Pembo

[Rich]

7 hours ago, JamesBCFC said:

Pemberton was our assistant coach, but also our defensive coach, so some of the responsibility must lie on his shoulders for the bad defensive records, as it does the managers for their tactical choices.

Johnson has the following record at this level. P62 W25 D12 L25. This is a top half record.

Seeing as you are blindly refusing that fact, there is no point wasting my time continuing a discussion with someone who will not accept the reality.

Brilliant, you can make statistics do most things if you want. That set of results were taken including last season with the new manager effect, it equates to 1.4 points per game. This season, honeymoon over, 1.17 points per game, which is definitely just about surviving. It depends how you want to portray it, through rose tinted glasses or with a touch of reality.

I am not a Lee hater, or a Cotterill lover but, it's plainly obvious that Lee has had far more support from on high than his predecessor enjoyed.

To come out and imply the team problems were because of a coach is very simplistic

[exAtyeoMax]

7 hours ago, City Ben said:

I think that we might be reading too much in to all of this. There are infinite variables at play so of course it's too simplistic to say "Pembo bad. Results bad. Pembo gone. Results good [caveman chest thump]" and therefore assume that Pembo was a cr@p coach. He's clearly not a cr@p coach.

However what I can well imagine is that there was a difference in philosophies between LJ (and the rest of the coaching staff) and Pembo. I've no idea what that difference was! But I can definitely imagine a new guard/ old guard kind of thing. If that was the case, then regardless of quality of coaching the team as a whole wouldn't have worked well together. Once he'd gone, with everyone pulling in the same direction, results improved. 

As I say I'm speculating, but I can certainly imagine this being the case. 

Note this is different to Pembo being "straight talking and Lee not being able to take it." It's more just about a harmonious working environment with everyone wanting to achieve the same thing in broadly the same way. 

I think of it being a bit like Animal Farm

[Rich]

5 hours ago, Monkeh said:

not backed by the owner?!?! you are talking rubbish, Lansdown has backed every single manager here, 

Phil In France says.          "But when such ostensibly high bids are made, they must be capable of being backed up with appropriate wages/salaries or else the original bid, which may well have been accepted by the 'selling' club, will ultimately fail when the proposed transfer talks collapse due to 'the parties' failure to agree terms'.

In addition, it rarely helps conclude a contract when other parties try subsequently to change the previously agreed terms.

Was SC really backed unequivocally by the owner?"

I agree. Mr Lansdown was asked about competing with the likes of Burnley for the services of Andre Gray, he replied we can compete with those wages.

He didn't say that we did compete. As we were deemed less attractive than Burnley at that time, I think we would have had to better their offer to Gray, it appears that we didn't. is that backing the manager? It's all down to opinions, I don't feel he had the unequivocal backing that his successor has subsequently received.

[Rich]

5 hours ago, Monkeh said:

yes, the double winning season is proof of that

As said on another post, it's about opinions.

I believe it was easier to back Cotterill in the lower division, because it was obviously lower transfer fees, lower wages and lower signing on fees. In the bigger boys division, where we were so say doing our business early, we ended up with a depleted squad and barely enough senior pros to fill the bench, was that good backing? We also abandoned that policy of getting older pros to help us get promotion, and chose to improve our academy and recruiting for the future policy, so no I don't think he was backed as he would have liked. I believe the path was being prepared for a replacement with the same ideas as the owner.     No, problem with that, I just see it a different way, if you don't agree tough, you keep spouting your rubbish and I'll spout mine

[Mr Popodopolous]

53 minutes ago, Rich said:

Ok, Bit pedantic but, I was trying to say that he'd changed the formation from Cotterills preferred 3-5-2 which was not working in the championship, as it had in league 1. And in so doing, this made us more difficult to beat and the players and supporters seemed happy with that.

Oh I agree with that yeah.

[Unan]

SL wouldn't pay the wages I thought? Didn't Gray mention it in an interview? 

Note: May be wrong 

[REDOXO]

SC and SL fell out over transfer policy. Eventually SC was fired as we would have almost certainly got relegated if things were not changed. I even mentioned it to a well known person within the club away at Reading, whose response was we know where we are. 

Players were not keen to come under SC either. That changed under Pembo and a couple of shrewd buys and a loan came in

 LJ didn't change much for most of the rest of the season as the ship had steadied. 

