Pearsons WBA Press Conference

[2015]

4 hours ago, petehinton said:

If he’d had come in instead of Holden, we’d be absolutely nowhere near where we are now. 
 

Don’t forget, Adam Nagy called Pearson ‘strict’ for punishing players who were late to meetings or didn’t tidy up after themselves around the HPC. That’s probably the tip of the iceberg of what he was dealing with. 

I'm out of likes, but words never so true. The decision to appoint Holden at that time has set this club back about 5 years. The whole culture at this club was totally wrong at the time.

[frenchred]

3 minutes ago, 2015 said:

You happen to pick out one point and ignore the context. What I was basically saying is although we are not getting the results we deserve, we're not far away, it's small tweaks like individuals making mistakes rather than the whole side playing below par. The Championship is very close and most teams are evenly matched, consistent wins in this league is very hard to come by for the majority (Luton have been the exception to this rule).

If you cannot see the progress in our performances this season then I would say you may not go to many games.

Season ticket holder mate, probably been going longer than you been alive!

[DaveF]

1 minute ago, frenchred said:

Season ticket holder mate, probably been going longer than you been alive!

Hes not going to leave anytime soon so you're just going to have to put up with it I'm afraid. Enjoy.

[2015]

10 minutes ago, frenchred said:

Season ticket holder mate, probably been going longer than you been alive!

Stop going then if you are fed up with the results so much. Pearson wont be going by the sounds of things he's planning on the long term and has probably already had discussions with SL about the summer ahead. 

For the past 40 years this club has bumbled between lower half of Championship and the top half of League 1. We have had a couple of good seasons within that in this League which have cost us in the long run financially. In those times we have constantly fired and hired managers and it eventually led to relegations on every occasion (1995, 1999, 2013).

For once this club needs stability due to the financial position it is in so in the long run we reap the rewards, sacking NP would absolutely throw everything up in the air regarding finances and contracts. We have to simply survive in this League whilst being restricted by FFP. Can you seriously name any other Manager who would come in and be able to stabilise this Football Club right now?

[Top Robin]

5 minutes ago, 2015 said:

Stop going then if you are fed up with the results so much. Pearson wont be going by the sounds of things he's planning on the long term and has probably already had discussions with SL about the summer ahead. 

For the past 40 years this club has bumbled between lower half of Championship and the top half of League 1. We have had a couple of good seasons within that in this League which have cost us in the long run financially. In those times we have constantly fired and hired managers and it eventually led to relegations on every occasion (1995, 1999, 2013).

For once this club needs stability due to the financial position it is in so in the long run we reap the rewards, sacking NP would absolutely throw everything up in the air regarding finances and contracts. We have to simply survive in this League whilst being restricted by FFP. Can you seriously name any other Manager who would come in and be able to stabilise this Football Club right now?

Most managers would have come in and the first thing they would address is the cr*p defence and build from there. 

And that is not necessarily buying players - it's coaching and drilling the ones we have, which too be honest aren't that bad and should have improved. 

[Davefevs]

3 hours ago, Port Said Red said:

The only thing that annoys me a little is the way that some fans interpret the "not doing what we want" remarks as "he's being lazy". I think that the only thing Atkinson may be guilty of is not reading the change in his status at the club. He came to us for fairly good money having only having 39 first team games under his belt and when he came he was "one for the future". Then partly because of the Baker situation and partly because he started so well, he was a regular quite quickly, then had a period out after injury but finished the season strongly. In that time and even more so over the summer, the squad changed in such a way that Pearson probably thinks of him in the same way as the experienced pros, There are several more junior players in around him now, whether due to age or shortage of games. I think maybe Atkinson has been slow to pick up on that change, and Pearson felt that he needed to get into that new mindset quickly and thought that a short sharp shock was the best way to do that. That's not about laziness.

I think that is a sensible view from the outside about the situation.  He’s becoming more senior, through performance levels and raised expectations as a result.

2 hours ago, spudski said:

I reckon someone may have had a word in his ear. 

He said it had been pointed out to him, what fans were saying, views etc etc post Stoke. Who would have pointed that out to him? Who has that job? Who is the go between,  giving him ' a feel' to what the fans are thinking and reacting? 

I wouldn't envy anyone having to point out the negatives to him.

Perhaps maybe the ' owner' had a bit of a chat with him?

