Points lost from winning positions

[Mr Popodopolous]

I don't think you can really include points thrown away when you concede the 1st goal. Not so easy to justify.

When you score it but don't win, yeah of course. We came back from behind twice today- resilience that.

[Sheltons Army]

1 minute ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I don't think you can really include points thrown away when you concede the 1st goal. Not so easy to justify.

When you score it but don't win, yeah of course. We came back from behind twice today- resilience that.

Quite right Mr  P

I posted in the match day thread when they scored the opener 

‘A proper test for us now’

Thats true , it was 1 down to a physical side , the sort historically we’ve caved into , at a ground where we don’t tend to do well

Well we ended up with a point , and nearly 3

As frustrating as the equaliser was we didn’t fail the test , we might not have got an A+ but we didn’t fail

[Davefevs]

25 minutes ago, Harry said:

Klose? Really?? 
Klose’s header was excellent and cleared the ball over 20 yards. It was just a shame that he was the one who was left to attempt to close down that 20 yards after he’d headed it clear. 
It was tactical to not have someone patrolling the edge of the box for just such a scenario. 
As for Bentley, well, it’s common knowledge that he’s not the best at crosses. Therefore it’s tactical as to how we set up at corners and we should be protecting him more. 
Mistakes happen. Tactics can help to negate them. 

From memory, we did have someone on the edge, Weimann, but he switched off.

Happy to be corrected, it’s a few weeks ago.

[Numero Uno]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

From memory, we did have someone on the edge, Weimann, but he switched off.

Happy to be corrected, it’s a few weeks ago.

He had cramp and we had made all three subs……

[BUTOR]

I don’t think we are unique in this league. Every team is something of a basket case. Even in consistency and form, eg. Preston drawing four/five games 0-0, Forest coming from rock bottom to win the play offs… you have to take the rough with the smooth in the championship. We kept two clean sheets and appeared to have sorted our defensive/mental fragilities completely in the last couple of games, today we shipped three and looked all over the shop. That’s this league. There will be similar patterns with every team. Also Bloomfield road is a tough place to implement our type of identity at and we managed it. That’s a really positive step.  

[ralphindevon]

I’m not sure why people are getting angry with Harry.

This is a football forum and when you’re at the top/bottom of any league of stats it’s worth discussing surely? 

[marcofisher]

7 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

He had cramp and we had made all three subs……

Don’t we have 5 subs now? 

[ralphindevon]

At the end of the day, if we’d held on to those 10 points we’d be 6 points clear at the top and I’d already be having nightmares about losing 9-0 at Anfield.

[ralphindevon]

2 minutes ago, marcofisher said:

Don’t we have 5 subs now? 

Subs have to be made in 3 blocks*, we’d already used our 3 blocks.

*there are exceptions like concussion subs 

[Sheltons Army]

2 minutes ago, ralphindevon said:

At the end of the day, if we’d held on to those 10 points we’d be 6 points clear at the top and I’d already be having nightmares about losing 9-0 at Anfield.

Pesky opponents having the cheek to try and equalise

[joe jordans teeth]

8 minutes ago, ralphindevon said:

At the end of the day, if we’d held on to those 10 points we’d be 6 points clear at the top and I’d already be having nightmares about losing 9-0 at Anfield.

We wouldn’t,only Scott Parker can be so lucky to get two cushty jobs and worry about what clobber he is wearing 

Edited August 27, 2022 by joe jordans teeth

[Sheltons Army]

Be interesting how many would swap a 3-3 draw in Championship with a 9-0 humiliation , but at Anfield , in the Prem 

[ExiledAjax]

1 minute ago, Sheltons Army said:

Be interesting how many would swap a 3-3 draw in Championship with a 9-0 humiliation , but at Anfield , in the Prem 

The accountants would. 

I wouldn't, but they would.

[downendcity]

1 hour ago, spudski said:

That's exactly how I see it as well.

It is tactical. 

What people also tend to forget, is that opposition managers will know we concede late, inform their players and feel upbeat and positive about scoring.

Whilst we in the other hand, know we concede late, yet keep making the same mistakes.

The opposition late in will be buzzing...we will be nervous wrecks.

The only way of changing it ..is by doing something different.

Instead of defending, playing for time, shoring up ...which we have history of being poor at...play on the front foot. Play to our strengths.

