So for all you 'sack the manager short termists'....

[Nogbad the Bad]

18 minutes ago, Bobfish said:

Please, Cott’s was always for the here and now, his non-filling a bench and thus complete disregard for the youth setup is testament to that. It is well documented throughout these forums how he didn’t adopt the five pillars and went his own way, hiring people who did the same, splitting the club behind the scenes. No doubt this non-supporting of the club's plan influenced his non-support in the transfer market, although the idea of a "top striker" signing for a newly promoted side from league one is niave. The frailties of last season were evident throughout the league one campaign, for example wing backs/full backs who can’t defend – ailing when played out on the right and bryan on the left (with Cunningham who could defend being pushed out by Cotts.) In league one these deficits were evident, but mattered less as we “Kevin keegan-ed” through the league, outscoring our weaknesses. But the championship is not as forgiving. I thank Cotts for what he did for us, but what he didn’t do has caused us to suffer. Splashing big money on a big name striker may have won a few more points and a couple of league positions, until a bigger club steal them, but it won’t teach defensive midfielders to pass or how to track runs, full backs how to position themselves, keepers how to distribute the ball, or centre backs how to not just lump the ball upfield like they were playing rugby. All these faults we see week in and out were present two seasons ago and burying one’s head in the sand surprisingly did not solve them. That is not thinking ahead. That is thinking for the here and now.  An astute manager would have prepared for this when it was evident so early on that promotion was in the bag. Cott’s never changed, never adapted, never tried to fix the gaps, and just thought he could buy security in the championship with a few million – that is not understanding the jump between the leagues. Steamrolling league one may have blinded him, and many now angry fans, to the qualities and deficits of our game.

You said, 'Cotts. team was bought for the now - i.e. L1.'

I gave you a list of young players signed by Cotterill, all with genuine potential to become quality Championship performers.

It was always the idea they would form the nucleus of a BCFC Championship team, enhanced with the quality additions necessary for them to adapt to the new level and for the whole team to thrive there.

So your assertion was simply wrong.

[Nogbad the Bad]

10 minutes ago, Emperor Palpatine said:

Actually Nog its in response to your post about that it seemed all rosy under SC or how great it was on the pitch or should we say spirit of the squad which was dissected. 

I'm merely replying to others my view if thats ok with you, after all this is a forum right? Plenty of others pro or con have brought him up.

You and others like to bring up SO'D, maybe I should haul you up on that 

You should look through your postings over the last week or so.

To say you've been prolific in defence of LJ would be an understatement, you've taken on all comers and I can assure you I'd seen you bring up Cotterill in a large number of posts, quite unnecessarily, before I was moved to respond.

 

[Gillies Downs Leeds]

21 hours ago, Northern Red said:

He's been talking up Di Girolamo recently too, saying he'd be playing if it wasn't for Tomlin. Wouldn't surprise me to see him get a go against Fleetwood. 

 

21 hours ago, Gillies Downs Leeds said:

Think he will be at Cheltenham before the end of the transfer window,

[GodEmperor Palpatine]

4 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

You should look through your postings over the last week or so.

To say you've been prolific in defence of LJ would be an understatement, you've taken on all comers and I can assure you I'd seen you bring up Cotterill in a large number of posts, quite unnecessarily, before I was moved to respond.

 

Yep I have been prolific in the defence of LJ. I believe that some of the criticism in regards to wanting the club to lose to get rid of the manager or boycott games is very much OTT.

And hardly regarding Cotterill, some have made him out to be untouchable which is 100% wrong as his record last season is a testament to that. I've merely responded to comments about SC including yourself. 

[samo II]

9 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

Samo, what I'm saying is the fans - mostly - stayed with GJ during the losing run. He wasn't 'public enemy no.1'.

There was a period, perhaps in the Jan/Feb, when GJ was being severely questioned, mostly for lack of transfer activity, some poor displays, supposedly good players being sent out on loan and replaced by similar or worse, not playing Marcus Stewart etc.

And a few fans had made no secret that he simply got on their nerves, and wouldn't have minded if he was 'poached' like Pulis.

A fairly short period of sustained criticism though because we went on to finish the season strongly, and looked well set up to challenge the next.

I think that is probably fair; I was perhaps OTT in the public enemy comment.

 

[Nogbad the Bad]

15 minutes ago, Emperor Palpatine said:

Yep I have been prolific in the defence of LJ. I believe that some of the criticism in regards to wanting the club to lose to get rid of the manager or boycott games is very much OTT.