LJ bought big in the summer which started well, however started falling apart when players were being rotated and in some cases played in unnatural positions and some crazy substitutions. Pembo did not buy in to LJs philosophy neither did Taylor and were sacrificed. 

LJ found a winning team by keeping a settled side and dumping all his big money buys to the bench/stand. Team played well enough to get us out of the shit in most of April after complete dicking at PNE and national media attention. 

Does that cover it!? 

Arguments that lay the blame on Pemberton are as weird as it gets. If Pembo was the problem he should have gone at effing Christmas. 

Moral. Settled team and simple structure are the key to keep you up.  

[Strictly Obi]

On 2017-5-8 at 17:49, Creg said:

Found myself with a (rare) spare half hour at work, and put this together:

Championship after Pembo (8th March onwards) versus Championship with Pembo (7th August 2015 up to, and including, 7th March 2017)

In summary: We've improved (drastically) in win percentage and average goals per game, but are facing more shots and less accurate at hitting the target than before he left.

(nb. 'Championship Average' is Pembo's average, NOT the rest of the divsion)

Yes it would seem in hindsight we should of got rid of Pemberton much earlier. And I think we need to blame LJ, for leaving it so late in the season before he fired him. No surprise that results increased dramatically after Pemberton left. But I wish him well, I'm sure he will do well in the lower leagues and reckon he could make a good conference manager sometime. 

[JamesBCFC]

3 hours ago, Rich said:

Brilliant, you can make statistics do most things if you want. That set of results were taken including last season with the new manager effect, it equates to 1.4 points per game. This season, honeymoon over, 1.17 points per game, which is definitely just about surviving. It depends how you want to portray it, through rose tinted glasses or with a touch of reality.

I am not a Lee hater, or a Cotterill lover but, it's plainly obvious that Lee has had far more support from on high than his predecessor enjoyed.

To come out and imply the team problems were because of a coach is very simplistic

Right because using the entire set of data is being really selective and is obviously me manipulating things to make a point...

Secondly the new manager bounce is (a) little more than mythical, and (b) less of a 'bounce' than what you get from sticking with a manager until he turns it around.

Thirdly you "aren't a LJ hater or Cotterill lover" but Pembertons supposed decline this year was Lee's fault, but him doing no better (actually worse) in the same role pre-Lee is pure coincidence? 

[swanker]

On 08/05/2017 at 21:28, Bristol Rob said:

I wasn't looking for a witch hunt, just wondering if we had improved in the short term.

The bloke was a waste of time and took our club backwards. For this he needs burning at the stake

[Rich]

8 hours ago, JamesBCFC said:

Right because using the entire set of data is being really selective and is obviously me manipulating things to make a point...

Secondly the new manager bounce is (a) little more than mythical, and (b) less of a 'bounce' than what you get from sticking with a manager until he turns it around.

Thirdly you "aren't a LJ hater or Cotterill lover" but Pembertons supposed decline this year was Lee's fault, but him doing no better (actually worse) in the same role pre-Lee is pure coincidence? 

Ok, you like to see and use the whole set of figures of Lee's term to justify your opinions and theory. There's no magical effect on players under a new manager, which begs the question, why change manager. But what did happen?

Our team were struggling under the obstinacy of Cotterill, he was removed, tactics changed and results and performances improved, of course, that change and effect are mythical. Lee didn't change a lot when joining and stuck generally with Pemberton's changes, until we were safe. Formation and tactics changed and results improved, sound familiar? Credit Lee for that.

After a nervy but promising start to the season with Lee now in total charge, using his players and his preferred formation, we went into a massive decline culminating in the worst losing run of results in our clubs history. Suddenly, in a desperate situation at the end of the season, we change personnel and formations and we get a run of fantastic results over the last ten games, sound familiar?  This sequence of results was only bettered by Reading, and only equalled by SWFC, Brighton and Fulham, thank goodness for that turnaround. Pemberton had left the club by then, so the negative performances and results must have been down to him. Obviously, the upturn in results had nothing to do with changing players and formation, so it must have been Pemberton's departure. Using your theory, Cotterill should have remained in charge and be allowed to turn things around.

I feel you are whitewashing history with your take on things, giving excess credit where it's not due, (last end of season) and again when we fortunately had a champions style run of results to get us out of the shyte at the end of this season, because he got rid of Pemberton.  Changing tactics and reverting to tried and tested players, ironically, players inherited from the previous regime had nothing to do with it. 

