It’s so obvious why does Nige get it wrong.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Just now, W-S-M Seagull said:

I'd like a narrow front 3 of Semenyo on the left, Conway as the striker and Weimann on the right. Kind of like how Liverpool play. 

I was highly excited about the prospect of that front 3 back in late August when Sememyo was starting to come back, with his goals off the bench.

Maybe wasn't thinking in the shape that you said but on paper it looks very exciting, that front 3..would be rather harsh on Wells and on that note, can Wells and Conway combine quite well? I think they can.

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, Shuffle said:

I have this with friends that if you criticise or question Nige then then instantly become very defensive.  Its like they are members of some Nigel Pearson cult as they won’t accept that he ever gets it wrong.

it’s a fine line as a couple of positive results then it would even be a discussion.  I’m still prepared to give him time and was very impressed by him at the forum & recent sky interview.  However, he isn’t perfect and we still leak goals and has signed numerous defenders to make us difficult to beat.  I acknowledge that going forward we have been good but we cannot keep relying on us scoring 2 or 3 goals to wing games as we are finding.  His subs are also very questionable.

Keep offering opinions as that what forums are for & at the end of the day it’s a results business and we are sliding towards the bottom.  A win ratio of 30% deserves to be questioned & rightly so as despite the financial backdrop it’s not good enough.

I guess my biggest issue is when we lose / fail to win….is it always Nige’s fault for some posters.  Why is the first point of blame to the manager?

What did Nige himself actually get wrong last night with what he had available?  We played well, we just didn’t bloody score.

If you go beneath the manager, then it’s “who is the scapegoat”?  Seems Chris Martin is last night’s fall guy.  I’ve just sat back and watched the last 32 minutes of the game from the point Tanner hits the post.  It isn’t Martin’s fault, but the “we need a plan b” brigade moan they don’t like this particular plan b, so their lazy rhetoric is to point the blame at him.  There are good posters on here who will at least explain the rationale behind why they form their opinion, but too often it’s “throw away” comments with no basis.

Context, they scored an offside goal.

Context, they should’ve been down to 10 men

It’s bloody frustrating, but finding individuals to blame is effing tedious.  And the flip side, for us so-called “Nige lovers”, I didn’t see any of going OTT on our decent run, we were all pretty calm, realistic of a thin squad, tough league, form, injuries etc.

Basically, there are a number on here who love a good whinge.

 

 

[Topper 123]

I think Pearson cost us a point or more with the Chris Martin sub for nahki wells who I thought was having a good game and probably the player most likely to score , brought Martin on attack slowed due to change of shape and long ball football, we were causing endless chances and had 16 shots , I believe in the time Chris Martin ( who has slowed down even more ) was on we didn’t have a shot ? Why nige oh why 

[spudski]

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I have a leaning towards a 4-3-3 but that's just me but @brad blit it was none other than Sykes who out in the ball that DaSilva could/should have scored from.

More of that from both flanks would be welcome.

I'd prefer us to play to a more ' narrow' formation like this.

However...I don't think it will happen.

The Club from top to bottom are set up to play the way we are. 

It's easy to see the Academy teams are set up to play like the first team.

A pathway being created to move seamlessly into the first team when ready.

It would take a lot of time and change to implement a new system of play.

I guess it's finding players capable of playing the system well, on a consistent basis.

NP has said, that our defenders will make errors and we will concede. 

So we have to find ways of scoring more. 

What type of goal scoring opportunities do we create? 

Hopeful balls or more controlled and precise?

Are we giving our strikers the best opportunity to score goals? Are the chances created quality? 

The last two questions I feel we could do better at. Imo, we rely to much on crosses that create half chances. 

Conway, Wells, Semenyo, Weimann all have decent movement and do well when receiving ' through balls', create angles, pass and move into the box and around it centrally. 

At the moment we are relying a lot on crosses into the box. Crosses aimed into areas. Hoping a player will get on the end of it. Hoping a defender doesn't stop it. The chances being created are relying on hope, luck and hoping a defender makes a mistake.

Very few chances being created are quality and controlled. 

Yesterday's game was a prime example of this.

Yes we created chances...but the chances rely too much on so many factors.

It's so frustrating to watch. 