He did mention in the interview about the owners being good people. And that it's his job not to waste their money when buying players. ( When he mentioned that we had to pay players off to leave)

In the same breath he mentioned that the owners want a team built around home grown products. And that our circumstances had probably sped that process up and given opportunity, where it may not have been, under different circumstances.

Was interesting that even if it was a charm offensive, that he still had a little dig (to James Piercy - Bristol City Online aka BEP in old money) about allowing fans to fill column space.  Paraphrased “it’s great that they allow fans to write their opinions, but they need to be accurate”.

I think he’s well in touch with what fans think.  He mentions them most games, pre and post.

[RedM]

I didn't think that interview was such a good watch. There were a few interesting points but mostly he come across as a smug, arroant person who thinks he's a level up from the fans never mind the reporters only doing their jobs.

I just get the feeling he is beginning to tighten the screw a bit as maybe the screw is being tightened on him, he has had more than a decent amount of time, even with all our injury problems and otherwise. He should know his best team by now and get some consistency, many times he appears not to be able to do either.

Elsewhere in the Championship teams have changed Managers with improving results. Again I say I don't want yet another change in manager, but if he does stay he needs to step up a notch too.

What irritated me as much as anything was the constant fiddling and fidgeting, can't the bloke sit still for a few minutes and be more professional? He really gave the impression that he had better things to do elsewhere and didn't want to give his time.

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, Top Robin said:

Most managers would have come in and the first thing they would address is the cr*p defence and build from there. 

And that is not necessarily buying players - it's coaching and drilling the ones we have, which too be honest aren't that bad and should have improved. 

My view is that we have improved our defence.  Not by much, but since Max has come back in we seem to have a defence and keeper who are confident in each other.  I know we can’t just accept mistakes like King’s last week, but that’s not a goal conceded by poor drilling in training.  Bloody frustrating, indeed.  Not saying it’s all down to Max, but I do think he’s played a part by being decisive off his line, but also his starting position (edge of box) when ball is in opponents half gives confidence to the defence.  It means he takes back passes higher up the pitch, when Bents used to retreat and retreat and retreat before kicking it, allowing himself to be closed down and the opposition to get up the pitch.

11 goals conceded in 10 games, 2 clean sheets is much improved. Take out one or two individual errors and it looks even better.  That’s the challenge now.

And we’ve done that without a regular back three, through injury or Nige’s selections.

 

[2015]

17 minutes ago, Top Robin said:

Most managers would have come in and the first thing they would address is the cr*p defence and build from there. 

And that is not necessarily buying players - it's coaching and drilling the ones we have, which too be honest aren't that bad and should have improved. 

It's difficult. When he took over our defensive line was basically camped in its own 18 yard box, we were very deep but this was a big issue as it was effecting how poorly we were going forward. NP has tried to push us further up the pitch and in doing so it has made us more leakier than we would have liked, but on the attacking front we've been far better than when he took over. NP has failed to get a balance so far, I can admit that.

The problem is we were because we had no choice, we were a very poor team and had little creativity, so opponents had the run of the play for most of the matches in 2020/21. 

Like i've said on previous posts, we aren't far away, we are probably 1 or 2 players short of being a decent side at this level. 

[Davefevs]

12 minutes ago, RedM said:

Elsewhere in the Championship teams have changed Managers with improving results. Again I say I don't want yet another change in manager, but if he does stay he needs to step up a notch too.

 

I don’t think all have improved, but some have.  Very much early days though.  It’s a lot of changes whether sacked, or not though.

 

 

[Barrs Court Red]

As ever, I like what Pearson says, I buy into what he’s trying to build.  
 

This being said, the poor results and performance can’t go on.  He knows this, the guys no mug.  Question is can he solve that puzzle before running out of road - his comments here make me wonder if he knows that’s an ever growing predicament.  

[2015]

5 minutes ago, Tafkarmlf said:

Think the fidgets are nerves, anxiety or as a few have, suggested on social media possibly autism. Can't hold someone to that. 

Accusing our Manager of autism is beyond weird. 

[Harry]

I don’t particularly care what excuses Nigel presented in this press conference. 
At the end of the day, he made a decision. A poor one. Which backfired. 
He played an aging attacking midfielder by trade, as the central (ball winning) centre half. He had multiple other options. He left Atkinson out of the squad completely. He’s got Klose out of the squad completely. He’s got Tanner on the bench. All 3 are players he’s signed, who are defenders by trade and could have played somewhere in the back 3. He’s got Dasilva on the bench, who he could play instead of Pring and move Pring inside to LCB (where’s he’s performed competently before). 
Loads of options. He purposely chose to play an attacking midfielder, who let’s be honest, was very lucky to earn a new contract after not really doing anything in his first season. A player who then contributed significantly to the two goals we conceded. In fact, not even “contributed significantly”, he was actually pretty much fully at fault. 
 

