Mid table obscurity.

[Waconda]

9 hours ago, Robbored said:

Seriously hampered by injuries to important players, most recently Atkinson and Tanner, both defensive players. No real surprise that City struggle to keep a clean sheet.

Yes, I did say he deserves some slack for the injuries but defending starts from the front and you defend as a TEAM.

[Fordy62]

He inherited a team that were slightly better at defending but much much worse at going forwards. 

He’s sorted/sorting the latter. Just needs to sort the first bit. 

Some people want everything to happen at once, but they’re the ones who are oblivious to the mess he inherited and how much the rot had set in with the previous regime’s habit of collecting players.

Think of how much leeway he’d have if we weren’t spending 50k/week in two players who don’t ever play. 

[Waconda]

6 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I know people won’t like this, but, he hasn’t got anything like “his squad” yet.

He has signed just 4 players he expected to be here in year 3…Weimann (re-sign), James, Atkinson and Tanner.  Of course there are some existing players who will be on that journey too.  But it isn’t even a full eleven.

Finances have made it very difficult to “trade”…made worse when the likes of Diedhiou left for free, giving him nothing additional to spend.

I think he’s trying to tread water against the tide at the mo’, and even if it is helped by points deductions of Derby and Reading, we’ve had a season (so far) of not really having to look over our shoulder.  I think that’s a positive, especially when you’ve blooded plenty of youngsters, some of whom have suddenly either given hope for ourselves in the future or worst case (contradictory) will be sold for fees that sort out our finances to a great degree.

Its bloody frustrating, but I’ve really enjoyed this season.  I do wonder why some actually support us?

I know people won’t like this, but, he hasn’t got anything like “his squad” yet.

Hear this said often, mainly as an excuse, no new manager has "his" squad when we walks into a new job, you have to get the best out of what you have.

- Ryan Lowe and Graham Potter for example.

Of course the financial situation has made his job more difficult but he has signed 6 players that he obviously wanted for his squad and we had very decent and "proven" Championship players already here.

Bentley, Kalas, Williams, Wells, Martin, HNM, ODowda, DaSilva.

Interesting to see the saving on wages of King for Lansbury for example.

As I said underwhelming from a proven Manager.

Not a disaster but was expecting more basic improvements by this stage.

 

[lenred]

33 minutes ago, VT05763 said:

I know people won’t like this, but, he hasn’t got anything like “his squad” yet.

Hear this said often, mainly as an excuse, no new manager has "his" squad when we walks into a new job, you have to get the best out of what you have.

- Ryan Lowe and Graham Potter for example.

Of course the financial situation has made his job more difficult but he has signed 6 players that he obviously wanted for his squad and we had very decent and "proven" Championship players already here.

Bentley, Kalas, Williams, Wells, Martin, HNM, ODowda, DaSilva.

Interesting to see the saving on wages of King for Lansbury for example.

As I said underwhelming from a proven Manager.

Not a disaster but was expecting more basic improvements by this stage.

 

How are any of the situations Graham Potter has been in in English football in any way comparable to what NP has had to deal with here?  

[Mad Cyril]

We have been really unlucky this season.

If we didn't have those injuries, if all our games finished in the 89th minute, if referees gave more balanced decisions, if we ever got a penalty, if the league had deducted points off teams at the top of the table not ones at the bottom.... then instead of mid-table mediocrity, we would be looking forward to defeat in the play-offs.

Robbed.

[Robbored]

46 minutes ago, VT05763 said:

I know people won’t like this, but, he hasn’t got anything like “his squad” yet.

Hear this said often, mainly as an excuse, no new manager has "his" squad when we walks into a new job, you have to get the best out of what you have.

- Ryan Lowe and Graham Potter for example.

Of course the financial situation has made his job more difficult but he has signed 6 players that he obviously wanted for his squad and we had very decent and "proven" Championship players already here.

Bentley, Kalas, Williams, Wells, Martin, HNM, ODowda, DaSilva.

Interesting to see the saving on wages of King for Lansbury for example.

As I said underwhelming from a proven Manager.

Not a disaster but was expecting more basic improvements by this stage.

 

You’ve answered part of your own comment with your first sentence and also overlooking the fact that as yet Nige hasn’t had a full squad to select from virtually all season with so many experienced players missing thru injury. That has of course has given the opportunity to the youngsters to gain Championship experience with Pring and Scott to name just two and that’ll be of benefit in the longer term.

