Johnson on sound of the city with twentyman

[reddoh]

On 14/05/2018 at 20:57, spudski said:

It's the little things like this, that make a huge difference when a player comes in and is trying to settle quickly BBSB.

When I've said in the past that our infrastructure at the Club has been poor, and we have been run like an Amateur outfit, it's this type of thing that fits in that phrase.

It's simple...and like you said, not rocket science.

Our Club pays peanuts for the majority of it's staff...you pay peanuts, you get monkeys.

If SL wants to progress, he needs to pay more money, not play at being a football owner.

It doesn't come under FFP...so stop playing around SL.

Trying to do well on the cheap in the infrastructure will get you no where.

And if it were me...get rid of your son at the Club.

 

Jimmy Hill on Ralph Milne ,man red 88 170,000 

[BS4 on Tour...]

10 hours ago, Redrascal2 said:

Usual load of excuses on why the January transfer window was such a failure. Other clubs face the same problems but find a way to handle it. How long can he trot out this rubbish before even he gets fed up with it. He said we did the best we could. Well if that's the best then heaven help us.

And the ‘best we could’ was 4 wins in the last 22 league games....other clubs had serious injury worries (eg PNE) and the rubbish about ‘fixture congestion’ is just that....we had ONE cup match throughout the whole of November and December....unfortunately those in power at our club don’t credit the fans with much intelligence.....but we can see through the corporate guff that they spout...

[Ivorguy]

1 hour ago, GrahamC said:

Having listened to this again this afternoon a couple of things struck me:

He talked about “less quantity, more quality”, which with a maximum of just 4 out of contract suggests more than a few other squad players would also be moving on.

I think in addition to Engvall, who will clearly be allowed to leave, Hegeler, Taylor & Moore (who was not mentioned at all amongst those said to be doing well out on loan) must be vulnerable.

Secondly there was an interesting answer about us looking for yet another wide player (despite already signing O’Dowda, Eliasson, Paterson & regularly using Brownhill there). He also seemed to admit in it that Paterson might move into the number 10 role to replace Reid.

Thursday’s retained list will also answer the goalkeeper question he fudged, if we give Steele another deal then I cannot see us having 3 senior keepers, my guess is we won’t.

Surprised how much he bigged up Pisano as a leader, and also exaggerated his Serie A experience, not something I have observed myself.

Overall a bit too much David Brent for me, but not quite as awful as some had made out.

Guess the wide player will be Watkins of Norwich who has been a disaster there but who played under LJ at Oldham.  This is likely to turn out to be another dreadful signing if correct. Norwich fan I know say their fans cannot believe we are prepared to pay good money for him. Oh dear

 

[Ivorguy]

Spudski said earlier that you pay peanuts and get monkeys.  But if you check employee views re Hargreaves Lansdown SL has form on this.  Poor management.

[miser]

7 minutes ago, Ivorguy said:

Spudski said earlier that you pay peanuts and get monkeys.  But if you check employee views re Hargreaves Lansdown SL has form on this.  Poor management.

HL - hasn't been a succss has it 

[Davefevs]

9 hours ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

Well I suppose so, but the players available but not getting a game from January onwards seem to consist of Eliason, Engvall, Kelly, Steele, Vyner (if we hadn't sent him on loan), Woodrow and Walsh.  Were they the solution?  Who else was fit in January through to March, but not getting a game?

The problem for me was he didn’t have to play 5 or 6 at a time, just a subtle 1 each game, 2 max....just keep the players fresh....and on their toes.

8 hours ago, Redstreet said:

Gary Rowett after Derby lost last night was honest , straight to the point and clear and detailed as to what contributed to their loss . So refreshingly honest and cliche free . Respect to the guy . The LJ  interview was a consultancy type power point , full of words , no clarity . When LJ was describing scouting for players activities  , he emphasised spreadsheets.  Performance data and video footage . Fair enough , technology now used but actually watching and judging players . Not enough said on that . I thought GT was good but not pressing enough on some issues

Said too many times, Diony being the target instead of Diedhiou....I just don’t buy it.

7 hours ago, Cowshed said:

Lee Johnson did change the team, unless you believe its approach was consistent throughout the season. It was not.

In coaching circles there is a school of though that teams go through cycles to build cohesion.

One of these cycles is forming. Players are gathered, purchased to fit a playing style. What can follow is storming where conflicts arise where players cannot adjust, adapt to the style - Tomlin maybe. Next is norming, then performing where players are at ease within the approach and understand the teams identity.

Two words above feature. Approach and identity. After 2.5 years it should be possible to understand what Lee Johnsons approach and identity is. After 2.5 years Lee Johnson is still at stage one - Forming. His team have achieved. His teams have nosedive, but virtually no supporter can tell you want sort of team Bristol City really are.

And what are (the lesser known) stages 5 and 6 of the Tuckman Model?

5. Adjourning

6. Mourning

You decide who’s doing what!!