 

[Davefevs]

Just now, Magger1 said:

I think Pearson cost us a point or more with the Chris Martin sub for nahki wells who I thought was having a good game and probably the player most likely to score , brought Martin on attack slowed due to change of shape and long ball football, we were causing endless chances and had 16 shots , I believe in the time Chris Martin ( who has slowed down even more ) was on we didn’t have a shot ? Why nige oh why 

We weren’t. The sting had gone out of our attack before Martin came on.

[firstdivision]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

I guess my biggest issue is when we lose / fail to win….is it always Nige’s fault for some posters.  Why is the first point of blame to the manager?

What did Nige himself actually get wrong last night with what he had available?  We played well, we just didn’t bloody score.

If you go beneath the manager, then it’s “who is the scapegoat”?  Seems Chris Martin is last night’s fall guy.  I’ve just sat back and watched the last 32 minutes of the game from the point Tanner hits the post.  It isn’t Martin’s fault, but the “we need a plan b” brigade moan they don’t like this particular plan b, so their lazy rhetoric is to point the blame at him.  There are good posters on here who will at least explain the rationale behind why they form their opinion, but too often it’s “throw away” comments with no basis.

Context, they scored an offside goal.

Context, they should’ve been down to 10 men

It’s bloody frustrating, but finding individuals to blame is effing tedious.  And the flip side, for us so-called “Nige lovers”, I didn’t see any of going OTT on our decent run, we were all pretty calm, realistic of a thin squad, tough league, form, injuries etc.

Basically, there are a number on here who love a good whinge.

 

 

I am reading Ryan O'Hanlon's book, Net Gains, about football stats. There's so much to discuss but his main argument (one that seems to be uncontested) is that player wages are the biggest single factor governing success on the field.

Here's my question: how do our wages compare with other Championship clubs? My ears pricked up when I heard Richard Gould say we are in the top ten payers in the Championship at the forum the other evening (one of the most interesting things said at the event). You know where I'm going with this, Dave...

Also, Dave, football is an emotional game. You know that. This is a forum. Not everyone is as rational as you. Of course, people like to whinge. But we could be facing another relegation battle. Unlucky teams, teams who play well and lose, teams who play badly and lose, teams who give away soft goals - you don't find many that regularly display those characteristics doing well.

And a half-decent team, or two, or three will most probably go down this season. Little has surprised me about where we are. I did notice a few/some talking about the play-offs (hard to know exactly how many) earlier in the season, though. I, of course, laughed to myself. I would much rather be wrong but this is stating to feel worrying. Now, about those wages...

 

 

[LondonBristolian]

I think we have to put last night in the context of a good performance against a very good team with four of our five most senior defenders missing - and I think that it would be very difficult to go to a back four until we get at least some of those players back. However I also don’t think the back five is the problem so much as a lack of creativity further up the pitch.

When we are losing, we tend to throw striker after striker on simply because we lack potential game-changing options elsewhere on the pitch.

A fundamental question then is whether that is by necessity or by design. If Pearson is happy with the options in attacking midfield and on the flanks, that is an issue. If we’ve had players we wanted we could not afford, and players under contract we could not shift, that is a separate matter and it is harder to blame the manager.

All that said, it is Pearson’s job to get the best out of what we have but I do wonder how many managers would have got a better performance against a very good Sheffield United side with the players we have unavailable. And our players have to take some responsibility for their finishing when it goes wrong, just as they deserve credit when it goes right. 

It is always easy in hindsight to say the players on the bench would have done better than those on the pitch. And that we should go out and buy players we cannot afford to afford to replace the players we could not afford but bought anyway who are no longer getting in the team. But I am not convinced it is anyway near so simple in reality.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, firstdivision said:

I am reading Ryan O'Hanlon's book, Net Gains, about football stats. There's so much to discuss but his main argument (one that seems to be uncontested) is that player wages are the biggest single factor governing success on the field.

Here's my question: how do our wages compare with other Championship clubs? My ears pricked up when I heard Richard Gould say we are in the top ten payers in the Championship at the forum the other evening (one of the most interesting things said at the event). You know where I'm going with this, Dave...

Also, Dave, football is an emotional game. You know that. This is a forum. Not everyone is as rational as you. Of course, people like to whinge. But we could be facing another relegation battle. Unlucky teams, teams who play well and lose, teams who play badly and lose, teams who give away soft goals - you don't find many that regularly display those characteristics doing well.