With all that in mind I reckon Nige is doing as well as I expected.

 

 

[Baba Yaga]

Not much pressure on the team this season due to the other clubs point deductions, I think without them the gap to relegation zone would be 5pts rather than what we have. Playing a young squad in that situation I think people would feel very differently and it may not have worked out. Getting more game time now when things are relatively comfortable will hopefully build them up for the challenges ahead next year.

In terms of goals scored it has been a very good effort from the team so hoping that continues, strange that the team can't buy an away win now after going so long without winning at Ashton Gate.

Edited February 27, 2022 by Baba Yaga

[Waconda]

46 minutes ago, Robbored said:

You’ve answered part of your own comment with your first sentence and also overlooking the fact that as yet Nige hasn’t had a full squad to select from virtually all season with so many experienced players missing thru injury. That has of course has given the opportunity to the youngsters to gain Championship experience with Pring and Scott to name just two and that’ll be of benefit in the longer term.

With all that in mind I reckon Nige is doing as well as I expected.

 

 

OK

agree to disagree.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, VT05763 said:

I know people won’t like this, but, he hasn’t got anything like “his squad” yet.

Hear this said often, mainly as an excuse, no new manager has "his" squad when we walks into a new job, you have to get the best out of what you have.

- Ryan Lowe and Graham Potter for example.

Of course the financial situation has made his job more difficult but he has signed 6 players that he obviously wanted for his squad and we had very decent and "proven" Championship players already here.

Bentley, Kalas, Williams, Wells, Martin, HNM, ODowda, DaSilva.

Interesting to see the saving on wages of King for Lansbury for example.

As I said underwhelming from a proven Manager.

Not a disaster but was expecting more basic improvements by this stage.

 

And what if this is the best you can get out of this squad…because this squad isn’t as good as you think it is?

Re Lowe - inherited a pretty balanced squad, who last Jan (2021) had proactively started succession planning for the likes of Gallagher retiring and Pearson leaving. They didn’t let Pearson, Ben Davies and Fisher leave on free transfers as their contracts ran down. They got fees to allow them to reinvest.  They aren’t posting £38m losses that dictated the last two transfer windows, that dictated losing 10+ players, getting nothing for them.

Not really apples and apples.

Re Potter, are you referring to his Swansea or Brighton appointment?

37 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

Pearson's priority was to sort out the defence. To make us harder to score against. So far he has failed there for sure.

For me it is a lack of organisation which starts on the training ground.

Also a poor performance in possession yesterday. We have some excellent technical players, keeping possession should not be a problem imo.

and to some extent he did sort out the defence early season, but the attack wasn’t firing, at least not enough for many fans.

It was a poor performance yesterday, but it’s far too simplistic to say “We have some excellent technical players, keeping possession should not be a problem imo.”. We saw a good technical side like Cov on Tuesday spend 30 minutes camped in their own half, unable to string any passes together.

We are inconsistent, we are going to carry on being inconsistent for a while yet…it’s the nature of a rebuild. You’d hope players like Kalas would be consistent, but he had an absolute “shocker” yesterday (second half more than first). This is why my earlier point about this not being Nige’s squad yet.  It makes no difference whether players are allegedly “proven” or not. Maybe they were only proven when they had better players around them.

I think people are valid in their views, but my main point is - “what did they expect at this point”.  It appears some expected a lot more.  My view is that their expectations were unrealistic.  That’s not saying I’m right, but it is the basis for my side of the debate.

[Waconda]

12 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

And what if this is the best you can get out of this squad…because this squad isn’t as good as you think it is?

Re Lowe - inherited a pretty balanced squad, who last Jan (2021) had proactively started succession planning for the likes of Gallagher retiring and Pearson leaving. They didn’t let Pearson, Ben Davies and Fisher leave on free transfers as their contracts ran down. They got fees to allow them to reinvest.  They aren’t posting £38m losses that dictated the last two transfer windows, that dictated losing 10+ players, getting nothing for them.

Not really apples and apples.

Re Potter, are you referring to his Swansea or Brighton appointment?

and to some extent he did sort out the defence early season, but the attack wasn’t firing, at least not enough for many fans.

It was a poor performance yesterday, but it’s far too simplistic to say “We have some excellent technical players, keeping possession should not be a problem imo.”. We saw a good technical side like Cov on Tuesday spend 30 minutes camped in their own half, unable to string any passes together.