[Lack of Action Man]

34 minutes ago, miser said:

HL - hasn't been a succss has it 

It has often been suggested that Peter Hargreaves was/is the dynamic, forward thinking, somewhat cut-throat entity in HL's rise to power.

[NickJ]

14 hours ago, Cheesleysmate said:

 So no explanation as to why tactically he would take our best ball winning and workmanlike midfielder (Korey Smith) and persist with playing him at right back even though it was evident in many games that we would be over-run in the middle of the park, and that this would reverse when he moved Korey into the midfield for the second half of the game (Man City at home is a prime example). Also, if it wasn’t Korey, then it was our other battling midfielder Josh Brownhill that would have to fill in at right back, again leaving us without that additional bite in midfield.

I can explain that one! It worked really well when LJ came on in midfield in the 2007 play off, and our league player of the season Marv, moves to RB. That worked really well didn’t it?

Blimey I’ve read that several times and none the wiser. 

Isnt it easier to say that our owner hasn’t got s clue about running a football club and our manager hasn’t got a clue about managing a football team? 

[Rich]

14 minutes ago, NickJ said:

I can explain that one! It worked really well when LJ came on in midfield in the 2007 play off, and our league player of the season Marv, moves to RB. That worked really well didn’t it?

Blimey I’ve read that several times and none the wiser. 

Isnt it easier to say that our owner hasn’t got s clue about running a football club and our manager hasn’t got a clue about managing a football team? 

You speak too much sense for this forum Nick.

[The Bard]

On ‎14‎/‎05‎/‎2018 at 15:38, Kid in the Riot said:

I think it tells its own story to be honest!

Exactly.   Some people just are incapable of making good choices..   Restrict the choice and it unclouds their minds allowing them to make the most of what they have.  

[The Bard]

1 hour ago, The Bard said:

Exactly.   Some people just are incapable of making good choices..   Restrict the choice and it unclouds their minds allowing them to make the most of what they have.  

Makes me think that his real strength is as a coach not a manager...

[Mr Popodopolous]

13 hours ago, NickJ said:

 I can explain that one! It worked really well when LJ came on in midfield in the 2007 play off, and our league player of the season Marv, moves to RB. That worked really well didn’t it?

Blimey I’ve read that several times and none the wiser. 

Isnt it easier to say that our owner hasn’t got s clue about running a football club and our manager hasn’t got a clue about managing a football team? 

I personally think the decline that season wasn't so much LJ related- and all declines are relative, but to me it coincided with the move to 4-4-2 from the 4-4-1-1. In the 4-4-1-1, LJ played decently I thought- 4-4-2 though? Not necessarily the one.

It's ironic that GJ was ahead of his time in a sense at this level with the 4-4-1-1 (Noble behind striker)- that flexibility and fluidity undoubtedly helped us. Yet LJ persists with a relatively traditional 4-4-2. Think in the right system and with the right players around him, LJ performed a useful role tbh. On the bench, we had Weale, Vasko, Johnson, Sproule, Byfield. LJ for Orr was the wrong sub, but at the same time who do we put on? Not so easy- none are/were a natural RB.

[Ska Junkie]

21 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Problem with the QPR situation is the fine would bankrupt the club- once QPR have exhausted all legal options they will have to pay. just a question of how.

A difference too is the rules were different and chopping and changing then- less so now, therefore less room for manoeuvre.

Read about Bolton's sanctions in the post I provided- no wriggle room there.

Whilst I appreciate what you say about the repercussions for QPR, they spent the money, knowing the rules and had an attitude of 'we're Premier league so it doesn't apply to us anymore'. Surely, the fines / punishment handed out to Bolton nearly crippled them so why should QPR be treated any differently?

They must have had that fine hanging over them for a good few years now yet still pay money for players. Hammer them for breaking the rules and maybe some clubs might have a tad more respect for those rules.

They can't have it both ways with all possible respect but they appear to be doing just that at the moment.

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 minute ago, Ska Junkie said:

Whilst I appreciate what you say about the repercussions for QPR, they spent the money, knowing the rules and had an attitude of 'we're Premier league so it doesn't apply to us anymore'. Surely, the fines / punishment handed out to Bolton nearly crippled them so why should QPR be treated any differently?

They must have had that fine hanging over them for a good few years now yet still pay money for players. Hammer them for breaking the rules and maybe some clubs might have a tad more respect for those rules.

They can't have it both ways with all possible respect but they appear to be doing just that at the moment.

I think they will get clobbered by it once all legal options exhausted yes.

If they don't have £40m to pay though, the only real solution is say paid over x years- e.g. it would knock £4m out of their budget for a decade- but they should pay up in full IMO.

[Ska Junkie]

16 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I think they will get clobbered by it once all legal options exhausted yes.

If they don't have £40m to pay though, the only real solution is say paid over x years- e.g. it would knock £4m out of their budget for a decade- but they should pay up in full IMO.

I agree with that Mr P. Nothing against the R's but that would hurt them for a long time and may stop others doing the same thing in the future. There's no point having rules if they aren't enforced after all.