And hardly regarding Cotterill, some have made him out to be untouchable which is 100% wrong as his record last season is a testament to that. I've merely responded to comments about SC including yourself. 

No you absolutely haven't. Wade through your unprecedented volume of posts over the last week or 10 days.

You've been posting like a dervish and if you didn't keep bringing up Cotterill all the time he'd hardly be getting a mention on this forum.

You tag comments about SC on to your posts all the time, often for no apparent reason, and mention him more than any other poster on this forum.

If you don't want a response try to stop obsessively talking about him so much - it would be a relief to all of us, and probably to you too!

[Bobfish]

42 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

You said, 'Cotts. team was bought for the now - i.e. L1.'

I gave you a list of young players signed by Cotterill, all with genuine potential to become quality Championship performers.

It was always the idea they would form the nucleus of a BCFC Championship team, enhanced with the quality additions necessary for them to adapt to the new level and for the whole team to thrive there.

So your assertion was simply wrong.

Wow. Thanks for such a considered, thought out response. I can see that you have read my posts with thoughtful diligence.

I have this crazy idea that young players maybe need to be “coached” to improve the areas of their game that they are deficient in? You know, so they can adapt and improve their game? Buying a player who is young is not enough to ensure their potential. Did the frailties that I discussed at length improve over Cott’s reign? No. Did he listen to Pembo’s complaints on our defensive shambles? No. If the manager was too blind to see the team’s failings that he did not see fit to alter the style or tactics to address the frailties in a team, I can hardly see that he worked individually to improve a young player’s game, especially with the contempt he held for our youth system (remember the non-filling of the bench? The youth players leaving our academy? The large emphasis after Cotts left that we had a clear path from youth to first team in an attempt to repair the damage?) The fact that LJ has now hired an extra coach to help them focus on 1-1 ing with players to improve their game, as well as the replacement of the u23 coach, shows how much the previous set up “worked” on our young players’ potential. Have you noticed the new focus on loaning them out to get "men's football?" The mention of academy products all the time? Plus the evidence is on the pitch, those players from Cott’s reign have in the majority not adapted well in one and a half season's worth of championship football. Or do you see something else?

 

[GodEmperor Palpatine]

3 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

No you absolutely haven't. Wade through your unprecedented volume of posts over the last week or 10 days.

You've been posting like a dervish and if you didn't keep bringing up Cotterill all the time he'd hardly be getting a mention on this forum.

You tag comments about SC on to your posts all the time, often for no apparent reason, and mention him more than any other poster on this forum.

If you don't want a response try to stop obsessively talking about him so much - it would be a relief to all of us, and probably to you too!

Yes I have... I've barely brought up SC unless its a response to someone saying he wasn't a fault or his record last season.

Stop trying to spin that I'm the obsessive, you don't seem to haul up others who are in defence of him which shows your posts regarding myself are irrelevant.

Go and tell others who bring him up without no precedent to... oh thats right, you wont because you agree with them.

[GodEmperor Palpatine]

3 minutes ago, Bobfish said:

Wow. Thanks for such a considered, thought out response. I can see that you have read my posts with thoughtful diligence.

 

 

I have this crazy idea that young players maybe need to be “coached” to improve the areas of their game that they are deficient in? You know, so they can adapt and improve their game? Buying a player who is young is not enough to ensure their potential. Did the frailties that I discussed at length improve over Cott’s reign? No. Did he listen to Pembo’s complaints on our defensive shambles? No. If the manager was too blind to see the team’s failings that he did not see fit to alter the style or tactics to address the frailties in a team, I can hardly see that he worked individually to improve a young player’s game, especially with the contempt he held for our youth system (remember the non-filling of the bench? The youth players leaving our academy? The large emphasis after Cotts left that we had a clear path from youth to first team in an attempt to repair the damage?) The fact that LJ has now hired an extra coach to help them focus on 1-1 ing with players to improve their game, as well as the replacement of the u23 coach, shows how much the previous set up “worked” on our young players’ potential. Have you noticed the new focus on loaning them out to get "men's football?" The mention of academy products all the time? Plus the evidence is on the pitch, those players from Cott’s reign have in the majority not adapted well in one and a half season's worth of championship football. Or do you see something else?

 

 

He doesn't because he's totally blinkered and wont accept criticism of SC

Careful though, he'll label you obsessive for having a different opinion...

For the record I agree 100% with you but as I'm now prohibited I wont debate in fear of becoming further obsessive

[GodEmperor Palpatine]

1 hour ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

No you absolutely haven't. Wade through your unprecedented volume of posts over the last week or 10 days.