And a half-decent team, or two, or three will most probably go down this season. Little has surprised me about where we are. I did notice a few/some talking about the play-offs (hard to know exactly how many) earlier in the season, though. I, of course, laughed to myself. I would much rather be wrong but this is stating to feel worrying. Now, about those wages...

 

 

I believe we are in the top half of payers…as RG suggested.

However, we would probably need to delve deeper into what that really means.

Certainly in the published accounts £30.252 (20/21 - BCFC Ltd) on wages is the headline figure, and is / was too high.  Add £12.358m amortisation (transfer fee “depreciation”) and you’re talking about £43m of cost, the vast slug of which is on “footballers”.  That is too high, way too high, and most definitely puts us in top half / top ten.

That will’ve reduced, looking forward to 21/22’s accounts coming out, but I still expect us to be top half.  I assume RG means our overall wage bill is in a similar ballpark to teams outside the PP clubs plus the odd one or two, ie. The next bracket down.  If you couple that with one stream of our new target market being OOC players, then the fact that there is zero amortisation, means there is some justification to paying a bit more to get an senior pro who’s OOC.

Rob Atkinson (almost 23 upon signing) £1.6m plus let’s say £400k p.w = £2.8m (albeit hopefully future value)

For that same £2.8m you can get Kal Naismith (30), let’s say on £15k p.w that costs you £2.3m over the same 3 years, but no future value.

And I think we start to see the model….young and cheap, coupled with paying a bit more to attract players 27+, but who leave us with no amortisation to sink, like we have with Kalas (total cost £13m over 4 years) or Diedhiou.  Massengo should’ve realised some value, but that’s a whole different story!

So that leaves us paying good wages for senior players (top 10 money) but watered down by the likes of Semenyo, Scott, Conway, etc….and probably a mid-table budget overall.  It puts pressure on Academy () and recruitment () and being able to sell or shift players when the timing is right.  We’ve seen with Palmer that shifting a player who signed for a large fee is a financial headache, trying to shift a player you signed OOC is much easier.

Not sure if I answered where you were going or not.

I’d really like to see where the squad is next September when the summer window has closed, to really confirm whether the strategy is working or not.

[Daniro]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

 Massengo should’ve realised some value, but that’s a whole different story!

 

Do we think Han THE Man will be snapped up in the January window - and if so, for how much?!!

[JoeAman08]

7 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I guess my biggest issue is when we lose / fail to win….is it always Nige’s fault for some posters.  Why is the first point of blame to the manager?

What did Nige himself actually get wrong last night with what he had available?  We played well, we just didn’t bloody score.

If you go beneath the manager, then it’s “who is the scapegoat”?  Seems Chris Martin is last night’s fall guy.  I’ve just sat back and watched the last 32 minutes of the game from the point Tanner hits the post.  It isn’t Martin’s fault, but the “we need a plan b” brigade moan they don’t like this particular plan b, so their lazy rhetoric is to point the blame at him.  There are good posters on here who will at least explain the rationale behind why they form their opinion, but too often it’s “throw away” comments with no basis.

Context, they scored an offside goal.

Context, they should’ve been down to 10 men

It’s bloody frustrating, but finding individuals to blame is effing tedious.  And the flip side, for us so-called “Nige lovers”, I didn’t see any of going OTT on our decent run, we were all pretty calm, realistic of a thin squad, tough league, form, injuries etc.

Basically, there are a number on here who love a good whinge.

 

 

Love a good whinge or just don’t agree with you? The Chris Martin sub effectively killed our chances of scoring. Same thing on Saturday. Not his fault they scored but after they did it was point is best case scenario. 
 

Then everyone praises his man management. You said it yourself the goal was offside. Then after the match he proceeds to talk about how they’ll concede soft goals because the quality is poor at the back. Imagine playing in driving rain against a top 4 side only allowing 4 shots and an offside goal and your boss says you are of poor quality. No he is not wrong in terms of who played last night but the timing and wording is dreadful. And what about when everyone is fit? 3/5 are his signings in Sykes, Naismith and Atkinson. Is he admitting fault? 
 