 I cannot deny the figures over his tenure, but, I think one has to dig a little deeper and analyse them to get a truer picture.

I'm sorry, I haven't a clue what you're talking about in your last sentence. I haven't said Pemberton has declined, I haven't said it was Lee's fault. You must have misunderstood me.

[JamesBCFC]

4 hours ago, Rich said:

Ok, you like to see and use the whole set of figures of Lee's term to justify your opinions and theory. There's no magical effect on players under a new manager, which begs the question, why change manager. But what did happen?

Our team were struggling under the obstinacy of Cotterill, he was removed, tactics changed and results and performances improved, of course, that change and effect are mythical. Lee didn't change a lot when joining and stuck generally with Pemberton's changes, until we were safe. Formation and tactics changed and results improved, sound familiar? Credit Lee for that.

After a nervy but promising start to the season with Lee now in total charge, using his players and his preferred formation, we went into a massive decline culminating in the worst losing run of results in our clubs history. Suddenly, in a desperate situation at the end of the season, we change personnel and formations and we get a run of fantastic results over the last ten games, sound familiar?  This sequence of results was only bettered by Reading, and only equalled by SWFC, Brighton and Fulham, thank goodness for that turnaround. Pemberton had left the club by then, so the negative performances and results must have been down to him. Obviously, the upturn in results had nothing to do with changing players and formation, so it must have been Pemberton's departure. Using your theory, Cotterill should have remained in charge and be allowed to turn things around.

I feel you are whitewashing history with your take on things, giving excess credit where it's not due, (last end of season) and again when we fortunately had a champions style run of results to get us out of the shyte at the end of this season, because he got rid of Pemberton.  Changing tactics and reverting to tried and tested players, ironically, players inherited from the previous regime had nothing to do with it. 

 I cannot deny the figures over his tenure, but, I think one has to dig a little deeper and analyse them to get a truer picture.

I'm sorry, I haven't a clue what you're talking about in your last sentence. I haven't said Pemberton has declined, I haven't said it was Lee's fault. You must have misunderstood me.

A hell of a lot of twisting what I said there.

[Rich]

1 hour ago, JamesBCFC said:

A hell of a lot of twisting what I said there.

You see it as twisting, I see it as, telling it as it is.

 

[JamesBCFC]

Just now, Rich said:

You see it as twisting, I see it as, telling it as it is.

 

Manipulating what was said so that it doesnt fit with other things is not "telling it as it is"

Not everything is black and white.

You also said in that post you hadnt said it was Lee's fault. Yet your first line on this thread was "Lee happened" which at the very minimum puts blame on Lee Johnson and insinuates it being his fault.

 

"Telling it as it is" and what you have been posting are worlds apart.

[Red-Robbo]

On 5/9/2017 at 15:29, reddoh said:

 

Brazilian then back, sack and crack.

Blimey. Basso's not returning is he?!

[Rich]

Just now, JamesBCFC said:

Manipulating what was said so that it doesnt fit with other things is not "telling it as it is"

Not everything is black and white.

You also said in that post you hadnt said it was Lee's fault. Yet your first line on this thread was "Lee happened" which at the very minimum puts blame on Lee Johnson and insinuates it being his fault.

 

"Telling it as it is" and what you have been posting are worlds apart.

All I have done is tell what happened in a timeline way, using my words and my opinions. I have interspersed your comments within those opinions to show that things can be read a little differently, depending on ones viewpoint.

According to you, the figures quoted for games played and points accrued, back your argument, while ignoring all other factors. If that's not telling it as Black or white, then I don't know what is.

As regards "Lee happened", I was referring to a collective series of events, from his appointment, until this day, nothing more.

[JamesBCFC]

2 minutes ago, Rich said:

All I have done is tell what happened in a timeline way, using my words and my opinions. I have interspersed your comments within those opinions to show that things can be read a little differently, depending on ones viewpoint.

According to you, the figures quoted for games played and points accrued, back your argument, while ignoring all other factors. If that's not telling it as Black or white, then I don't know what is.

As regards "Lee happened", I was referring to a collective series of events, from his appointment, until this day, nothing more.

If you see my response to the OP when they posted about not wanting a witch hunt, I actually said there are many, many factors.

[Rich]

57 minutes ago, JamesBCFC said:

If you see my response to the OP when they posted about not wanting a witch hunt, I actually said there are many, many factors.