You've been posting like a dervish and if you didn't keep bringing up Cotterill all the time he'd hardly be getting a mention on this forum.

You tag comments about SC on to your posts all the time, often for no apparent reason, and mention him more than any other poster on this forum.

If you don't want a response try to stop obsessively talking about him so much - it would be a relief to all of us, and probably to you too!

And just to add to dispel you're pretty much garbage post quite frankly, I've just been back through my posts in the last week and have mentioned what we are talking about less than 25% of my posts so really all the time? you are indeed wrong on that score and lo and behold the majority was in relation to what someone else had posted.

Nice try though... maybe you shouldn't be obsessing over my posts full stop

[Jack Dawe]

 

5 hours ago, Davefevs said:

 

I think LJ thought that the signings of GON, Tomlin, O'Neil and to some extent Matthews meant that we were well placed to continue the form from the end of last season, and recruitment could focus on players with potential, who could take 6-12 months to get up to speed.

That is a key part of Lee's job as I see it though, Dave. Making these assessments. That's what Lee is paid to do, and paid very well. He is paid to get enough of them right. The more he gets right, the less "managing" he has to do afterwards. 

Lee talked in a Guardian interview last summer about "emotional intelligence" is what "separates the men from the boys" in football coaches. And it is emotional intelligence he would've used in assessing Matthews, and Tomlin. It's not like he hadn't worked with either of them.

So, if the rumours are true, and these two are now part of the problem, then who is accountable? 

 

I know that he hasn't been here long, that he says he needs 3 windows, but

6 hours ago, Davefevs said:

   Its a brutal division.

Can we afford, at this level of football, in which we have struggled terribly too often before, to have a coach that thought a couple of players would be the answer, but turned out to be the problem?

Can we "carry" a "rookie" coach in this league, while we wait for him to make his inevitable mistakes, and learn his lessons? Derby probably can, or Leeds, or one of the other big hitters, but us? In this "brutal" league?

That's the panic for many of us, after 10 defeats in 13 games.

It does seem "brutal" to be holding Lee to account so soon into his time here, but we know what happens to us in this league when we get in a muddle.

 

If they - Matthews and Tomlin, their attitude; or the senior players - are the problem, that is. I don't know. And I'm not calling for Lee's head. I'm just asking questions. Because I don't know. I don't know what is the best way forward, or the way out of this latest slump.

 

For 90 minutes tomorrow, though, I will be supporting the team and Lee 100% (then probably back on here after. Asking more questions....)

 

 

[Davefevs]

Nice response @Jack Dawe - I said in another post that I'm starting to ask a few questions too.  Results will answer those.

As each game goes by, we'll find answers or more questions.

Tomorrow's starting eleven is going to be interesting....or maybe it won't! 

Preston seems an age ago.  Desperate for a result tomorrow!

[WECANDO]

We need to pick the correct players who will get out there and use their pace to good effect. In other words get forward to support Abraham and get back to protect the back four. So the keeper. I'm never happy with Fielding. He isn't the sort of sizeable keeper that centre backs or fans have confidence in. So Lucic starts for me but with a word to cut out so many short dodgy passes. Only do so if defenders are well and truelly in the clear. Back four has to be Matthews, Moore in Hordurs absence, Flint and Golbourne. The crunch midfield. For me O'Dowda, Reid, Brownhill and Patterson. All pretty fit and pacey. Tomlin to support Abraham but told firmly he has to shift his ass or Enkvall gets on. Then of course, top man Abraham. As I said the midfield four are the crucial players who have to get back with pace when attacks break down. When we get near the box, shoot and follow up if the keeper spills it. That leaves us with Wilbs a bit slow but puts in a shift and encourages everyone. Freeman the step over king. I'd tell him to be more direct and belt the ball when he gets near the goal. Smith, obviously struggling a bit. So need to handle him carefully. Let him out on loan to Cheltenham with an immediate recall clause. Get him fit plus raise confidence in a lower league.  Bryan just isn't a back four defender is he? Bring him on if O'Dowda struggles. But in training get him to work on more aggressive running. Always seems to hold back and not give the appearance of someone going for it. Pack works hard and is good at what he does i.e. mops up and plays it simple. At one point he was pushing forward and getting into opponents penalty areas but seems to have stopped that. O'Neil is an all action player who needs to keep to his position and not run all over the place leaving gaps. But good to have in the squad. I'm hopeful we will start fast tomorrow, close them down fast and give them no space and get that all important early goal. COYRs. 