We have played well the last couple of games and if that is now the level we see week in and week out then NP has figured it out and I will love to say I was wrong. Not worried we scored only the 1 in 180 minutes. That said we have seen this before. A few good performances and once they don’t return points we crumble a bit. Massive games coming up now and we can’t afford the crumble at the minute. 

[firstdivision]

5 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I believe we are in the top half of payers…as RG suggested.

However, we would probably need to delve deeper into what that really means.

Certainly in the published accounts £30.252 (20/21 - BCFC Ltd) on wages is the headline figure, and is / was too high.  Add £12.358m amortisation (transfer fee “depreciation”) and you’re talking about £43m of cost, the vast slug of which is on “footballers”.  That is too high, way too high, and most definitely puts us in top half / top ten.

That will’ve reduced, looking forward to 21/22’s accounts coming out, but I still expect us to be top half.  I assume RG means our overall wage bill is in a similar ballpark to teams outside the PP clubs plus the odd one or two, ie. The next bracket down.  If you couple that with one stream of our new target market being OOC players, then the fact that there is zero amortisation, means there is some justification to paying a bit more to get an senior pro who’s OOC.

Rob Atkinson (almost 23 upon signing) £1.6m plus let’s say £400k p.w = £2.8m (albeit hopefully future value)

For that same £2.8m you can get Kal Naismith (30), let’s say on £15k p.w that costs you £2.3m over the same 3 years, but no future value.

And I think we start to see the model….young and cheap, coupled with paying a bit more to attract players 27+, but who leave us with no amortisation to sink, like we have with Kalas (total cost £13m over 4 years) or Diedhiou.  Massengo should’ve realised some value, but that’s a whole different story!

So that leaves us paying good wages for senior players (top 10 money) but watered down by the likes of Semenyo, Scott, Conway, etc….and probably a mid-table budget overall.  It puts pressure on Academy () and recruitment () and being able to sell or shift players when the timing is right.  We’ve seen with Palmer that shifting a player who signed for a large fee is a financial headache, trying to shift a player you signed OOC is much easier.

Not sure if I answered where you were going or not.

I’d really like to see where the squad is next September when the summer window has closed, to really confirm whether the strategy is working or not.

Thank you. I suppose where I was going is…if we are mid-table payers, should we not expect to be mid-table finishers? If we are top ten payers, then should we expect to be closer to the top ten? 

[Davefevs]

58 minutes ago, JoeAman08 said:

Love a good whinge or just don’t agree with you?

I think some love a good whinge!

I don’t mind having an opposite view to anybody on here.  You can still have a good discussion on it Joe and learn from others…sometimes it can be as simple as seeing from a different seat at the ground.  On OSIB tonight Stanley thought the sub of Semenyo for Sykes and swapping Weimann was the momentum changer.  I agree, more than the Martin for Wells sub.

15 minutes ago, firstdivision said:

Thank you. I suppose where I was going is…if we are mid-table payers, should we not expect to be mid-table finishers? If we are top ten payers, then should we expect to be closer to the top ten? 

I think the point I’m trying to make is only some of the players fall into that category, the whole squad is not mid-table imho. One of our ever-presents is “league one at best”  and he isn’t being paid top ten!

Edited November 2, 2022 by Davefevs

[TonyTonyTony]

It’s a fair point about the wing backs. I find it odd that Wilson has not been given a go yet to be honest. Also agree re Chris Martin slowing the game down but you can’t slog the same players over and over again. You have to use the squad.

What happened, btw, to Semenyo is not a striker ?

[TheReds]

58 minutes ago, JoeAman08 said:

Then after the match he proceeds to talk about how they’ll concede soft goals because the quality is poor at the back. Imagine playing in driving rain against a top 4 side only allowing 4 shots and an offside goal and your boss says you are of poor quality. No he is not wrong in terms of who played last night but the timing and wording is dreadful.

When did he say this? I have listened to the interview on the City youtube channel and he doesn't say anything like how you have put it, unless it was a Sky interview? 

[Davefevs]

3 minutes ago, TheReds said:

When did he say this? I have listened to the interview on the City youtube channel and he doesn't say anything like how you have put it, unless it was a Sky interview? 

It was in one of the interviews, I heard it.

[Simon79]

5 minutes ago, TheReds said:

When did he say this? I have listened to the interview on the City youtube channel and he doesn't say anything like how you have put it, unless it was a Sky interview? 