If Pearson should’ve said anything in this presser, it should have been “yes, after a few days reflection, I got it wrong”. 

Edited December 24, 2022 by Harry

[Davefevs]

20 minutes ago, Harry said:

I don’t particularly care what excuses Nigel presented in this press conference. 
At the end of the day, he made a decision. A poor one. Which backfired. 
He played an aging attacking midfielder by trade, as the central (ball winning) centre half. He had multiple other options. He left Atkinson out of the squad completely. He’s got Klose out of the squad completely. He’s got Tanner on the bench. All 3 are players he’s signed, who are defenders by trade and could have played somewhere in the back 3. He’s got Dasilva on the bench, who he could play instead of Pring and move Pring inside to LCB (where’s he’s performed competently before). 
Loads of options. He purposely chose to play an attacking midfielder, who let’s be honest, was very lucky to earn a new contract after not really doing anything in his first season. A player who then contributed significantly to the two goals we conceded. In fact, not even “contributed significantly”, he was actually pretty much fully at fault. 
 

If Pearson should’ve said anything in this presser, it should have been “yes, after a few days reflection, I got it wrong”. 

Harry, where’s the balance gone from your recent posts?  You’re completely disregarding how he played in the previous games…at least give some balance, e.g. it worked against Watford (for example) whether you agreed with it or not.

I don’t believe he’s playing him as a ball winning centre back either, more of a “sweeper”.

Rob hasn’t started a game since he withdrew pre-game at Swansea, so it’s not like he’s dropped him per se.  I totally agree there were other options though.

[Harry]

6 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Harry, where’s the balance gone from your recent posts?  You’re completely disregarding how he played in the previous games…at least give some balance, e.g. it worked against Watford (for example) whether you agreed with it or not.

I don’t believe he’s playing him as a ball winning centre back either, more of a “sweeper”.

Rob hasn’t started a game since he withdrew pre-game at Swansea, so it’s not like he’s dropped him per se.  I totally agree there were other options though.

To be honest Dave, I don’t have much balance in my opinion when it comes to playing players completely out of position and comfort zone. 
As you know, I’ve been highly critical of the number of non-right backs being deployed at right back. And as you also know I absolutely hated the fact that Alex Scott was being played there. 
I didn’t like King being played at CB the first time it happened and I didn’t like it the 2nd, 3rd or 4th times either. The first time it was horrible, the 2nd and 3rd times he kinda got away with it, and the 4th time it was an absolute disaster. As for the sweeper role, to me, if you’re the central CB in a 3, then you are gonna get tested aerially. A test he failed miserably in first half injury time. 
I hope it doesn’t ever happen again. And I really hope Nige has learnt from the fallout this week. 
 

I don’t want Nigel to leave. But when he continues to do very odd things like this and then say he “takes responsibility” but then doesn’t actually take responsibility for it, it makes it hard to keep believing in him. 

[Spike]

I keep reading that the main issue people have with Pearson that he is smug or arrogant but I personally don't think he is, I can see why some people may think that but I think they're probably who are more often around empathetic and caring people. Being the manager of a football club in a lower league doesn't always allow you to be empathetic and in Pearsons case I believe he does care about his players but unlike a lot of people he can separate his empathetic side and his business side.
I enjoyed that press conference if I am honest, he addressed the issues that fans have been complaining about and he reaffirmed that he's more interested in creating a squad/team who are here for the right reasons. I've lost count of how many City fans still seem to love Massengo when it's clear to see that he wants a bigger contract than we can offer and is willing to run his contract down to get it. I don't think he's in a position to demand that personally as he's yet to prove he was worth what we paid for him, I mean we're crying out for a central midfielder who can do a bit of everything and yet Massengo has never excelled at doing that IMPO.
I personally would rather have Pearson trying to build a competitive team within our budget than have to stretch our chances of breaking FFP by bringing in a new manager, that manager wanting money to bring in player etc when we cannot offer that. I think based on that press conference it is clear to see that we're on the very edge of FFP and as much as we'd like to keep some players like Massengo, Semenyo etc it's clear to see that we cannot and that we're looking to make changes sooner rather than later.
I think my only concern in that was the mention of Tommy Conway, it felt like Pearson was trying to bring to the table that he may well be sold if it allows us to make changes. I'd rather sell Massengo, Bentley and Semenyo than lose Conway as I don't think Semenyo suits us, Max (if he resigns) is good enough to replace Bentley permanently as we've seen and Massengo at this point is not suited to clubs mentality as he's more interested in his money than he is to a club that's tried to improve his position in the football world. I think losing Conway would be a huge blow and even more so now that Wells has signed on for another 2 years as Wells is best paired with Conway and I do not think he has that same rapport with Semenyo or Weimann.