[Davefevs]

10 minutes ago, WECANDO said:

We need to pick the correct players who will get out there and use their pace to good effect. In other words get forward to support Abraham and get back to protect the back four. So the keeper. I'm never happy with Fielding. He isn't the sort of sizeable keeper that centre backs or fans have confidence in. So Lucic starts for me but with a word to cut out so many short dodgy passes. Only do so if defenders are well and truelly in the clear. Back four has to be Matthews, Moore in Hordurs absence, Flint and Golbourne. The crunch midfield. For me O'Dowda, Reid, Brownhill and Patterson. All pretty fit and pacey. Tomlin to support Abraham but told firmly he has to shift his ass or Enkvall gets on. Then of course, top man Abraham. As I said the midfield four are the crucial players who have to get back with pace when attacks break down. When we get near the box, shoot and follow up if the keeper spills it. That leaves us with Wilbs a bit slow but puts in a shift and encourages everyone. Freeman the step over king. I'd tell him to be more direct and belt the ball when he gets near the goal. Smith, obviously struggling a bit. So need to handle him carefully. Let him out on loan to Cheltenham with an immediate recall clause. Get him fit plus raise confidence in a lower league.  Bryan just isn't a back four defender is he? Bring him on if O'Dowda struggles. But in training get him to work on more aggressive running. Always seems to hold back and not give the appearance of someone going for it. Pack works hard and is good at what he does i.e. mops up and plays it simple. At one point he was pushing forward and getting into opponents penalty areas but seems to have stopped that. O'Neil is an all action player who needs to keep to his position and not run all over the place leaving gaps. But good to have in the squad. I'm hopeful we will start fast tomorrow, close them down fast and give them no space and get that all important early goal. COYRs. 

Sorry, the loan rules have changed.  They are half or full season only.  For full season loans, both clubs can agree a recall clause in the winter window.

[Jerseybean]

The way I see it.

Clearly recent results and performances have not been good enough. We over-achieved at the start of the season; despite never playing consistently well. We know we are a work in progress and the strategy is to build for future success. Confidence is critical and given the last two months ours will be low.

We are currently in a dilemma with results and our league position is becoming a major concern. There is growing frustration and anger which is being largely directed at the manager and certain players (others sometimes come in for it too.)

We have three options:

1) Accept that the manager is following the agreed strategy and allow him to continue.
2) Adopt a different strategy. 
3) Sack the manager and find someone else who will - hopefully more successfully - fulfil the strategy.

My conclusion is that we are following the right strategy and LJ should be given more time and supported/enabled to implement the strategy. This is based upon realistically weighing-up the short-term against the long-term. I really do believe our strategy is the right one and recognise it will take time to mature. I don't see us being relegated and accept that we are a developing work in progress so there will be lots of downs and a few ups - which is what you get as a City fan.

If we manage a good transfer window which adds experience and strengthens key positions, sell a couple who are not part of the future and record a few wins, things will look and feel very different in a month or two.

Finally, happy New Year to City fans everywhere. I'm off to find my tin hat.

[BobBobSuperBob]

14 minutes ago, Jerseybean said:

The way I see it.

Clearly recent results and performances have not been good enough. We over-achieved at the start of the season; despite never playing consistently well. We know we are a work in progress and the strategy is to build for future success. Confidence is critical and given the last two months ours will be low.

We are currently in a dilemma with results and our league position is becoming a major concern. There is growing frustration and anger which is being largely directed at the manager and certain players (others sometimes come in for it too.)

We have three options:

1) Accept that the manager is following the agreed strategy and allow him to continue.
2) Adopt a different strategy. 
3) Sack the manager and find someone else who will - hopefully more successfully - fulfil the strategy.

My conclusion is that we are following the right strategy and LJ should be given more time and supported/enabled to implement the strategy. This is based upon realistically weighing-up the short-term against the long-term. I really do believe our strategy is the right one and recognise it will take time to mature. I don't see us being relegated and accept that we are a developing work in progress so there will be lots of downs and a few ups - which is what you get as a City fan.

If we manage a good transfer window which adds experience and strengthens key positions, sell a couple who are not part of the future and record a few wins, things will look and feel very different in a month or two.

Finally, happy New Year to City fans everywhere. I'm off to find my tin hat.

I'd say it was the chosen method of play / tactics are the issue above the 'strategy' (By which I assume you mean ?developing younger players), certainly the immediate concern

On the overall strategy , I'm for it in principle ,  but surely any club would get there first team 15/16  in order and then add younger additions to the squad with a view to developing them

Wouldnt they ?