You did refer to many factors to consider, unfortunately, you didn't take those factors into consideration when using statistics to form a conclusion, like that of a points collected for a "top half finish". You also stated that results had improved short term (64 games) and it was difficult to form a judgement. Yet, you managed to form a judgement on Pemberton, when other than working under instructions from his manager/head coach, he had very little time in charge. He wasn't in charge of coaching, he was one of a team during his time here, yet, you state rather conclusively that, "he didn't have a good defensive record", "he was not doing his job properly" and that "he failed in his duties", all rather unfair.      Are you part of the management team? If not, how on earth can you make such statements?

[Robin1988]

On 5/8/2017 at 20:00, Dynamite Red said:

Not widely liked by the players and other coaches.

Lee isn't liked by the footballing fraternity either, inside or outside AG. Doesn't do him a huge amount of harm!

On 5/8/2017 at 19:55, Rich said:

Lee happened.

Pemberton was a good coach under Cotterill, was a good coach and temporary boss when he left, He laid the foundations for our survival last season reverting to 442 and organising the players, and then Lee took charge, not changing much until survival was achieved. Lee tried out the squad in the last games, rotating players (as he's entitled to), then continued that process this season. After what many people felt was a lucky period in respect of results in the early part of the season the shyte hit the fan. We couldn't win a game and it was someones fault. Even after recruiting six new players in January, we still couldn't win, so someone had to take the rap. It wasn't the person in charge of the coaching team, It wasn't the person recruiting the players, it wasn't the person selecting the players, it wasn't the person choosing the tactics, it wasn't the coach brought in by Lee, so who had to go? Obviously the constant changing of player selection, formation and anything else, was carried out by Pemberton.

If people can't see what happened, then they are blind.

Very objective and level-headed report Rich. How long have you been a fan of LJ?

1 hour ago, Rich said:

According to you, the figures quoted for games played and points accrued, back your argument, while ignoring all other factors. If that's not telling it as Black or white, then I don't know what is.

It is black and white and there's no way more black and white to tell it than with cold hard facts. We all thought getting rid of JP at the time was just an exercise in saving Lee's skin, and even if it was, you can't put the way things have changed since down to coincidence.

[Rich]

Just now, Robin1988 said:

Lee isn't liked by the footballing fraternity either, inside or outside AG. Doesn't do him a huge amount of harm!

Very objective and level-headed report Rich. How long have you been a fan of LJ?

I've been keeping him cool since his playing days here.

[RobintheRed Red]

On Mon May 08 2017 at 20:00, Dynamite Red said:

Not widely liked by the players and other coaches.

neither is the current manager

[JamesBCFC]

6 hours ago, Rich said:

You did refer to many factors to consider, unfortunately, you didn't take those factors into consideration when using statistics to form a conclusion, like that of a points collected for a "top half finish". You also stated that results had improved short term (64 games) and it was difficult to form a judgement. Yet, you managed to form a judgement on Pemberton, when other than working under instructions from his manager/head coach, he had very little time in charge. He wasn't in charge of coaching, he was one of a team during his time here, yet, you state rather conclusively that, "he didn't have a good defensive record", "he was not doing his job properly" and that "he failed in his duties", all rather unfair.      Are you part of the management team? If not, how on earth can you make such statements?

I said we couldnt form a long term view on how he did because he had 4 games. That in itself was reasonable and favourable to him

Pembo had a role as the defensive coach. Having a shocking defensive record for 75% of his time in that role suggests something is amiss, even taking into acount potential outside factors.

[BobBobSuperBob]

Don't want to get into the full JP debate but 

Can anyone point me in the right direction of WHEN , JP was suddenly declared the 'defensive coach'  ?

Am I right in thinking up to , and even  through the majority of LJs  tenure he was never described as such but was always 'First Team coach' or 'Assistant' ?

The title slightly bemuses me tbh as most coaching , particularly pattern of play , shape involves the whole side

My knowledge and experience football is that Clubs tend to have a goalkeeping coach and some of the Prem Clubs have specific set piece coaches but in all my years I can't remember hearing of a club having a 'defensive coach' ( Can anyone  correct me and point out who ?)

Clubs sometimes use coaches to work on particular skills , normally forwards but to ' section up responsibility' in coaches at a Club like ours I've not heard of

Generally coaches will run different sessions to work on different aspects 

So did we have a 'defensive coach' but no 'attacking coach' ?

