Sensible Analysis ?

[longyears]

Let me start by saying I read the forum daily but rarely post - just feel the need today.

I have seen every home game this season and three away games so am not a keyboard lurker.

Not just me but fans I have travelled with, sat with, had a drink in the pub with and walked to the car with are all united.

We will not get anywhere with a strike force of Baldock and JET - only our clown of a head coach believes otherwise. Baldock needs a target man to feed from ( whatever his faults ) and JET is never that. JET is a selfish non team player who is a waste of space if he doesn't score ( which of course he often does ) - bit of a poor mans Greaves or Charlie Fleming really !

So I see three options:

1. Play Baldock, JET and ( say ) Taylor for 90 minutes every game. The risk - midfield is light and might get over run.

2. Drop JET as a luxury we can't afford and play Baldock and Taylor - the risk is dropping your top scorer.

3. Drop Baldock and play Taylor and JET - the risk - Taylor is a target man and would have no one running off him as JET would still be wandering around somewhere.

I would go for option one. It might not work and would be a risk but as at now our clown is going to get us relegated. Might as well go down fighting and attacking as playing the negative carp we do. In addition - as others have said - let us get some width and flair - we aint got much I know but at least give what we have got half a chance.

Two wins from the season so far, the worst in our division says it all. Draws aint gonna keep you up these days with a win worth three points.

And to the happy clappies - don't talk about SOD and his success at other clubs as he has none worth talking about. Danny Wilson has a far, far better record and you don't want him back.

End of analysis !

[Nibor]

Let me start by saying I read the forum daily but rarely post - just feel the need today.

I have seen every home game this season and three away games so am not a keyboard lurker.

Not just me but fans I have travelled with, sat with, had a drink in the pub with and walked to the car with are all united.

We will not get anywhere with a strike force of Baldock and JET - only our clown of a head coach believes otherwise. Baldock needs a target man to feed from ( whatever his faults ) and JET is never that. JET is a selfish non team player who is a waste of space if he doesn't score

So selfish he has double figures of assists and has been involved in nearly all the goals we've scored in some capacity. Honestly I think some people just fix a stereotype in their heads and see that instead of what actually happens in games. You did notice on Saturday for example the five or six times JET won flick ons that Baldock wasn't close enough to him to benefit from?

Only at Bristol City would a player have a record of 2 goals and 2 assists every 3 games and still be getting stick, it's ridiculous.

( which of course he often does ) - bit of a poor mans Greaves or Charlie Fleming really !

So I see three options:

1. Play Baldock, JET and ( say ) Taylor for 90 minutes every game. The risk - midfield is light and might get over run.

2. Drop JET as a luxury we can't afford and play Baldock and Taylor - the risk is dropping your top scorer.

3. Drop Baldock and play Taylor and JET - the risk - Taylor is a target man and would have no one running off him as JET would still be wandering around somewhere.

I would go for option one. It might not work and would be a risk but as at now our clown is going to get us relegated. Might as well go down fighting and attacking as playing the negative carp we do. In addition - as others have said - let us get some width and flair - we aint got much I know but at least give what we have got half a chance.

Two wins from the season so far, the worst in our division says it all. Draws aint gonna keep you up these days with a win worth three points.

And to the happy clappies - don't talk about SOD and his success at other clubs as he has none worth talking about. Danny Wilson has a far, far better record and you don't want him back.

End of analysis !

You'd go for option one with three centre forwards but you want width and flair? That doesn't jive really.

Option two is absurd. So is option three, you'd be relying even more on JET to score on his own.

I would go for option four - recognise that the problem is confidence rather than selections in the main, let things continue to improve when Reid is back and seek to add some width in January not that we've got Kilkenny moved on.

Failing that option five until we can bring some more width in: Harewood, Baldock and JET. Harewood is likely to be more effective than Taylor and we're so narrow anyway that losing the "wide" players and putting a three man midfield in there won't matter much.

[GrahamC]

Option three, though it doesn't have to be Taylor, it could just as easily be Harewood.