It may be true what other posters have highlighted that LJ could have expected a far better return from our experienced / 'have pedigree' pros (Wilbs being the one exception, and complete opposite in terms of impact/return)

Not sure about Lees man management skills tbh , outing players post match is not normally a great strategy - SAF would never out an individual publicly , and love him or loathe him , he wasn't a bad manager ( Head Coach )

 

[MarkRed!]

Hey don't worry all, we are opening "Marina Dolman Way" tomorrow - that should lift the mood and just shows the priorities being pursued by those above.....ffs.

[REDOXO]

Some great posts in the last page. 

I suppose we have all had a couple of cooling off days.

For the record. My view is Most were right bhind GJ during that horrible run. It had to happen as the dressing room was out of order and GJ was perfect for that period 

As for LJ, I WANT TO BELIEVE. But the evidence is starting to be compelling. I want to be wrong and like the rest of us am desperate for something tomorrow to hang onto as is SL  

As for dressing room problems now. Firstly it something we have had issues with on and off since the mid eighties. Sometimes it's been weak management, sometimes poor management, but discipline is a management issue. However when staff, whether they are footballers or Aircraft Fitters, loose confidence in management you will get discipline issues. 

Is this what's happening now? I don't know, some are speculating openly (I guess I am) and some purport to know, but it's not a stretch to think there are based upon what there is to see, which is the first team on match day and some very odd tactics, selections and demeanors 

LJ sounds confident but that's easy. We need to show confidence all over the pitch and get a couple of goals that would help. If we lose tomorrow there will be a board meeting minimum I suspect. 

Lastly Emperor Palpatine. Who were you previously?

[REDOXO]

21 minutes ago, MarkRed! said:

Hey don't worry all, we are opening "Marina Dolman Way" tomorrow - that should lift the mood and just shows the priorities being pursued by those above.....ffs.

It means the entire board will be in attendance at the game, thus I suspect there will be plenty of talking by those above, particularly if we lose!

[Jerseybean]

40 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

I'd say it was the chosen method of play / tactics are the issue above the 'strategy' (By which I assume you mean ?developing younger players), certainly the immediate concern

On the overall strategy , I'm for it in principle ,  but surely any club would get there first team 15/16  in order and then add younger additions to the squad with a view to developing them

Wouldnt they ?

It may be true what other posters have highlighted that LJ could have expected a far better return from our experienced / 'have pedigree' pros (Wilbs being the one exception, and complete opposite in terms of impact/return)

Not sure about Lees man management skills tbh , outing players post match is not normally a great strategy - SAF would never out an individual publicly , and love him or loathe him , he wasn't a bad manager ( Head Coach )

 

Thanks BBSB. Yes I was meaning (among other things) the development of younger players. I think re the first team it's about getting the right balance and with the addition of a couple of experienced players we should be OK, by the way I also think we have too many similiar kind of players at the mo. As for his man management skills think the jury is still out; he genuinely tries to offer an honest and considered  analysis which at times will likely mean somebody is highlighted either positively or negatively.

 

[Olé]

10 hours ago, Bobfish said:

By breaking eggs, I mean that SL either has to give up the philosophy he signed LJ for and resort to a more direct and bland style, hoping for just above relegation for a year or two, or open his wallet and allow LJ to replace a few players with those that are technically able enough to play this modern style under the pressure and pace of the championship.

Really interesting stuff @Bobfish, thank you. All logical and plausible reasons for the predicament, and a contribution I had not seen recently in defence of LJ. With that said, I'm really not sure I agree that it's simply that the players aren't able to adapt to "high pressing, possession" tactics, as I've seen no evidence of us trying to play those tactics - I see something else: players who appear to have the ability and stamina, playing awkwardly within themselves in a shape that doesn't afford any support for building attacking possession, nor for pressing in the opposition half. We're too deep and regressive and I see it as instruction.

Nonetheless I will certainly watch tomorrow with your comments in mind and hope for evidence that I've got it wrong. And if by 'breaking eggs' the answer is for SL to allow LJ to spend big sums to bring in players that can play high pressing, possession football for 90+ minutes, I'm more than a little nervous this is a convenient ask for a head coach who has already spent more than any other City manager, without apparently fulfilling that requirement in his recent crop. Am 100% with you on 4-4-2 (diamond or otherwise) and agree that we desperately need some proper quality full backs for this and hope that's incoming #1 and 2.