Individual mistakes happen, because we allow teams on to us.

I think NP is doing a good job mainly...but this is now becoming far beyond a joke.

In Four Weddings and. Funeral, Kristen Scott Thomas was actually talking about Bristol City's propensity for conceding 90th minute goals when she said "there's a greatness to your lateness". 

I've long thought as you do, in that opposition managers will know they are not out of games late on against us.

An extra bit of a press and intensity will only add to the nervous tension among our players 

Us pressing the opposition, and especially now we have pace up front, would mean the opposition having to be a little more circumspect. Whereas, if we drop ever deeper it just makes it easier for the opposition to ramp up the pressure which in turn will cause the almost inevitable mistake.

What is more galling is the number of times it is our poor play that gifts a goal rather than the opposition scoring through their good play.

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 hours ago, Sheltons Army said:

Quite right Mr  P

I posted in the match day thread when they scored the opener 

‘A proper test for us now’

Thats true , it was 1 down to a physical side , the sort historically we’ve caved into , at a ground where we don’t tend to do well

Well we ended up with a point , and nearly 3

As frustrating as the equaliser was we didn’t fail the test , we might not have got an A+ but we didn’t fail

Agreed with this Sheltons.

As you say and indeed behind not once but twice and that is a strong test of character. Blackpool not just for us, is a hard away game in general IMO when things are going okay there.

A game despite our recent wins I would certainly have taken a point from pre-game today. Last season we would have lost I think.

Twice recovered, nearly did the full one. Definitely no fail today, seen the equaliser at last on EFL ITV and it seemed like we could have done better on but overall not too unhappy all told.

[The Journalist]

I don’t really understand why Harry is copping it here - it’s a fact that in 15 of our past 16 games we’ve led but only won seven. We keep getting ourselves into a winning position but don’t see it out.

Now, we can all ignore that, put our fingers in our ears and hope it goes away, but I don’t think that’s a ‘normal’ record and suggests to me we’re not matching results up with performances. This team is capable of more.

What I would be interested to know… is there a particular substitution we keep making when leading, either positional and personnel? Are we doing something tactically when ahead?

Others who watch us more often and more closely may be able to answer this, but the general consensus seems to be that we tend to retreat back into our shell when in front? Perhaps we need to keep the game more open so we can keep playing to our strengths?

FWIW, I think Pearson has done a tremendous job in his 18 months or so - when you think about what he inherited and the absolute apathy surrounding the club at that time, he’s done exactly what I hoped. We now have a more balanced squad and a genuinely quite exciting group of players.

For the first time, though, his job is starting to become more about making sure results match the quality we’ve got rather than just fire fighting, building and nursing us through.

For me, we’re entering the next phase of our development under Pearson - which is absolutely a compliment to him that we’re even in this position and should fill us all with excitement… but it also brings a bit more pressure.

We shouldn’t shy away from that or be afraid to call it out - let’s take the next step forward!

[Wanderingred]

All I have to say is that I’ve thoroughly enjoyed watching City so far this season. I haven’t been able to say that since the first half of the 2017-2018 season. 

[fgrsimon]

It's frustrating because we've been in front in every game this season, so if we had a defence that could 'shut up shop', we'd be top of the league and with a toe in the Premier League door already.

Logically then, if we can get the defence sorted, promotion is a real prospect because up front we have Weimann, Wells, Conway, Semenyo and Martin all scoring and contributing regularly already this season. This is dreamland as far as strikers are concerned.  It looks like we can score goals against anyone in the Championship but can we keep enough clean sheets to compete at the top end? That is the conundrum for NP to solve.

 

[Logical-City]

Prefer to judge game by game. For all Naismiths positives of which there are many he has brought to our team (communication,playing out from the back) but the fact is if you include the penalty that should never have been at Hull he has solely been responsible for costing us points this season (costly mistakes Sunderland, Hull and a hospital ball to Vyner yesterday) I’m sure he will learn from this as he wises up to the capabilities of his teammates and who is able to receive the ball under pressure in important moments! Not too much to assess again cost points due to individual errors 

Edited August 28, 2022 by Logical-City

[Olé]

15 hours ago, robin_unreliant said:

Sky showed it over a longer period on the coverage last week. We were miles clear at the top of the 'points lost' table. Nobody anywhere close. 