Think it was the Sky one. Did raise an eyebrow when I heard it. COYR 

[Cityboy1954]

15 hours ago, 1960maaan said:

1) Agree to a point. Saturday Conway was blowing out of his arse, and Wells got subbed first, strange. Starting to look like Subs by numbers. Tonight , with no real option on the bench it did seem strange, as Wells didn't look like he was struggling.

2) We have no options other than Martin, but I would tell him stay central, he adds nothing to build up play, but can occupy a CB. We do need and upgrade, or alternative, but have no money.

3) Sykes, apart from a couple of times tonight , looks like he's struggling for confidence . He started the season like our best player, form has dipped but I thought he showed glimpses last night. Wilson would probably have got a run by now, if he wasn't injured. I like Tanner, but it seems Nige sees him as more FB than WB. Sykes has the shirt for the next couple of games whatever happens now.

4) Jay is technically good, can dribble and beat a man, in that respect he is a WB. His delivery is shocking though, TBF that could be said about everyone out there last night. I'm a fan of Pring, he brings more physicality , he's more direct and for the most part his delivery is better. Although last night it wasn't great and mostly from the wrong position.
I'd like to see Pring and Atkinson link up down the left.

5) Ha . Max has let in 2 goals in 2 games. One a firm shot deflected just in front of him and the other he jus has to spread himself. He hasn't had another difficult shot to save. He's claimed balls Bentley wouldn't come for, has connected with every punch he's come for and his distribution, though far from perfect is better than Bentley and he is far, far more vocal . He has done nothing to think Bentley would have done better.

All managers talk about fine margins and over the last 2 games, with better decisions last night we have a Pen & at least play 10 V 10. Saturday the keeper throws out an arm and deflects Semenyo's shot wide. At least we are making chances, and TBF we have kept it pretty tight at the back. One deflection, one offside and a little luck and we are looking at 2 great results against teams that will be challenging. 
Of course results are important , but the last 2 games show we can easily compete with the better side in this Division.

 

Spot on with the keeper situation .

[1960maaan]

12 hours ago, TonyTonyTony said:

It’s a fair point about the wing backs. I find it odd that Wilson has not been given a go yet to be honest. Also agree re Chris Martin slowing the game down but you can’t slog the same players over and over again. You have to use the squad.

What happened, btw, to Semenyo is not a striker ?

Got a knock pre season which is why Sykes got in. TBF Sykes did brilliantly to start. Then just as Sykes started to drop off, Kane got injured and has had an operation . Looks like 4 months away from a start , at least.

[IAmNick]

12 hours ago, firstdivision said:

Thank you. I suppose where I was going is…if we are mid-table payers, should we not expect to be mid-table finishers? If we are top ten payers, then should we expect to be closer to the top ten? 

I think mid table payers can mean very different things based on the distribution of the wages. We've been pretty top heavy (large proportion distributed among a few players) which can distort the reality imo, especially if a few of them like Kalas and Bentley aren't in the team. At a guess he's probably being paid as much as say, Sykes, Conway, and Pring combined for example.

So the headline figure is maybe mid table or top 10, but with our wonky distribution (which Pearson has mentioned quite a few times) I don't think you can draw a line between that and what our finishing position should be, compared to if our wage structure were more even - coupled with the fact that all of those higher earners who are skewing it were signed by previous managers and may not fit in to how Pearson wants us to play. Of course there's an element that he has to make do with what he has, and find a way to get our better players performing regardless...!

Edited November 3, 2022 by IAmNick

[The Bard]

I really don't get the negativity towards Martin.  As soon as their goalie faked injury, we lost momentum in the game and they retreated.  He came on to win flick ons so that we got possession in their 3rd, which he did. 

Clearly we could do with an upgrade but the contract that he signed was for 2 years plus an extra year if he hit certain targets which he did.  What's the point in moaning?  It's idiotic.  He's been a decent player at this level.  Like LWB, CB and CM, there is the opportunity to upgrade in the summer

There is still a section of support who just don't get the situation we are in.  Like there is some leeway to get rid of players on contracts way above their market value that were given to him by the previous regime.  To my Pearson has already performed 2 miracles in getting both Nagy and Palmer out the club when they had good contracts.  