By the way, Olé is not short for Oliver, and I didn't go to Hanham - it's a nod to growing up in Portugal and the universal language of celebrating good football!* *appropriately enough dispensed with by Portugal in 2016 in order to win big - proving winning football is about keeping it simple and getting basics right! 

[Nogbad the Bad]

6 hours ago, Bobfish said:

Wow. Thanks for such a considered, thought out response. I can see that you have read my posts with thoughtful diligence.

 

 

I have this crazy idea that young players maybe need to be “coached” to improve the areas of their game that they are deficient in? You know, so they can adapt and improve their game? Buying a player who is young is not enough to ensure their potential. Did the frailties that I discussed at length improve over Cott’s reign? No. Did he listen to Pembo’s complaints on our defensive shambles? No. If the manager was too blind to see the team’s failings that he did not see fit to alter the style or tactics to address the frailties in a team, I can hardly see that he worked individually to improve a young player’s game, especially with the contempt he held for our youth system (remember the non-filling of the bench? The youth players leaving our academy? The large emphasis after Cotts left that we had a clear path from youth to first team in an attempt to repair the damage?) The fact that LJ has now hired an extra coach to help them focus on 1-1 ing with players to improve their game, as well as the replacement of the u23 coach, shows how much the previous set up “worked” on our young players’ potential. Have you noticed the new focus on loaning them out to get "men's football?" The mention of academy products all the time? Plus the evidence is on the pitch, those players from Cott’s reign have in the majority not adapted well in one and a half season's worth of championship football. Or do you see something else?

 

 

That's OK, Bob.

My only reason for commenting on your earlier post was to point out that your statement, 'Cotts bought players for the now -i.e L1' was imo. incorrect.

The policy was clearly to buy young players not only for the now ( i.e. getting out of L1) but who could also serve City higher up once promotion was achieved.

So, very similar to Barnsley's policy in your original comparison.

As for your other comments, they are wide ranging and really not relevant to our initial point of contention, and I'm not interested in getting embroiled in masses of side arguments.

[Olé]

7 hours ago, Dynamite Red said:

And so are the opposition. How many games have we been dependant on Frankie making incredible saves or goal line clearances. Yes we are wasteful but we don't create enough guilt edge chances compared to the opposition.

Absolutely this - I was going to respond to @Emperor Palpatine's point on this too.

There's been a number of comments recently about us creating enough chances to win games and this being enough evidence it will turn - and it just doesn't chime with what I've seen. In addition to plenty of opposition chances, I'm routinely seeing a dearth of chances for us and those created being far from clear cut. We're not unlocking defences or putting a cross on the head of a player with just the keeper to beat.

In recent weeks I've only really seen us create and miss two types of chances, lightweight balls into Tammy who has to hold off a defender and get a snap shot on goal from an angle (the weakness/lack of accuracy in the finish often reflecting the strength required just to deal with the defender) OR attacking midfielder on the edge of the box in space, needing to pick a route to shoot through a crowd (often instead putting it over).

Neither of these are high frequency/probability chances without the best finishers in the country. Even the first 20 versus Preston was more good possession than clear chances. We're not missing sitters. I don't know what data you could use to validate chances created, but if this is what our Shots On/Off Target says, then that stat isn't helpful and isn't telling the story of the quality of chances we're producing.

As it happens, I don't recall LJ using chances created as an excuse anytime recently, so he at least is seeing the same game as others?

[Bobfish]

53 minutes ago, Olé said:

Really interesting stuff @Bobfish, thank you. All logical and plausible reasons for the predicament, and a contribution I had not seen recently in defence of LJ. With that said, I'm really not sure I agree that it's simply that the players aren't able to adapt to "high pressing, possession" tactics, as I've seen no evidence of us trying to play those tactics - I see something else: players who appear to have the ability and stamina, playing awkwardly within themselves in a shape that doesn't afford any support for building attacking possession, nor for pressing in the opposition half. We're too deep and regressive and I see it as instruction.

Nonetheless I will certainly watch tomorrow with your comments in mind and hope for evidence that I've got it wrong. And if by 'breaking eggs' the answer is for SL to allow LJ to spend big sums to bring in players that can play high pressing, possession football for 90+ minutes, I'm more than a little nervous this is a convenient ask for a head coach who has already spent more than any other City manager, without apparently fulfilling that requirement in his recent crop. Am 100% with you on 4-4-2 (diamond or otherwise) and agree that we desperately need some proper quality full backs for this and hope that's incoming #1 and 2.

