bearded_red Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 I'd say the most noticeable thing about the football we are playing this season is how high up the pitch we are retaining possession. We have all seen teams pass it along the backline and bore everyone to death, but are keeping the ball in the opposition's half and that is a major reason we have dominated recent games. There were spells on Tuesday night where we had Port Vale camped in their own box as we quickly move the ball around our midfield. It has to be said that we really are blessed with our three players in midfield, the confidence and ability they have on the ball stands out like a sore thumb at times in this league. We do go longer to Wilbraham at times, but in the last four games I haven't seen much aimless lumps up the pitch (Flint for the third goal was just a clearance), rather measured balls into Wilbraham which his excellent first touch enables us to keep the ball. The beauty of the current system also means that when we do play the ball into Wilbraham he isn't isolated and being asked to do an impossible job as he has Agard up there beside him and Freeman floating around in behind. The question of course as ever will be when we lose a couple of games and our current sky high confidence takes a slight dive. It is easy to want to get on the ball and knock it about when we're winning and playing well. It takes stronger characters to do so when the pressure is on and suddenly kicking it as far as you can as quickly as you can seems the easiest option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDBS36 Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 I admit it - I'm not a regular attender at our games, so I thought I'd ask on here... SC has a 'reputation' for being direct in his teams' style. Just watched the highlights from Tuesday, great away win but...are we really becoming a team who win by scoring from set pieces and a keeper's hoof downfield (great bit of defending mind...not (but a good finish))? Is that typical or just a pragmatic way to win away? The hoof ball you refer to was by a defender and it makes a hell of a differance to see the ball cleared to row z when we need to instead of fluffing about in our own penaty area Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCFC_Dan Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 the board are there to run the business side of things (and in the majority of cases finance a club) and should have no baring on the football side of things, Actually, that reminds me of another thing that's different this season: at Cotterill's insistence, the team now have a top-notch coach on which to travel to away games, and I presume he was behind the decision to spend two nights up in the north west ahead of the Fleetwood game. Relatively small things like that can make a big difference. If the players feel they're being given top class treatment then they should be inclined to behave like top class players and conversely penny-pinching over things can have a negative impact far greater than it should. It's good that the board are prepared to spend money in the right areas (even if it took the manager to make them do it). If spending a bit on a coach and nice hotels can get extra performance out of the existing players it's worth more than signing a new player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redcherryberry Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 i don't buy that for a second SC just used his money availabe more wisly then the last manager did, You believe what you want to but as ever your wrong. The budget what SC had to spend was far greater than that of SOD's mainly due to like Spudski said, the expensive dead wood in Fonts, Marv & Pearson etc finally moving on. Granted you need to still spend whatever money is available wisely & thus far it looks like SC has so full credit to him. Working closely with football people at City as I do then I can guarantee you, at the time if SC was offered the job prior to SOD taking it, he wouldn't of done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gasbuster Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 The difference between the start of this season & last = TEMPO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Casual Connoisseur Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 The last 20 of the first half we were pressed hard by Vale and hit it long to Agard countless tmes, obviously not his game. Rectified at half time and didn't happen again. 20 minutes! Get real. I didn't see that, I sa? some balls that were played poorly that were chased by Agard and I saw a few balls that were put in the channel for him to chase, some of which were useful in an NFL kind of way (keeping the opposition high in their own half),. That's football, we all see things in different ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Litoris Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 i don't buy that for a second SC just used his money availabe more wisly then the last manager did, Well it's an actual verifiable fact so you probably should buy it... Cotts is doing the job he was brought here to do. Win promotion. SOD was brought here to change the club from bottom to top and the board gave up at the first opportunity. Nowt wrong with that, but I do wonder how much better we are placed as a club to deal with the championship, and if we will make a better fist of making that our home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshtonGreat Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 I genuinely feel that SC is a far superior football manager than SOD. The former is a breath of fresh air: a positive leader who rallies fans and players alike. The latter came across as a negative, arrogant man who depressed a lot of fans, both with his tactics and his personality. SC's career record is superior to SOD's, and people can say 'given time, SOD would've achieved the success that SC has' all they like. He wouldn't have, and certainly not in the short space of time that SC has achieved it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talk Of The Town Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 How much has Cotterill spent, just out of interest? Bear in mind the 2 million received for Baldock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin1988 Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 i don't buy that for a second SC just used his money availabe more wisly then the last manager did, You should, as it's true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshtonGreat Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 Well it's an actual verifiable fact so you probably should buy it... Cotts is doing the job he was brought here to do. Win promotion. SOD was brought here to change the club from bottom to top and the board gave up at the first opportunity. Nowt wrong with that, but I do wonder how much better we are placed as a club to deal with the championship, and if we will make a better fist of making that our home. Gave up at the first opportunity? I hardly think so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Peacock Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 The manager is there for judgement because he is only judged on results on the pitch...something I find bemusing...as it wouldn't happen in any other line of business. That's not really true. The CEO is the Football Manager equivalent and generally loses his job when the results go wrong. The board, non-execs in particular, stay sitting on the gravy train. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Litoris Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 Gave up at the first opportunity? I hardly think so Good for you, but your postings suggest that you lack reason when it comes to SOD's tenure. That's your prerogative, but it doesn't make for any kind of debate. The point, obviously too subtle for you, was that they baulked at the first hurdle. That's true, and whether it was right or wrong long term is merely a matter of opinion. However, the whole point of a long term plan is you don't baulk. You see it through. We didn't and we've reverted to using our superior budget. No problem with that, we are a big fish in league 1, but when/if we step up to the championship we won't be, not even close. So are we now approaching it the same way as last time? Throwing money at it again? Cotts and Burt have proven they can be astute in the market so there is every chance that will bear more fruits than the GJ and Pete double team, Coppout, Millen and McInnes tenures but what if it doesn't? Are we going back to square one again? And at what point do we say as a club it's time to do things differently? I feel that Cotterill is the perfect man to get us out of this division with this plan. I don't know about further than that though. I don't think the club is set up to do it. Not yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dandare 1966 Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 Went to port vale we played good attacking football at a nice high tempo under a bit of pressure last ten minutes but dealt with it well . Spoke to a port vale fan afterwards and he said we were by far team he had seen this year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshtonGreat Posted September 19, 2014 Report Share Posted September 19, 2014 Good for you, but your postings suggest that you lack reason when it comes to SOD's tenure. That's your prerogative, but it doesn't make for any kind of debate. The point, obviously too subtle for you, was that they baulked at the first hurdle. That's true, and whether it was right or wrong long term is merely a matter of opinion. However, the whole point of a long term plan is you don't baulk. You see it through. We didn't and we've reverted to using our superior budget. No problem with that, we are a big fish in league 1, but when/if we step up to the championship we won't be, not even close. So are we now approaching it the same way as last time? Throwing money at it again? Cotts and Burt have proven they can be astute in the market so there is every chance that will bear more fruits than the GJ and Pete double team, Coppout, Millen and McInnes tenures but what if it doesn't? Are we going back to square one again? And at what point do we say as a club it's time to do things differently? I feel that Cotterill is the perfect man to get us out of this division with this plan. I don't know about further than that though. I don't think the club is set up to do it. Not yet. I don't need to debate SOD's tenure, because SOD did my debating for me. It's not that your point was too subtle, it was just inaccurate. Baulking at the first hurdle would have been to sack him after his side were relegated from the Championship with no fight whatsoever. But they didn't. Instead, they waited until he'd managed just two wins in 27 games, in the process turning Bristol City into a laughing stock, driving fans away and genuinely threatening a second consecutive relegation. People can argue all they like about having patience while the club is rebuilt from top to bottom, but life is too short to have waited for SOD to painstakingly revarnish every skirting board in the players' bar and valet every seat in the boardroom. By the time he'd made any serious inroads on the first team (which, let's face it, he hadn't by the time of his sacking), we'd have been staring non-league in the face. Even if he had finally turned us around and enjoyed similar success to his time at Doncaster... well, look where they ended up again after a few seasons. Obviously in an ideal world, Bristol City would rise to the pinnacle of European football using only home-grown talent, like some kind of latter-day Busby babes. Sure, Southampton and Swansea have achieved success by following this model, but in modern football they are very much exceptions to the rule, and the majority of clubs spend money to hit the big-time. Maybe it's dangerous in the long run, but I'd say Bristol City are in a better financial position than many to take the risk. And maybe I lack patience/have ADHD, but I'm prepared to sit back and enjoy the ride. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chivs Posted September 20, 2014 Report Share Posted September 20, 2014 You make a very valid point my friend... That is why I always think there should be greater transparency in any football Club, just so fans get a better understanding. For example...do you know the day to day activities and what experience and benefits are brought to the club by Jon Lansdown? Or any of the board for that matter. Managers get slated if things go wrong on the pitch...but never the board. If a manager does well on the pitch... the board take lots of credit. They are always in a total win win situation, because most is hidden from public consumption. The manager is there for judgement because he is only judged on results on the pitch...something I find bemusing...as it wouldn't happen in any other line of business. This club (like many I guess) is run like a hobby. I hope that the business prioritises as follows: 1) Win football matches 2) Sell tickets to the football matches 3) Provide a match-day experience that brings in greater revenue (e.g. catering, merchandise, corporate facilities) On this criteria, the first team manager should be held responsible for the first especially if the business has provided him with all the resources he requires. Lansdown (both) and the board should be responsible for the other 2. Generally they fail miserably with these and should be held accountable. But, it is a hobby, and we can't effect that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfieldred Posted September 20, 2014 Report Share Posted September 20, 2014 'Playing the 'long ball' is not hoof ball either...as long as it's aimed as a pass to a player, and not aimless. It is effective under the right conditions, and if play dictates that is the right decision to make.' The quality of the long ball is key and last season only Pack seemed able to pick out a decent long pass (about half the time). Ayling now does a great diagonal ball which finds either Little or Bryan. The percentage of ball retention is far higher than last season when taking the long ball options - also due to the quality of Wilbraham - I noticed in the games we drew, his ball retention wasn't as good. Ayling is quality and has more than one way of getting the ball out of defence. He can run it, pass accurately through the middle or do the long diagonal. This is what we were lacking in defence last season as they always did the same thing and that made the game easy to read for the opposition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.