We are inconsistent, we are going to carry on being inconsistent for a while yet…it’s the nature of a rebuild. You’d hope players like Kalas would be consistent, but he had an absolute “shocker” yesterday (second half more than first). This is why my earlier point about this not being Nige’s squad yet.  It makes no difference whether players are allegedly “proven” or not. Maybe they were only proven when they had better players around them.

I think people are valid in their views, but my main point is - “what did they expect at this point”.  It appears some expected a lot more.  My view is that their expectations were unrealistic.  That’s not saying I’m right, but it is the basis for my side of the debate.

And what if this is the best you can get out of this squad…because this squad isn’t as good as you think it is?

And that is where we differ - I think he isn't getting the best out of the squad (injuries accounted for) and you do.

This squad is of better quality than our current league position and performances - In my opinion but yours differs.

As I have said not a disaster but an underwhelming and disappointing first year from NP and the squad for me.

“what did they expect at this point”. = Better.

Edited February 27, 2022 by VT05763

[Waconda]

1 hour ago, JonDolman said:

Pearson's priority was to sort out the defence. To make us harder to score against. So far he has failed there for sure.

For me it is a lack of organisation which starts on the training ground.

Also a poor performance in possession yesterday. We have some excellent technical players, keeping possession should not be a problem imo.

DETAIL.

[22A]

15 hours ago, Robbored said:

Disappointing to lose today but City are now 14 points off the top six and 17 points above the drop zone so are comfortably in mid table and that’s pretty much where many of us were predicting where City would end this campaign,

 

2nd August, that is what many on this forum thought. Some of the other thoughts, top corer etc, were out though.

 https://www.otib.co.uk/index.php?/topic/213177-mildly-interesting-bcfc-related-prediction-competition-for-the-202122-season/

 

[Davefevs]

2 minutes ago, 22A said:

2nd August, that is what many on this forum thought. Some of the other thoughts, top corer etc, were out though.

 https://www.otib.co.uk/index.php?/topic/213177-mildly-interesting-bcfc-related-prediction-competition-for-the-202122-season/

 

Blimey….all of the player stuff I’m miles out on!

[Davefevs]

9 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

I don't see why we should be as bad as we were yesterday in possession, and pretty much every game out of possession defending.

I ignore yesterday with the ball, it was an off-day (the exception) when over a couple of months we’ve generally been better.

Out of possession we are suffering, I don’t disagree.  Versus Coventry we actually defended really well in the main, they didn’t score through mistakes borne out of pressure, e.g. eventually you are gonna concede, you know it’s gonna happen.  But in other games we have just been unable to stop the tidal wave of pressure and then chances, and then goals.

Personally I think we are too “attacking”, we are too impatient when we get the ball.  We don’t have enough players who are happy to play “pass and move keep ball”, take the sting out of your opponent.  In fairness we haven’t since that halcyon period of 17/18.  We try the killer pass too quickly in the cycle of possession.  Therefore when we don’t execute, the ball comes back.

To use a basketball term, you are are most at risk defensively when you are transitioning defence into attack.  Because invariably you are no longer relying on set patterns, but off the cuff plays.  You lose your shape and if you turn it over, your structure has been lost.

That’s us.

In the games Andy King played, he was the player that did that, more so than James (imho).  He was to some extent our Wade Elliott.  The always available player, keeping it ticking over (not always successful, but that was the theory).

We are playing too often as individuals.  Some of that is down to the fact Nige is barely able to pick the same team.  The consistency has come up front, same three of late, and it’s delivered.  The 8 behind them changes every game.  Therefore I’m not really surprised at what we are seeing.  Let alone the inconsistent personal performances.

Lets see if we can find some settled partnerships over the remaining 11 games….and analyse if that has an effect on how we play.

[The Swan and Cemetery]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

In the games Andy King played, he was the player that did that, more so than James (imho).

King is viewed by many as a failed signing and in lots of ways that’s fair, but personally think more due to injuries than performance when on the pitch (other than a daft sending off). He played 2/3rds of the season in a team that won the Premier League and whilst legs going (see injuries), when he has played, the calmness and positional sense have helped, a lot. Haven’t done the maths, but would guess lower goals conceded per game when he’s played than when he hasn’t. We need a combo of Williams and James to work out how to do this consistently. 