[Davefevs]

7 hours ago, The Journalist said:

I don’t really understand why Harry is copping it here - it’s a fact that in 15 of our past 16 games we’ve led but only won seven. We keep getting ourselves into a winning position but don’t see it out.

Now, we can all ignore that, put our fingers in our ears and hope it goes away, but I don’t think that’s a ‘normal’ record and suggests to me we’re not matching results up with performances. This team is capable of more.

What I would be interested to know… is there a particular substitution we keep making when leading, either positional and personnel? Are we doing something tactically when ahead?

Others who watch us more often and more closely may be able to answer this, but the general consensus seems to be that we tend to retreat back into our shell when in front? Perhaps we need to keep the game more open so we can keep playing to our strengths?

FWIW, I think Pearson has done a tremendous job in his 18 months or so - when you think about what he inherited and the absolute apathy surrounding the club at that time, he’s done exactly what I hoped. We now have a more balanced squad and a genuinely quite exciting group of players.

For the first time, though, his job is starting to become more about making sure results match the quality we’ve got rather than just fire fighting, building and nursing us through.

For me, we’re entering the next phase of our development under Pearson - which is absolutely a compliment to him that we’re even in this position and should fill us all with excitement… but it also brings a bit more pressure.

We shouldn’t shy away from that or be afraid to call it out - let’s take the next step forward!

Here is each sub that has come on this season (league):

From a pure 1s and 0s the last 3 columns are the ones you’re after, but of course they don’t tell us anything tactically or about individual performance.

Pts +/- reflect the change in game-state from the point they entered the pitch to the point they leave (often full-time).  A player like Antoine came on yesterday at 1-2 (L) but end result was 3-3 (D), so we scored 2 (GFOP) and conceded 1 (GAOP), but importantly we went from getting 0 pts (losing) to 1 pt (draw) so Antoine gets +1.

Youll see most subs don’t change the game-state, but overall our subs have had a slightly negative affect.  But can you legislate for a pass from Naismith like yesterday?

[Davefevs]

For info, the reason i collate the info this way is to avoid the way sites like transfermarkt give someone coming on in the last minute of a game won a 3 points in their PPG calculation.  In the same vain Andy King would get 1 pt as would Antoine Semenyo yesterday, when the game states changes in a polar opposite way.

Caveat: 6 games only.  Over a full season you can see some trends, but I wouldn’t be basing team selection on it for example.

[mozo]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Here is each sub that has come on this season (league):

From a pure 1s and 0s the last 3 columns are the ones you’re after, but of course they don’t tell us anything tactically or about individual performance.

Pts +/- reflect the change in game-state from the point they entered the pitch to the point they leave (often full-time).  A player like Antoine came on yesterday at 1-2 (L) but end result was 3-3 (D), so we scored 2 (GFOP) and conceded 1 (GAOP), but importantly we went from getting 0 pts (losing) to 1 pt (draw) so Antoine gets +1.

Youll see most subs don’t change the game-state, but overall our subs have had a slightly negative affect.  But can you legislate for a pass from Naismith like yesterday?

Well Pearson seems to have a very old school approach to subs.

If we're chasing the game he brings on as many attackers as he can.

If we're holding onto a game he brings another centre back or senior player on.

[The Journalist]

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

Here is each sub that has come on this season (league):

From a pure 1s and 0s the last 3 columns are the ones you’re after, but of course they don’t tell us anything tactically or about individual performance.

Pts +/- reflect the change in game-state from the point they entered the pitch to the point they leave (often full-time).  A player like Antoine came on yesterday at 1-2 (L) but end result was 3-3 (D), so we scored 2 (GFOP) and conceded 1 (GAOP), but importantly we went from getting 0 pts (losing) to 1 pt (draw) so Antoine gets +1.

Youll see most subs don’t change the game-state, but overall our subs have had a slightly negative affect.  But can you legislate for a pass from Naismith like yesterday?

I think if Pearson was to answer my question (publicly at least) he’d almost certainly say “too many individual mistakes”, which is never an untrue statement when you’re conceding goals, but it’s happening too frequently and over a sustained period of time to put it down solely to that isn’t it?

What are we doing tactically when trying to see a game out? What’s the strategy? What’s our decision-making process like when in front? What are the players doing instinctively when placed under pressure?

It’s almost become an embedded issue. I don’t know how anyone could just dismiss this in the way some have re: Harry’s original point.