I hope come January we see Bentley, Massengo, Klose and Martin leave at the very least which allows us to make the odd free transfer signing and strengthen where needed but I worry Conway may go and we'll be left with Wells and Semenyo up front which I don't think will work for us unless we change our way of supplying Semenyo the ball.

[mozo]

10 hours ago, 2015 said:

Yes, the reaction was over the top and emotional after a disappointing result. What he said about Atkinson was not that big an issue really. Pep has called Kalvin Phillips too overweight to train in the media today, which is far worse and from a world class coach.

Then there was the overreaction about how 'rude' NP was to Ali Durden. Another bizarre overreaction. 

If City want to change as a club we need to get away from this softy softy approach we have to everything and we want players who actually want to be here, so if Atkinson isn't pulling his weight he can rightfully be dropped and if Massengo isn't wanting to sign a contract he can do one too. The club needs to change and that includes the impatient and entitled fanbase

I don't understand the attitude that a player can 'do one' if they don't renew their contract. You're saying that we're happy to pay a player for 4 years but will only utilise the player for 3 years. What a waste of money! Use a player until he ceases being a City player so that we get a return on investment imo.

Agree with your other points though.

[2015]

9 minutes ago, mozo said:

I don't understand the attitude that a player can 'do one' if they don't renew their contract. You're saying that we're happy to pay a player for 4 years but will only utilise the player for 3 years. What a waste of money! Use a player until he ceases being a City player so that we get a return on investment imo.

Agree with your other points though.

If a player is already thinking of playing elsewhere with a year left, it's pointless pursuing with playing them if their mind is on different things. I find it hard to believe they will want to put 100% into playing for City incase they fear of picking up an injury which will effect a future move.

[Spike]

17 minutes ago, mozo said:

I don't understand the attitude that a player can 'do one' if they don't renew their contract. You're saying that we're happy to pay a player for 4 years but will only utilise the player for 3 years. What a waste of money! Use a player until he ceases being a City player so that we get a return on investment imo.

Agree with your other points though.

I think it's more a case of getting the most out of players who will still be here. 

If we were to use Massengo that means either James, Scott or Williams need to be dropped, we're also paying for them to be here too so why drop one of those 3 who may still be a part of the club next season for one who definitely won't be? 

To play Massengo means to play him in place of a player whos future with this club is still intact. I would always pick someone who is likely to be a part of the club next season over one who has basically said "I'm out". When it comes to value there is no way to get more out of Massengo as it comes at a cost of someone else who we're also paying. 

[W-S-M Seagull]

6 hours ago, Harry said:

I don’t particularly care what excuses Nigel presented in this press conference. 
At the end of the day, he made a decision. A poor one. Which backfired. 
He played an aging attacking midfielder by trade, as the central (ball winning) centre half. He had multiple other options. He left Atkinson out of the squad completely. He’s got Klose out of the squad completely. He’s got Tanner on the bench. All 3 are players he’s signed, who are defenders by trade and could have played somewhere in the back 3. He’s got Dasilva on the bench, who he could play instead of Pring and move Pring inside to LCB (where’s he’s performed competently before). 
Loads of options. He purposely chose to play an attacking midfielder, who let’s be honest, was very lucky to earn a new contract after not really doing anything in his first season. A player who then contributed significantly to the two goals we conceded. In fact, not even “contributed significantly”, he was actually pretty much fully at fault. 
 

If Pearson should’ve said anything in this presser, it should have been “yes, after a few days reflection, I got it wrong”. 

King has shown that he is able to do a decent job back there. 

Even with his mistake, we still should have won. 

You need to look at the bigger picture here rather than that one game. Playing King there over a CB is sending a very strong message to every single player in the squad. Imagine being a Bristol City centre back and having Andy King picked over you at CB, that should be embarrassing for a professional centre back. 