[Fuber]

On 01/11/2022 at 23:16, Better Red said:

I thought we played well tonight and we were actually the better team so this is not about the game tonight.

Also to be clear I like NP and I am not asking for a change in manager but..

5 Simple mistakes that I am not sure why he keeps making.

I also think he is now costing us points.

1. Nakhi Wells needs to stay on the pitch when we are chasing a goal. Effort is brilliant, team contribution is brilliant and a goal scorer at this level. Bringing on Sam Bell Saturday for him was a crazy decision and taking him off tonight was equally as bad.

2. Chris Martin should never be brought on when we are chasing a goal.
Slows game down. We go long and lose our pattern and shape up front literally kills any chance of a goal.

I would happily let him go on a free in Jan and pay some of his wages just to get someone else in.

3 Sykes is not a wing back - I think Tanner would be better

4 JD is not a wing back - Pring would be better.

Seen enough in the last 2 games re 4 and 5 to think both would do a better job. Delivery has been poor from both most games and Skye’s could be better used as a sub in a more forward position. Both Tanner and Pring are also better defenders than both.

We also played Scott there which was ridiculous to waste him in that position when clearly needs to play in the central role in Midfield.

Wilson never got a chance and he is a natural wingback again madness.

Wiemann played there tonight - that is also ridiculous.

Nige has to sort out wingbacks it’s a problem he has had all season.

And finally

5. Playing Max in goal.
I know controversial but Bentley makes game saving saves. Max has not done to bad in fairness but I also don’t think he has had a lot to do at the same time.

Bentley will win you points Max has not done that for me when he has played.

We need to get points at the moment and Bentley will win you  more than Max. Maybe this is about his contract but I think it’s costing us points.

Again not about tonight as thought we were good value for at least a point if not all three.

 

 

Issue being none of the points above address one key fact - fitness.

We can't play neither Tanner nor Pring where suggested due to the number of injuries to centre backs.

As for Bents - he was rightly dropped after a couple of pretty horrific games. O'Leary hasn't done near anything wrong, even the Kalas incident was arguable - I actually think the whole reason our makeshift backline hasn't looked so bad is due to his clear communication, which Bentley never does. You could hear all his shouts clearly front the stands.

Only point I 100% agree with is Martin. But then the only other option is Bell (when on bench). In retrospect the decision to offer him a new deal was likely the wrong one in the summer in my opinion.

 

[The Bard]

6 minutes ago, Fuber said:

Issue being none of the points above address one key fact - fitness.

We can't play neither Tanner nor Pring where suggested due to the number of injuries to centre backs.

As for Bents - he was rightly dropped after a couple of pretty horrific games. O'Leary hasn't done near anything wrong, even the Kalas incident was arguable - I actually think the whole reason our makeshift backline hasn't looked so bad is due to his clear communication, which Bentley never does. You could hear all his shouts clearly front the stands.

Only point I 100% agree with is Martin. But then the only other option is Bell (when on bench). In retrospect the decision to offer him a new deal was likely the wrong one in the summer in my opinion.

 

This is what winds me up no end.  We didn't choose to offer Martin a deal.  He got an extra year due to a clause in his original contract.

Everyone has the right to an opinion but base it on reality not some imagined situation.  

[Fuber]

12 minutes ago, The Bard said:

This is what winds me up no end.  We didn't choose to offer Martin a deal.  He got an extra year due to a clause in his original contract.

Everyone has the right to an opinion but base it on reality not some imagined situation.  

We renewed/extended his contract in the summer, didn't we?

There was no mention of any clause in the official announcement that I can recall.

If I'm incorrect then fair enough. 

[Davefevs]

9 minutes ago, Fuber said:

We renewed/extended his contract in the summer, didn't we?

There was no mention of any clause in the official announcement that I can recall.

If I'm incorrect then fair enough. 

Was confirmed by Nige it was a clause in Martin’s favour, ie, if he made x appearances he could trigger an extra year.  Nige said (even though he didn’t sign him) that it was something he quite liked, paraphrased, it’s a nice carrot for the player to push himself to get another year.  Would imagine that is what Klose has in his “option”, e.g. if he makes x appearances he can trigger another year.