We’ve all seen City teams in the past who, when they go in front, you just know they’re in control of the situation. It works both ways.

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, mozo said:

Well Pearson seems to have a very old school approach to subs.

If we're chasing the game he brings on as many attackers as he can.

If we're holding onto a game he brings another centre back or senior player on.

As I said in other threads, I didn’t really watch the game in detail yesterday, but I thought it was to frantic a game to ever feel there wouldn’t be another chance.  However having equalised just after they had a chance to go 3-1 ahead, and then gone 3-2 up, I thought we managed the last 10 mins (before the goal) pretty well.  It seemed quite calm, in the context of the preceding 80 mins.  So a bloody stupid goal given away is so frustrating.

Versus Hull we were the better team in the last 10-15, looked the more likely to get a winner at 1-1, but a lucky deflection cost us.

Things to critique on the subs undoubtedly.

[ChippenhamRed]

12 hours ago, Sheltons Army said:

Be interesting how many would swap a 3-3 draw in Championship with a 9-0 humiliation , but at Anfield , in the Prem 

I would love to be able to say in my lifetime that we’ve just lost 9-0 to Liverpool in the Premier League. Because if I can, that means I’ll also have had my greatest ever moment as a fan of City.

[BigAl&Toby]

15 hours ago, Harry said:

So, because we’ve played ok in spells, everything is rosy and we’re not allowed to be critical? 

Indeed. Very impressive. 

Got nothing to do with Johnson and I do actually like Pearson a lot. So I’m not sure why you’d think that. But I guess if you have me on ignore you won’t read this. 

No. It means that in the last 2 years we had shite players who I had no affinity to. Therefore when we lost games, I was of course disappointed, but being critical was pointless, because half the players couldn’t give a shit about the shirt and thus it wasn’t as frustrating because there wasn’t much that we could do to remedy things. 
Now that there are some positive signs, and the squad has a lot more players who I feel are ‘buying-in’ then it’s a tad more frustrating that we’re letting things slip. 
 

Surely there is a place for being critical when we’ve dropped 10 points from winning positions against teams who are on our level. Or are we not allowed to critique anything? 
 

As I’ve explained, I see positive signs. But there are mistakes occurring - why are we not allowed to discuss this? 

@Harry absolutely spot on. We should be allowed to discuss without being accused of anything.

We weren’t at Hull or Blackpool but we were at Wigan and Sunderland. My view of both was that we should have won both. We made far too many simple mistakes - particularly from dead ball situations in the final third.

Thing is far too many accept mediocrity and will grasp onto any aspect of progress and ignore other elements of what they see - or don’t.

Mediocrity - a Bristol disease. And that comes from a born and bred Bristolian………

If proof were actually needed look at the points we’ve dropped. And where we’d be if we hadn’t.

All ifs and buts, but there you go….

[Harry]

1 hour ago, billywedlock said:

Why use the word slugs ? What is that about. It makes your valid points weaker . 

Because all 3 are slow. They offer zero pace. 

[bcfctim]

16 hours ago, 2015 said:

I really do not miss the Johnson days. Most of the time we were scraping wins and playing on counter attack. We have a side who actually look to effect games now and are worth getting behind. I'd take how we are playing right now above 80% of his reign

We're playing good football at the minute and I'm optimistic about where we're headed but some of the revisionist history over LJ annoys me

Sure it went stale towards the end and it was the right time to move on when we did but we played some great stuff for the first 2/3 years of his reign.

3-1 vs Villa, 4-1 vs Derby, 4-0 vs Sheff Wed, 4-0 vs Huddersfield (twice!), 6-0 vs Bolton, 4-0 away at Fulham...

And that's not getting into the league cup run and the league run surrounding it

3 straight top half finishes, it wasn't all doom and gloom 

We very rapidly went from "a proper manager would get us promoted" to "without a proper manager we'd be relegated" once he'd gone. Says he did a better job than he was given credit for imo

 

 

 

[rednotblue]

This last minute conceeding has been going on for far too long. For all the good Pearson is doing (and in my opinion there is lots on and off the field) this is dogging his tenure.

The biggest issue by far is conceeding at the end of the game. Perhaps they need a physcoligist (sp?) brought in as I think it is now a mental issue more than a football issue.

I hope we crack it soon.