This is bigger than that one game against Stoke. This is about showing players that if they dont apply themselves to the required standard then it doesnt matter if they are the only fit player in that position, they'll be replaced. I made these same comments after the Stoke game so its not a reaction to this press conference. 

[frenchred]

50 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

King has shown that he is able to do a decent job back there. 

Even with his mistake, we still should have won. 

You need to look at the bigger picture here rather than that one game. Playing King there over a CB is sending a very strong message to every single player in the squad. Imagine being a Bristol City centre back and having Andy King picked over you at CB, that should be embarrassing for a professional centre back. 

This is bigger than that one game against Stoke. This is about showing players that if they dont apply themselves to the required standard then it doesnt matter if they are the only fit player in that position, they'll be replaced. I made these same comments after the Stoke game so its not a reaction to this press conference. 

Oh dear

[Son of Fred]

8 hours ago, Harry said:

I didn’t like King being played at CB the first time it happened and I didn’t like it the 2nd, 3rd or 4th times either. The first time it was horrible, the 2nd and 3rd times he kinda got away with it, and the 4th time it was an absolute disaster

In a nutshell.

Need more round pegs in round holes.

Let's see what happens on Monday!

Edited December 25, 2022 by Son of Fred

[Guest]

21 hours ago, cidercity1987 said:

Results in September 2020 have very little importance as to then what happened over that winter where we were barely able to get out of our half 

We managed to get to 12th by the end of that winter/Feb and before NP arrived

20 hours ago, 2015 said:

From November 2020 - February 2021 it was probably the worst football i've seen from City since we were relegated in 2013. Literally a bunch of no hopers who could barely string 2 passes together come the end of that bad run. Even having 50% possession in a game would have been an improvement.

As above that worst football got us to 12th by end Feb and then NP got here, we are currently 3pts from relegation.

20 hours ago, GrahamC said:

Another “fact” is that we had lost 7 on the trot before Pearson joined, we had a squad that we simply couldn’t afford & a horrendous availability/injury record.

That was the context in which he took over, he said himself that results were “awful” in the reminder of that season but as he joined in February he couldn’t change the squad then even if we could afford to do so.

Once people start quoting stats from that season you know they made their mind up a long time ago, fair to look at last season (when he brought in 3 players & extended the contracts of 3 more) to see if there is a plan, been some progress since, but before that?
No chance.

We dropped from 12th to 18th in his first year here when he had 2 windows to "act" no improvement in his what is now nearly 2nd year here we are down and currently 18th 3 pts from the drop. The posts above seem to suggest some would prefer us playing better football but are happy with us dropping down the league while doing so. I thought it was results that mattered? NP tenure has brought us nearly a 50% loss rate in games hes managed....not good.

[bcfc01]

16 hours ago, RedM said:

I didn't think that interview was such a good watch. There were a few interesting points but mostly he come across as a smug, arroant person who thinks he's a level up from the fans never mind the reporters only doing their jobs.

I just get the feeling he is beginning to tighten the screw a bit as maybe the screw is being tightened on him, he has had more than a decent amount of time, even with all our injury problems and otherwise. He should know his best team by now and get some consistency, many times he appears not to be able to do either.

Elsewhere in the Championship teams have changed Managers with improving results. Again I say I don't want yet another change in manager, but if he does stay he needs to step up a notch too.

What irritated me as much as anything was the constant fiddling and fidgeting, can't the bloke sit still for a few minutes and be more professional? He really gave the impression that he had better things to do elsewhere and didn't want to give his time.

Grinch 

Ony joking, he's a bit marmite - Merry Christmas .

[Port Said Red]

I don't think he is necessarily here for the long term, he has alluded to that in other interviews. He came in with the brief to completely revamp the way the club is run behind the scenes, and to manoeuvre the squad into the black for FFP purposes. When he has talked about long term before, he has talked like this is a legacy for the next Managers. 

He has the age groups playing and working the same way, we appear to be building a better recruitment department, and it seems roles and responsibilities are better defined. I understand that Richard Gould has been very much a guiding presence throughout, but I am sure that he is the man with the football knowledge input.

Often in the past the issue at most clubs like ours is that Managers, (like politicians), are only concerned with their own tenure and rarely given the luxury to think ahead for the good of the club, I think that's what's different about Pearson's role and value to us.