By the way, Olé is not short for Oliver, and I didn't go to Hanham - it's a nod to growing up in Portugal and the universal language of celebrating good football!* *appropriately enough dispensed with by Portugal in 2016 in order to win big - proving winning football is about keeping it simple and getting basics right! 

A lot of this comes from the last game against derby last season where for thirty minutes or so we played a high pressing game, put them on the back foot and forced mistakes from them, a period when Reid put us ahead, although we lost 3-2 in the end (I think). I can’t remember LJ’s post-match interview word for word, but he talked of that thirty minute period as the style he wanted the team to play, but that he didn’t have the luxury to try it often in the midst of a relegation battle. He mentioned that the team had been unable to maintain the pace and lost concentration, allowing derby to come back into the game after we had them on the ropes. I think he then said something about the club advancing at a fast rate and if players wanted to stay they had to improve to this new standard and way of playing. I had hoped that the summer youngsters were signed with this in mind, and I feel we played this way at the start of the season to good effect for a bit when O’dowda and it might have been Brownhill were in the side, giving us that energy and pace to press. (O’neil had the energy then too.) The high three behind a solitary striker is made for this sort of game. My fear is that LJ has put this tactic on the back burner to deal with our other problems, as it requires a lot of pressing, a lot of energy, and a continuous focus from players that are more used to sitting back and the slower pace of league one. This may be another reason why Brownhill’s recent appearance in the starting lineup could energize our lacklustre defensive midfield, although an energetic and physical signing would be a bonus. Other teams have used this high pressing game very effectively against us, limiting our time on the ball (much reduced in comparison to league one), forcing the inevitable errors, stopping our possession passing game and limiting the progress of the ball forward – which has often resulted in us playing the ball back to result in the aimless long ball and loss of possession.

 

As to your comment on him spending big in this window to do this, I don’t think it will happen as I expect this high pressing style won’t be fully adopted by us until the summer signings become regulars and we get the more basic aspects sorted. In this transfer window LJ has more immediate concerns to address, like full backs who can attack and defend, a bouncer for tammy, defensive midfielders who can pass and check runs, etc etc…  but with one eye of these players possessing the potential to play this and other more tactical aspects of the modern game.

[Davefevs]

17 minutes ago, Olé said:

Absolutely this - I was going to respond to @Emperor Palpatine's point on this too.

There's been a number of comments recently about us creating enough chances to win games and this being enough evidence it will turn - and it just doesn't chime with what I've seen. In addition to plenty of opposition chances, I'm routinely seeing a dearth of chances for us and those created being far from clear cut. We're not unlocking defences or putting a cross on the head of a player with just the keeper to beat.

In recent weeks I've only really seen us create and miss two types of chances, lightweight balls into Tammy who has to hold off a defender and get a snap shot on goal from an angle (the weakness/lack of accuracy in the finish often reflecting the strength required just to deal with the defender) OR attacking midfielder on the edge of the box in space, needing to pick a route to shoot through a crowd (often instead putting it over).

Neither of these are high frequency/probability chances without the best finishers in the country. Even the first 20 versus Preston was more good possession than clear chances. We're not missing sitters. I don't know what data you could use to validate chances created, but if this is what our Shots On/Off Target says, then that stat isn't helpful and isn't telling the story of the quality of chances we're producing.

As it happens, I don't recall LJ using chances created as an excuse anytime recently, so he at least is seeing the same game as others?

Ole - the highlighted para in particular I'm right behind.  There has been too many halves (at least) where I don't think we've created much, certainly not tested the keeper.  Might've been the odd ooh or ahh as a ball flashed across the 6 yard line.  I accept Tammy missed a couple of golden chances in the Brentford and PNE games, but I don't recall an opposition keeper being touted as MOTM....please correct me.

I am very surprised that statistically we are one of the higher chance creators?

Does that include 30 yard shots, off balance, with not a hope in hell of scoring from (maybe one per season)?  We have several of those a game, where I think 'just move the ball on until there really is a shot on'.

That's not to say our opponents (at home - don't get away very often) are all over us either at AG.

 

[zombie]

Quote

16 hours ago, REDOXO said:

Lastly Emperor Palpatine. Who were you previously?

 

Senator Palpatine, from Naboo, then the Supreme Chancellor.

[EnclosureSurge]

On 12/31/2016 at 19:31, Moor2Sea said:

SL model's fine, in theory. Have a spine of older, experienced players and develop youngsters around them. Sell some on for handsome profit, keep others and continually improve.