Let's face facts Baldock is as reliable one on one with the keeper as Danny Haynes is, so when you add that he's no aerial threat and the famed pace he is supposed to have has never materialised, he seemingly only gets in by virtue of being a likelier scorer than our 2 target men, which in Harewood's case I'm completely not sure of.

Secondly let's play JET up top, he's our best finisher and so should play there, especially as yesterday when our 4 man midfield included a left back and two central midfielders in Pack and Elliott who defend more than they attack.

By the way I don't think JET is lazy, just inconsistent of performance from time to time, which if he ironed out he'd play in The Prem, let alone The Championship.

[arpaul]

Let me start by saying I read the forum daily but rarely post - just feel the need today.

I have seen every home game this season and three away games so am not a keyboard lurker.

Not just me but fans I have travelled with, sat with, had a drink in the pub with and walked to the car with are all united.

We will not get anywhere with a strike force of Baldock and JET - only our clown of a head coach believes otherwise. Baldock needs a target man to feed from ( whatever his faults ) and JET is never that. JET is a selfish non team player who is a waste of space if he doesn't score ( which of course he often does ) - bit of a poor mans Greaves or Charlie Fleming really !

So I see three options:

1. Play Baldock, JET and ( say ) Taylor for 90 minutes every game. The risk - midfield is light and might get over run.

2. Drop JET as a luxury we can't afford and play Baldock and Taylor - the risk is dropping your top scorer.

3. Drop Baldock and play Taylor and JET - the risk - Taylor is a target man and would have no one running off him as JET would still be wandering around somewhere.

I would go for option one. It might not work and would be a risk but as at now our clown is going to get us relegated. Might as well go down fighting and attacking as playing the negative carp we do. In addition - as others have said - let us get some width and flair - we aint got much I know but at least give what we have got half a chance.

Two wins from the season so far, the worst in our division says it all. Draws aint gonna keep you up these days with a win worth three points.

And to the happy clappies - don't talk about SOD and his success at other clubs as he has none worth talking about. Danny Wilson has a far, far better record and you don't want him back.

End of analysis !

Very good post.

 

One big difference between O' Driscolls side and Danny Wilsons side, is that under Wilson, we regained possession much higher up field, and constantly kept our opponents on the back foot.

Unfortunately, todays team are so easy to play against. Sheffield Unite were dire yesterday, yet I'm pretty certain they too had one of their easiest 90 minutes of this season.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

Option three, though it doesn't have to be Taylor, it could just as easily be Harewood.

Let's face facts Baldock is as reliable one on one with the keeper as Danny Haynes is, so when you add that he's no aerial threat and the famed pace he is supposed to have has never materialised, he seemingly only gets in by virtue of being a likelier scorer than our 2 target men, which in Harewood's case I'm completely not sure of.

Secondly let's play JET up top, he's our best finisher and so should play there, especially as yesterday when our 4 man midfield included a left back and two central midfielders in Pack and Elliott who defend more than they attack.

By the way I don't think JET is lazy, just inconsistent of performance from time to time, which if he ironed out he'd play in The Prem, let alone The Championship.

 

I agree with that from what i've seen, the problem is we have become so reliant upon him that if he fails to score or provide, he is an easy target.

 

As i've said in the past SOD has created a monster with JET and unless he can come up with either 3 man midfield or a back 3, 2 upfront is a non starter. 

 

 

[Fiale]

Never mind.

.

[OneManMob]

So selfish he has double figures of assists and has been involved in nearly all the goals we've scored in some capacity. Honestly I think some people just fix a stereotype in their heads and see that instead of what actually happens in games. You did notice on Saturday for example the five or six times JET won flick ons that Baldock wasn't close enough to him to benefit from?

Only at Bristol City would a player have a record of 2 goals and 2 assists every 3 games and still be getting stick, it's ridiculous.

You'd go for option one with three centre forwards but you want width and flair? That doesn't jive really.