[Sir Geoff]

On 02/11/2022 at 12:15, Magger1 said:

I think Pearson cost us a point or more with the Chris Martin sub for nahki wells who I thought was having a good game and probably the player most likely to score , brought Martin on attack slowed due to change of shape and long ball football, we were causing endless chances and had 16 shots , I believe in the time Chris Martin ( who has slowed down even more ) was on we didn’t have a shot ? Why nige oh why 

Chris Martin had a shot on target and Weimann had a shot down the middle straight at the keeper to name but 2.

[Fuber]

9 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Was confirmed by Nige it was a clause in Martin’s favour, ie, if he made x appearances he could trigger an extra year.  Nige said (even though he didn’t sign him) that it was something he quite liked, paraphrased, it’s a nice carrot for the player to push himself to get another year.  Would imagine that is what Klose has in his “option”, e.g. if he makes x appearances he can trigger another year.

Fair enough - I had no idea.

[Better Red]

On 01/11/2022 at 23:16, Better Red said:

I thought we played well tonight and we were actually the better team so this is not about the game tonight.

Also to be clear I like NP and I am not asking for a change in manager but..

5 Simple mistakes that I am not sure why he keeps making.

I also think he is now costing us points.

1. Nakhi Wells needs to stay on the pitch when we are chasing a goal. Effort is brilliant, team contribution is brilliant and a goal scorer at this level. Bringing on Sam Bell Saturday for him was a crazy decision and taking him off tonight was equally as bad.

2. Chris Martin should never be brought on when we are chasing a goal.
Slows game down. We go long and lose our pattern and shape up front literally kills any chance of a goal.

I would happily let him go on a free in Jan and pay some of his wages just to get someone else in.

3 Sykes is not a wing back - I think Tanner would be better

4 JD is not a wing back - Pring would be better.

Seen enough in the last 2 games re 4 and 5 to think both would do a better job. Delivery has been poor from both most games and Skye’s could be better used as a sub in a more forward position. Both Tanner and Pring are also better defenders than both.

We also played Scott there which was ridiculous to waste him in that position when clearly needs to play in the central role in Midfield.

Wilson never got a chance and he is a natural wingback again madness.

Wiemann played there tonight - that is also ridiculous.

Nige has to sort out wingbacks it’s a problem he has had all season.

And finally

5. Playing Max in goal.
I know controversial but Bentley makes game saving saves. Max has not done to bad in fairness but I also don’t think he has had a lot to do at the same time.

Bentley will win you points Max has not done that for me when he has played.

We need to get points at the moment and Bentley will win you  more than Max. Maybe this is about his contract but I think it’s costing us points.

Again not about tonight as thought we were good value for at least a point if not all three.

 

 

No 1  - Fail Why are we resting him ? 1 game in the next month

No 2 - Fail Can’t believe he is even on the pitch enough said

No 3 - Fail - Vyner better option if not playing him at CB where he should be

No 4 - Fail  - Pring is so much better

No 5 - Fail Bentley not even good enough tonight contract issue or not - Joke

I can’t put my finger on why it’s not going well tonight.

New mistake to add

6 - Playing Andy King 

 

[Pezo]

8 minutes ago, Better Red said:

No 1  - Fail Why are we resting him ? 1 game in the next month

No 2 - Fail Can’t believe he is even on the pitch enough said

No 3 - Fail - Vyner better option if not playing him at CB where he should be

No 4 - Fail  - Pring is so much better

No 5 - Fail Bentley not even good enough tonight contract issue or not - Joke

I can’t put my finger on why it’s not going well tonight.

New mistake to add

6 - Playing Andy King 

 

Not disagreeing but this would carry more weight if you posted it in the hour between the team being announced and the kickoff, that would show it was obvious rather a knee jerk reaction to being 0-2 down.

[Better Red]

17 minutes ago, Pezo said:

Not disagreeing but this would carry more weight if you posted it in the hour between the team being announced and the kickoff, that would show it was obvious rather a knee jerk reaction to being 0-2 down.

I only posted it 7 days ago

3-0 down

[Pezo]

36 minutes ago, Better Red said:

I only posted it 7 days ago

3-0 down

No, you didn’t post that 7 days ago, you were replying to the post you made 7 days ago.

I know sometimes talking to yourself is the easiest way to have a conversation on here but if you do that you have to expect someone to at least critique what you are saying to yourself.