Lower are Sheff Utd and Palace with 175 and 165 respectively.

http://www.football-...4~20107,00.html

EDIT: In 2009/10 Bristol City finished 5th in the shots on goal table.

http://www.football-league.co.uk/page/ClubShooting/0,,10794~20097,00.html

thanks Nick

[Slave to the rhythm]

In the interests of factual accuracy, just to confirm that City are in fact not 2nd/3rd, but 22nd, in the shots on goal table, with 179 goals.

Lower are Sheff Utd and Palace with 175 and 165 respectively.

http://www.football-...4~20107,00.html

Should be a cracker of a game against the Blades on Saturday then!

[dezgimed]

thanks Nick

For what? Providing you with Robbored was wrong fap material?

[SC_Red]

For what? Providing you with Robbored was wrong fap material?

for providing facts rather than guff.

[tinman-is-god]

I think you'll find that City have had more shots at goal than most teams. City are second/third in the Championship with that particular stat.

I guess you'll say that City must be shooting from their own half as you think City don't attack much.

Using your stats, we are 22nd at shots on goal. We are 22nd in goals scored. Are we therefore attacking? Think you need to research a little bit before you post mate, you've just shot yourself in the foot!

Also, sitting back and playing on the break is called playing on the counter, which is very different from playing attacking.

[Robbored]

Using your stats, we are 22nd at shots on goal. We are 22nd in goals scored. Are we therefore attacking? Think you need to research a little bit before you post mate, you've just shot yourself in the foot!

Oops!

I must have got the stats the wrong way around..

Its a good job I don't take myself very seriously.

[tinman-is-god]

Oops!

I must have got the stats the wrong way around..

Its a good job I don't take myself very seriously.

Is that an acceptance that we are not an attacking side on any criteria available?

[Robbored]

Is that an acceptance that we are not an attacking side on any criteria available?

Not at all.

Any team thats sets up in every game ( bar one half ) with two wingers and two strikers is set up to play attacking football.

Don't overlook the fact the other team will try to stop an attacking game and sometimes they succeed.