[Davefevs]

14 minutes ago, The Swan and Cemetery said:

King is viewed by many as a failed signing and in lots of ways that’s fair, but personally think more due to injuries than performance when on the pitch (other than a daft sending off). He played 2/3rds of the season in a team that won the Premier League and whilst legs going (see injuries), when he has played, the calmness and positional sense have helped, a lot. Haven’t done the maths, but would guess lower goals conceded per game when he’s played than when he hasn’t. We need a combo of Williams and James to work out how to do this consistently. 

Fulham (2-6) skews his record.

[Waconda]

4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Fulham (2-6) skews his record.

Did those 6 not count against us then ?

2-0 win ?

Similar to saying the Palmer and Wells signings "Skew" our financial position.

I get what you are saying but you can't just remove the statistics that don't suit the narrative.

Edited February 27, 2022 by VT05763

[Davefevs]

Just now, VT05763 said:

Did those 6 not count against us then ?

2-0 win ?

Read what I wrote, rather than try to be clever, or a dick, or a clever-dick.  You decide which one you want to be!

[Waconda]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Read what I wrote, rather than try to be clever, or a dick, or a clever-dick.  You decide which one you want to be!

Fulham (2-6) skews his record.

Clever Dick ? or which ever one you feel the need to call me.

[Davefevs]

Just now, VT05763 said:

Fulham (2-6) skews his record.

Clever Dick ? or which ever one you feel the need to call me.

What does skew mean?

It doesn’t mean ignore as you implied, does it?  Nor your subsequently edited post where you used remove too.

[Waconda]

Just now, Davefevs said:

What does skew mean?

It doesn’t mean ignore as you implied, does it?  Nor your subsequently edited post where you used remove too.

Have we conceded more goals with King on the pitch ? because skew would seem to imply that if you take out the Fulham 6 then answer is no but if you include the Fulham 6 then the answer is yes. I don't know because I don't have a spreadsheet but could you confirm please.

[Robbored]

16 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

What does skew mean?

Skew - to give an oblique direction to; shape, form, or cut obliquely.

Hope that helps! 

Edited February 27, 2022 by Robbored

[Waconda]

26 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

What does skew mean?

It doesn’t mean ignore as you implied, does it?  Nor your subsequently edited post where you used remove too.

Skew - Make biased or distorted in a way that is regarded as inaccurate, unfair, or misleading.

This one ?

[BigTone]

32 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

What does skew mean?

 

Its a big garden in London

[Sheltons Army]

7 minutes ago, VT05763 said:

Skew - Make biased or distorted in a way that is regarded as inaccurate, unfair, or misleading.

This one ?

Are you still referring to your story of player rebellion and unrest in the camp ?

[Waconda]

Just now, Sheltons Army said:

Are you still referring to your story of player rebellion and unrest in the camp ?

No but nice deflection attempt.

[Davefevs]

43 minutes ago, VT05763 said:

Skew - Make biased or distorted in a way that is regarded as inaccurate, unfair, or misleading.

This one ?

So why are you suggesting what you did in your first response? 
 

[Waconda]

8 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

So why are you suggesting what you did in your first response? 
 

Correct me if I am wrong but are you not saying that if you include the Fulham goals on Kings record then we have conceded more goals this season with him in the team but if you don't count those 6 then we haven't ? 

That is what I thought you meant by "skewed" eg the Fulham game makes it look worse.

My point was that you cannot pick and choose the stats to support a narrative. In this case we concede less goals with King in the side, if you take out the Fulham game.

Apologies if I have misunderstood

Edited February 27, 2022 by VT05763

[chinapig]

2 minutes ago, VT05763 said:

Correct me if I am wrong but are you not saying that if you include the Fulham goals on Kings record then we have conceded more goals this season with him in the team but if you don't count those 6 then we haven't ? 

That is what I thought you meant by "skewed" eg the Fulham game makes it look worse.

My point was that you cannot pick and chose the stats to support a narrative. In this case we concede less goals with King in the side, if you take out the Fulham game.

Apologies if I have misunderstood

I took it that @Davefevswas simply accurately describing the data. The implication for me being that you can't draw any conclusions because it is skewed in a purely statistical sense.

The sample size i.e. the number of games King has played is too small anyway imo.

 

[Waconda]

1 minute ago, chinapig said:

I took it that @Davefevswas simply accurately describing the data. The implication for me being that you can't draw any conclusions because it is skewed in a purely statistical sense.

The sample size i.e. the number of games King has played is too small anyway imo.

 

Ah O.K. so King hasn't played in many games so we shouldn't use him in any stats. 

That would render quite a few stats useless but good to know.

Thanks.