 

 

Whilst I kinda agree on the flip side our tactic going forward is pass it too JET and see what he can do so hes bound to have more assists than anyone else

[GodEmperor Palpatine]

Wilson was a great manager for us and really enjoyed watching his football, I would like SO'D to stay but if he doesn't and board decide to axe then Wilson would be more than welcome by me at AG.

 

Unfortunately given the circumstances and why he was sacked, I doubt he would want to come back with the Lansdowns at the helm.

[Rich_s]

Welcome aboard!

It would have to be option 3 as I believe that in option 1 we would concede too many. SOD knows this too. Based on his goals and assists you simply cannot drop JET.  Plus he's literally the only entertainment within the team.

 

It's not just his goals though it is ability to hold the ball and complete a pass. I was watching him yesterday and granted it was not his best performance but he literally completes an accurate pass from any position. He's the only player we have that can do that.

 

Our biggest issue is the midfield. No movement. It's so static it's like looking at Burtons shop window. We play with little width, to the completely ire of the City faithful who by and large are bred on a diet of wing play. I believe the way SOD has the team playing is little more than a damage limitation formation, which unfortunately makes it dull as ditch water to watch.

[Nibor]

Whilst I kinda agree on the flip side our tactic going forward is pass it too JET and see what he can do so hes bound to have more assists than anyone else

I'm not sure our reliance on JET takes anything away from him? The fact that we can rely on him so heavily should surely mean that this continual criticism of laziness which seems to be based on nothing other than his running style (because it's not based on his workrate) ought to be recognised as nonsense?

We do need more creativity, but how we achieve that by taking JET out of the side or asking him to tackle back more is beyond me. I think if we've freed up some wages with Kilkenny moving on we might see some changes in January particular with us not having to pay for O'Connor after mid Jan and Shorey's deal being up too.

[Cap flinger]

I think Junior Bent would give Baldock a run for his money in one on one's!

[Alex_BCFC]

Seeing as JET has scored 14 and set up 9? you could never consider dropping him as we would barely ever score without him.

 

SOD got Doncaster and Bournemouth promoted on limited resources and you don't call that successful? Odd.

[Esmond Million's Bung]

Seeing as JET has scored 14 and set up 9? you could never consider dropping him as we would barely ever score without him.

 

SOD got Doncaster and Bournemouth promoted on limited resources and you don't call that successful? Odd.

 

Why should he be treated differently to any other manager?, GJ got nothing until he got us promoted, even though he had had success with limited resources at Yeovil.

 

Name one english football league manager with his overall record at BCFC that has kept his job?.

 

 

 

[Alex_BCFC]

Why should he be treated differently to any other manager?, GJ got nothing until he got us promoted, even though he had had success with limited resources at Yeovil.

 

Name one english football league manager with his overall record at BCFC that has kept his job?.

I'm not saying he should be treated differently. The original poster said he had no success at other clubs worth talking about.

[Fiale]

Why should he be treated differently to any other manager?, GJ got nothing until he got us promoted, even though he had had success with limited resources at Yeovil.

Name one english football league manager with his overall record at BCFC that has kept his job?.

No BCFC manager has ever kept his job irrespective of record have they ? Have any just worked their contact fully and then moved on without being sacked out resigning ?

[Esmond Million's Bung]

I'm not saying he should be treated differently. The original poster said he had no success at other clubs worth talking about.

 

Fair enough, that's just not true of course, but i'm only interested at what he has done/doing at BCFC.

 

 

[Taylor10]

Another option....play with some good damn width!! Just once!! please bloody try it!!

 

I would either play 4-2-3-1 with JET in behind Taylor or Harewood. I would also play Burns wide right and Bryan wide left.

 

If not I would go for a 4-3-3 with JET in a central striker role doing what he wants with Burns and Bryan out wide.

[glynriley]

Another option....play with some good damn width!! Just once!! please bloody try it!!

 

I would either play 4-2-3-1 with JET in behind Taylor or Harewood. I would also play Burns wide right and Bryan wide left.

 

If not I would go for a 4-3-3 with JET in a central striker role doing what he wants with Burns and Bryan out wide.