Some have suggested that Holden was the 'attacking coach' but I've only seen this suggested on here, somebody may correct me but I've not heard LJ / The Club refer to this

And presumably if JP was our defensive coach , can anyone point me when it's been explained who is now the 'defensive coach' and who has which responsibilities 

Unfortunately for JP the late season run may be coincidental but an obvious conclusion could be that the change had an / the effect

Personally , I don't think the change was anything to do with coaching skills but much more to do with dynamics / personalities 

 

Being brutal , if it was a factor in  keeping us up , it was necessary and justified but the whole 'defensive coach' thing I find a red herring

[Major Isewater]

On 09/05/2017 at 14:27, Ashtonwurzel said:

True in the short term but shouty and nasty soon wears off and fails. You will never go that extra mile for a boss you don't like or respect.

There are many people whom I respect but don't necessarily like , so the two things are not mutually exclusive.

I would follow a soldier into a war zone if I respected him not because I liked him . 

I wouldn't do the same for a soldier I liked but didn't respect .

[exAtyeoMax]

8 hours ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Don't want to get into the full JP debate but 

Can anyone point me in the right direction of WHEN , JP was suddenly declared the 'defensive coach'  ?

Am I right in thinking up to , and even  through the majority of LJs  tenure he was never described as such but was always 'First Team coach' or 'Assistant' ?

The title slightly bemuses me tbh as most coaching , particularly pattern of play , shape involves the whole side

My knowledge and experience football is that Clubs tend to have a goalkeeping coach and some of the Prem Clubs have specific set piece coaches but in all my years I can't remember hearing of a club having a 'defensive coach' ( Can anyone  correct me and point out who ?)

Clubs sometimes use coaches to work on particular skills , normally forwards but to ' section up responsibility' in coaches at a Club like ours I've not heard of

Generally coaches will run different sessions to work on different aspects 

So did we have a 'defensive coach' but no 'attacking coach' ?

Some have suggested that Holden was the 'attacking coach' but I've only seen this suggested on here, somebody may correct me but I've not heard LJ / The Club refer to this

And presumably if JP was our defensive coach , can anyone point me when it's been explained who is now the 'defensive coach' and who has which responsibilities 

Unfortunately for JP the late season run may be coincidental but an obvious conclusion could be that the change had an / the effect

Personally , I don't think the change was anything to do with coaching skills but much more to do with dynamics / personalities 

 

Being brutal , if it was a factor in  keeping us up , it was necessary and justified but the whole 'defensive coach' thing I find a red herring

Geoff Twentyman was adamant that Pembo wasn't the defensive coach…

I only heard mention of Pembo being the DC in the last six months… I don't know where this myth started.

[ashton_fan]

Even if Pembo was the defensive coach he didn't pick the team other than the five games when he was in charge, during that time we didn't concede more than 1. I don't see how he could be responsible for us letting in goals if he's not choosing the players, eg we know he encouraged Cotts to change to a back four since we kept getting caught on the break using the wing-back system but Cotts wouldn't budge.

[GodEmperor Palpatine]

39 minutes ago, exAtyeoMax said:

Geoff Twentyman was adamant that Pembo wasn't the defensive coach…

I only heard mention of Pembo being the DC in the last six months… I don't know where this myth started.

LJ had stated in an interview that he was made defensive coach so they could specialise in the this field, it would also allow LJ along with MA more time to identify targets and the day to day running (something along those lines), Makes sense for Macca to be his replacement

[BobBobSuperBob]

5 minutes ago, Emperor Palpatine said:

LJ had stated in an interview that he was made defensive coach so they could specialise in the this field, it would also allow LJ along with MA more time to identify targets and the day to day running (something along those lines), Makes sense for Macca to be his replacement

Well if that's correct he was only made 'defensive coach' when Holden was brought in (And when our abysmal spell started) as this was when LJ said the extra coach would allow him more time 'On First Team recruitment' - I heard that but recall no mention of Pemberton being made a defensive coach

Up to then our results had been pretty decent if the performances weren't so convincing

There was no mention iIRC in Lisa Knights long I/v with Holden & JM that either had rsponsibility as a defensive coach

 

[GodEmperor Palpatine]

Just now, BobBobSuperBob said:

Well if that's correct he was only made 'defensive coach' when Holden was brought in (And when our abysmal spell started) as this was when LJ said the extra coach would allow him more time 'On First Team recruitment' - I heard that but recall no mention of Pemberton being made a defensive coach

Up to then our results had been pretty decent if the performances weren't so convincing

There was no mention iIRC in Lisa Knights long I/v with Holden & JM that either had rsponsibility as a defensive coach

 

It was on the Official site a fair while back regarding Pemberton, I was merely speculating that Macca was the replacement for JP.