[cidered abroad]

19 minutes ago, Port Said Red said:

I don't think he is necessarily here for the long term, he has alluded to that in other interviews. He came in with the brief to completely revamp the way the club is run behind the scenes, and to manoeuvre the squad into the black for FFP purposes. When he has talked about long term before, he has talked like this is a legacy for the next Managers. 

He has the age groups playing and working the same way, we appear to be building a better recruitment department, and it seems roles and responsibilities are better defined. I understand that Richard Gould has been very much a guiding presence throughout, but I am sure that he is the man with the football knowledge input.

Often in the past the issue at most clubs like ours is that Managers, (like politicians), are only concerned with their own tenure and rarely given the luxury to think ahead for the good of the club, I think that's what's different about Pearson's role and value to us.

Pearson is definitely, IMO, not here for the money. I believe that he has set himself a project to kick start the largest football club* never to play in the Premier, from the 6th or 7th largest City in England,  never to have won an FA or League Cup, only spent nine years in the top tier.

He created a club that could win trophies at Leicester City and look at how they have been since he left.

The changes at City will not come easily. My desperate hope is that we do not have to drop before the recovery to really begin.

* Plymouth Argyle probably the next largest that he could have tried with.

PS. I completely agree with your view of Richard Gould and I can only hope that we can recruit someone of similar, or better, ability.

Edited December 25, 2022 by cidered abroad

[Guest]

On 24/12/2022 at 09:40, GrahamC said:

Another “fact” is that we had lost 7 on the trot before Pearson joined, we had a squad that we simply couldn’t afford & a horrendous availability/injury record.

That was the context in which he took over, he said himself that results were “awful” in the reminder of that season but as he joined in February he couldn’t change the squad then even if we could afford to do so.

Once people start quoting stats from that season you know they made their mind up a long time ago, fair to look at last season (when he brought in 3 players & extended the contracts of 3 more) to see if there is a plan, been some progress since, but before that?
No chance.

OK then lets try again; last/most recent 16 games back to 14th Sept (ok 1 was a cup game, we lost to Lincoln) so 15games; = 3 WINS, 4draws, 8 losses = 13pts from possible 45points.....is this a good run of results?

Yes feel free to blame injuries/refs etc but other teams have also had injuries/poor ref decisions the greatness of "Nige" doesnt seem too great to me

Edited December 25, 2022 by gl2

[W-S-M Seagull]

20 hours ago, Harry said:

To be honest Dave, I don’t have much balance in my opinion when it comes to playing players completely out of position and comfort zone. 
As you know, I’ve been highly critical of the number of non-right backs being deployed at right back. And as you also know I absolutely hated the fact that Alex Scott was being played there. 
I didn’t like King being played at CB the first time it happened and I didn’t like it the 2nd, 3rd or 4th times either. The first time it was horrible, the 2nd and 3rd times he kinda got away with it, and the 4th time it was an absolute disaster. As for the sweeper role, to me, if you’re the central CB in a 3, then you are gonna get tested aerially. A test he failed miserably in first half injury time. 
I hope it doesn’t ever happen again. And I really hope Nige has learnt from the fallout this week. 
 

I don’t want Nigel to leave. But when he continues to do very odd things like this and then say he “takes responsibility” but then doesn’t actually take responsibility for it, it makes it hard to keep believing in him. 

A disaster? That's very strong language. 

It wasn't his best game, but it certainly want a disaster. I think you are using those words to sensationalise. 

[zippycar]

23 hours ago, 2015 said:

Accusing our Manager of autism is beyond weird. 

I don't think it's autism that is making him fidget, but that's another story.

[IAmNick]

50 minutes ago, Tafkarmlf said:

You've made the classic assumption there that it was me suggesting it, because why not Invent something else to try and have a go at some one with

I was very clear to say it was on social media.has been since he was either at or post Leicester 

 

It's been mentioned on a few comments on interviews on social media this season too 

It's not the 'bad thing' you appear to be accusing me of as if it's 'weird' 

it's just an observation that other people have picked up on, explaining interview actions .no more, no less

Glad to see this board still as toxic as **** over Xmas

The wording of your comment clearly implies it's a potential in your mind.

Additionally if you repeat nonsense and frame it as a playable thing you do become responsible for repeating it. There's lots on nonsense we all see online we choose not to repeat, and with good reason. Especially seven year old tweets with 3 likes.

This "just asking questions"/"just repeating what I've heard" thing is a well known tactic.

Pointing that out isn't anything to do with this board being toxic or not.