 

Haven't you heard, width is a myth!

 

My god man, wingers are so last year, don't you know anything about modern day football, are you stuck in the 70's or something?

 

 

 

Oh nearly forgot a few swear words. So sprinkle these around liberally  ****, ******, ****.

 

 

 

Oh and, braindead, knuckle draggers, neanderthals.

 

 

 

I think that just about covers it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Aizoon]

I think we now have an algorithm for OTIB posting. Thank you, Mr Riley.

[italian dave]

80% analysis: I agree with some of it, not all (eg JET). But that's opinions, differents takes etc - what this forum is all about.

Sadly though, 20% is anything but analysis and more like abuse. Why the need to use terms like 'clown' and 'happy clapper'??

[Taylor10]

Haven't you heard, width is a myth!

My god man, wingers are so last year, don't you know anything about modern day football, are you stuck in the 70's or something?

Oh nearly forgot a few swear words. So sprinkle these around liberally ****, ******, ****.

Oh and, braindead, knuckle draggers, neanderthals.

I think that just about covers it.

Sorry Glynner! I really do need to get with the times with all this width malarkey don't I!? The sooner I can bring myself to accept that 'width' is in fact a myth, the sooner I can appreciate narrow and rigid displays!

Anyway who needs this width they all speak of??

We have a plan B....Marlon Harewood!!

I will stop panicking now

[The Right Honourable Les Q]

Sorry Glynner! I really do need to get with the times with all this width malarkey don't I!? The sooner I can bring myself to accept that 'width' is in fact a myth, the sooner I can appreciate narrow and rigid displays!

Anyway who needs this width they all speak of??

We have a plan B....Marlon Harewood!!

I will stop panicking now

I always believed (or hoped) that width was irrelevant. It's what you do with it, really. That's, er, what I was told?

[The Right Honourable Les Q]

The sooner I can bring myself to accept that 'width' is in fact a myth, the sooner I can appreciate narrow and rigid displays!

Rigid is pretty important. Can't see how it will work without this, shirley?

[The Right Honourable Les Q]

I'm really not up to any "display," of any sort, though. Rigid or otherwise

[longyears]

80% analysis: I agree with some of it, not all (eg JET). But that's opinions, differents takes etc - what this forum is all about.

Sadly though, 20% is anything but analysis and more like abuse. Why the need to use terms like 'clown' and 'happy clapper'??

What a strange post ! Happy clapper is in the OED and is certainly not abusive. As for clown he will get called far worse on this forum everyday and far far worse if we go down !

[GodEmperor Palpatine]

What a strange post ! Happy clapper is in the OED and is certainly not abusive. As for clown he will get called far worse on this forum everyday and far far worse if we go down !

 

Happy clapper is just a poor buzzword being floated around as is a 'negative nigel'.

 

Irrespective of whether you are for or against the manager at the end of the day we are all supporters. But the term happy clapper is ******* embarrassing to be perfectly honest.

[Drew Peacock]

I think we now have an algorithm for OTIB posting. Thank you, Mr Riley.

 

Excellent.

 

Let's go mining for Bitpoints.

[italian dave]

What a strange post ! Happy clapper is in the OED and is certainly not abusive. As for clown he will get called far worse on this forum everyday and far far worse if we go down !

There's lots of words in the OED that are far worse than that - and absolutely abusive.

 

My point is that the title of this thread claimed to be 'sensible analysis' and I dont think that abuse, name calling, call it what you will, is helpful analysis.

 

You and I can have a sensible debate about whether words being in the OED mean they arent abuse, about whether name calling and abuse are the same thing and so on. But if all I do is to come on and say that you're a clown - well that's not debate and its certainly not analysis.

[Taylor10]

I always believed (or hoped) that width was irrelevant. It's what you do with it, really. That's, er, what I was told?

So did I....but I was clearly very wrong!!

[glynriley]

So did I....but I was clearly very wrong!!

 

Width is a myth

 

But girth is mirth.