It was also the board that relieved him of his duties imminently, LJ wanted to keep him till the end of the season.

[BobBobSuperBob]

Well this remains all very mysterious , with people with calculators working out Pembertons competency as a defensive coach. , so I decided to have a look back

 

Below is the Club article about Holdens arrival

Ive highlighted a relevant section

 

 

http://www.bcfc.co.uk//news/article/2016-17/holden-appointed-assistant-head-coach-3411094.aspx

Holden appointed assistant head coach

Posted: Thu 10 Nov 2016 
Author: Mark Perrow

 

image: http://www.bcfc.co.uk/cms_images/player/holden43213-3411106_613x460.jpg

Dean Holden

Image by: jmpuk.com

Former Oldham boss reunited with Johnson and will work alongside Pemberton.

• Dean Holden appointed assistant head coach
• Former Oldham boss reunited with Lee Johnson after pair worked together at Boundary Park
• 37-year-old will join John Pemberton in assisting Johnson 

Bristol City has appointed Dean Holden as a new assistant head coach.

 

The 37-year-old former Oldham Athletic defender went on to manage the Latics after working under Lee Johnson at Boundary Park in 2014/15.

 

The pair are now reunited at Ashton Gate after Holden departed his role as assistant manager at Walsall.

 

Chief operating officer Mark Ashton told bcfc.co.uk: “As part of the club’s player development programme and due to our increased number of younger players, we made a strategic decision in the summer to bring in another senior coach to work alongside John Pemberton and report directly to Lee.

 

“We’ve been conducting that search since the summer for the right person and, having interviewed a number of people, we are delighted to announce that Dean has joined us from Walsall.

 

“Lee knows Dean from his time at Oldham. He’s a bright, intelligent young man who will add to what is already a strong coaching unit.

 

“We feel it is important to increase the time spent on the training field with the younger players to further their development, so from this point on Lee will work with two assistant head coaches.

 

“John Pemberton’s role remains exactly the same. Dean offers a different skill set and an additional resource in that area.”

 

City head coach Johnson added: “I’m delighted that we’ve been able to bring Dean in. He’ll work very closely with myself and John Pemberton.

 

“Dean brings all the qualities we need to offer the perfect balance on our coaching staff and I’m thoroughly looking forward to him being part of our future.

 

“I gave Dean his first chance in coaching at Oldham and he’s now had two years’ experience of being a manager, assistant manager and first team coach. He’s a very good developer of young players.”

Read more at http://www.bcfc.co.uk/news/article/2016-17/holden-appointed-assistant-head-coach-3411094.aspx#PlFw5Ai4sWdfJPxC.99

 

 

 

Then we come to Pembertons dismissal - below is the relevant quote from MA in Eve Post

 

Bristol City chief operating officer Mark Ashton has confirmed that the decision to remove John Pemberton from the Ashton Gate coaching staffwas Lee Johnson's. 

But he also revealed that the decision to relieve the 52-year-old assistant head coach of his duties now rather than at the end of the season was taken by the board of directors.

 

 

 

The first and only reference I can find to a defensive coach at the Club is the below from the Evil Post after JP had been 'relieved of his duties as assistant head coach'

 

'. Bristol City are on the lookout for a new defensive coach – and he could be in position ahead of this Saturday’s crunch Championship relegation battle against Wigan Athletic at the DW Stadium.

But former City manager Keith Millen will not be the man chosen to replace John Pemberton, who was relieved of his duties as assistant head coach yesterday. '

http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/bristol-city-could-replace-assistant-7045

 

 

 

It appears to me that the urban myth that Pemberton was a failed defensive coach is basically a load of b*******s

There appears confusion as to who was 'Assistant Head Coach' or in fact we had two and the appointment of Holden and the change in the coaching set up was just before the abysmal run

What it strongly suggests to me that the change in the coaching set up (Unless one almighty coincidence) certainly appeared to have a detrimental effect for some months (Too many cooks ?) and derailed the season , and only after that was addressed did the positive spell come

JPs competence as a ' defensive coach ' or whether he actually ever was one has absolutely no relevance IMHO