How does selling your best players lead to continually improve? Southampton do it (but only in the last 4 or 5 years or so, not, like for 10, 15 years). I can't think of one other club who does. If you were to compile a list of the 92 clubs who could do this, with Saints at the top, and given our track record, do you think we'd be 2nd in that list? 3rd? 10th? 20th? SL's model is, I'm afraid to say, not a good one in this division. Or possibly any division - we hardly did it in L1 and it's not like that is extensive proof of it working (1 season). I don't see any other clubs trying to do it our way, and that's telling. we're not renowned for coming up with new and innovative models for success at BCFC, so the odds are against SL's model on this one. This is uncomfortable reading for many, and there'll be lots of shouting about where we'd be without £48m Marina Dolman Ways etc but the long list of failed managers at this club are down to the board. That's where the vast majority of mistakes have been and are being made.

[Jack Dawe]

On 30/12/2016 at 22:36, spudski said:

...Come on then...what manager would guarantee wins in this league with the squad we have?

You all seem to know the budget we have to play with, and what players are available in January. Of course any new manager will have an endless budget, will be able to bring in anyone...it's just like going shopping in Tesco's  when doing your shopping don't you know...you can buy and loan whoever you want. You'll have already lined up players to release, and already done work with scouts, other managers and Agents in negotiating new deals. Easy isn't it...just bring them in, like we did last time we were in this position. Of course there are no more limitations to loans like before. Just go in and pick em off a shelf....

We must be absolutely crap...lose to Ipswich who have been in this division for 15 years.

Above Forest and Blackburn, Cardiff and QPR....how crap at this level must they be. Don't get me on the run Norwich are having with all their experience, money and players...we must be really crap.

Yep...two seasons up, with a rookie manager and very average Championship squad...who the hell do we think we are?

Get a bloody grip. when you look at those teams struggling...it shows how easy this league is right????

Exactly half way through the season and 17th....about right...no?

January window coming up...believe...it's no good moaning and thinking we have a divine right to do better. So many teams far better off than us, financially, player wise, and experience and all struggling.

I reckon there must be a manager, a coach, a something, that could guarantee some draws, at the very least, with the squad we have. Someone to stop the rot. To not go on losing, game after game.

That someone will not be a "rookie" I wouldn't have thought. 

We do not seem to have a problem "bringing players in." The problem appears to lie elsewhere.

Oh for the days of being "17th," how we miss them. Now we are 20th and 2 points off the drop (from 17th and 7 points clear), so by your reckoning we have dropped below "about right"....yes?

I told you this op was a load of absolute cobblers, spud, and I now suggest you hand back to the mods the indecent - and well meaning but misguided, imho - number of "likes" you received for it 

And while you're at it, how about an apology to all the "moaners" and the "thick" supporters who don't understand "how the game works" with all their "divine rights" that you so regularly insult and patronise on here?

Something somewhere at AG must be "absolute crap" to take 7 points from a possible 48, no?

 

Something is clearly amiss, and it is the people at AG with the ability to do something about that need to "get a grip"

 

 

[SedRA]

35 minutes ago, Jack Dawe said:

I reckon there must be a manager, a coach, a something, that could guarantee some draws, at the very least, with the squad we have. Someone to stop the rot. To not go on losing, game after game.

That someone will not be a "rookie" I wouldn't have thought. 

We do not seem to have a problem "bringing players in." The problem appears to lie elsewhere.

Oh for the days of being "17th," how we miss them. Now we are 20th and 2 points off the drop (from 17th and 7 points clear), so by your reckoning we have dropped below "about right"....yes?

I told you this op was a load of absolute cobblers, spud, and I now suggest you hand back to the mods the indecent - and well meaning but misguided, imho - number of "likes" you received for it 

And while you're at it, how about an apology to all the "moaners" and the "thick" supporters who don't understand "how the game works" with all their "divine rights" that you so regularly insult and patronise on here?

Something somewhere at AG must be "absolute crap" to take 7 points from a possible 48, no?

 

Something is clearly amiss, and it is the people at AG with the ability to do something about that need to "get a grip"

 

 

I think even Spud must be starting to wake up and smell the coffee now. 

I appreciate the patient approach and giving the coach time but we are sinking fast and LJ has to be held accountable. 

 

 

 

[NickJ]

34 minutes ago, Jack Dawe said:

I told you this op was a load of absolute cobblers, spud, and I now suggest you hand back to the mods the indecent - and well meaning but misguided, imho - number of "likes" you received for it 

And while you're at it, how about an apology to all the "moaners" and the "thick" supporters who don't understand "how the game works" with all their "divine rights" that you so regularly insult and patronise on here?

 

Oh so true.