Team for Birmingham match

[And Its Smith]

Surely, surely, surely it is now time for Pearson to get over the ‘this squad has to play with a back 5’ nonsense and give 4-3-3 a go against Birmingham and a fair few games after that.  
 

We can debate the selection but I don’t think anyone would disagree with majority of this side.  Could argue needing to find a place for Naismith (defence or midfield) or an out of form Weimann for Conway. But assume most of you would (a) agree with formation and (b) agree with at least 9 of this 11

                     O’Leary

Tanner.  Vyner.  Atkinson.   Pring

           Scott. James. Williams.

        Conway.  Wells.  Semenyo 

 

1 win in 12 and 3 wins in 20 playing 5-3-2 (or whatever formation you want to call it).   Surely 4-3-3 cannot return fewer wins than that!!

[Kodjias Wrist]

Brimingham City ffs when do we ever beat them

[Yoyo2345]

1 minute ago, And Its Smith said:

Surely, surely, surely it is now time for Pearson to get over the ‘this squad has to play with a back 5’ nonsense and give 4-3-3 a go against Birmingham and a fair few games after that.  
 

We can debate the selection but I don’t think anyone would disagree with majority of this side.  Could argue needing to find a place for Naismith (defence or midfield) or an out of form Weimann for Conway. But assume most of you would (a) agree with formation and (b) agree with at least 9 of this 11

                     O’Leary

Tanner.  Vyner.  Atkinson.   Pring

           Scott. James. Williams.

        Conway.  Wells.  Semenyo 

 

1 win in 12 and 3 wins in 20 playing 5-3-2 (or whatever formation you want to call it).   Surely 4-3-3 cannot return fewer wins than that!!

I'd never not play Naismith that's just crazy

[Charlie BCFC]

Only worry about playing 433 is how the front 3 would look. We don’t have many wide forwards, Weimann, Wells and Semenyo was a good front 3 but we don’t know if Weimann is fully fit. Midfield 3 and back 4 is exactly what I’d go for

[And Its Smith]

3 minutes ago, Yoyo2345 said:

I'd never not play Naismith that's just crazy

Yeah that’s the only question on this team. Do you play him centre back in a back four or in midfield? No obvious place for him so interested to know where you’d slot him in 

[And Its Smith]

4 minutes ago, Charlie BCFC said:

 

Only worry about playing 433 is how the front 3 would look. We don’t have many wide forwards, Weimann, Wells and Semenyo was a good front 3 but we don’t know if Weimann is fully fit. Midfield 3 and back 4 is exactly what I’d go for

I would say Semenyo has looked his most consistent coming off of the left. Conway can certainly play wide. I would see the front 3 of those two and Wells being quite interchangeable as well

[Super]

Doubt Conway will be fit

[And Its Smith]

1 minute ago, Super said:

Doubt Conway will be fit

Good point. Weimann for him then 

[David Brent]

Wells for Conway.

[Slippin cider]

Can we have none of those that played today please? ….

[Davefevs]

Let’s not think changing formation is the golden ticket. Let’s also consider the type of team we played against, how they set up, etc.

I’m in favour of a back four, but ultimately it’s how the players perform in the match that will count more often than not.

It took us 40 minutes to find a way to squeeze them into corners, and in that last few minutes if the first half we put them under pressure and could’ve had a couple of pens.

Second half, we got closer, we pressed well, undoubtedly aided by the change in system, also by Swansea intent on trying to over pass, especially with Cabango off for Darling who weakened them.

[GrahamC]

Seems very early to be debating this.

No certainty yet on whether Conway or Weimann will be available & there are 5 days of the transfer window between now & then, could be a departure or an arrival yet.

[Johnr1986]

2 hours ago, Yoyo2345 said:

I'd never not play Naismith that's just crazy

Thought Naismith was really poor today  we looked a lot brighter when Williams replaced him.

[cidered abroad]

2 hours ago, And Its Smith said:

Yeah that’s the only question on this team. Do you play him centre back in a back four or in midfield? No obvious place for him so interested to know where you’d slot him in 

Bench! ?

[Marina's Rolls Royce]

2 hours ago, And Its Smith said:

Surely, surely, surely it is now time for Pearson to get over the ‘this squad has to play with a back 5’ nonsense and give 4-3-3 a go against Birmingham and a fair few games after that.  
 

We can debate the selection but I don’t think anyone would disagree with majority of this side.  Could argue needing to find a place for Naismith (defence or midfield) or an out of form Weimann for Conway. But assume most of you would (a) agree with formation and (b) agree with at least 9 of this 11

                     O’Leary

Tanner.  Vyner.  Atkinson.   Pring

           Scott. James. Williams.

        Conway.  Wells.  Semenyo 

 

1 win in 12 and 3 wins in 20 playing 5-3-2 (or whatever formation you want to call it).   Surely 4-3-3 cannot return fewer wins than that!!

You lost me at 1 win in 12

[italian dave]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Let’s not think changing formation is the golden ticket. Let’s also consider the type of team we played against, how they set up, etc.

I’m in favour of a back four, but ultimately it’s how the players perform in the match that will count more often than not.

It took us 40 minutes to find a way to squeeze them into corners, and in that last few minutes if the first half we put them under pressure and could’ve had a couple of pens.

Second half, we got closer, we pressed well, undoubtedly aided by the change in system, also by Swansea intent on trying to over pass, especially with Cabango off for Darling who weakened them.

Agree Dave. And in fact I felt that the reason we switched was as much to do with how Swansea set up and played as it was about us.

They played it very effectively and neatly through the middle first half. We offered almost no resistance and they just ran midfield. 

One of the reasons they started to over pass was because we made it less easy for them: we had extra bodies in there and they couldn’t just waltz through any longer. 

[And Its Smith]

38 minutes ago, Marina's Rolls Royce said:

You lost me at 1 win in 12

Is it not true?  Apologies if I’ve got that wrong 

[OliOTIB]

2 hours ago, And Its Smith said:

Surely, surely, surely it is now time for Pearson to get over the ‘this squad has to play with a back 5’ nonsense and give 4-3-3 a go against Birmingham and a fair few games after that.  
 

We can debate the selection but I don’t think anyone would disagree with majority of this side.  Could argue needing to find a place for Naismith (defence or midfield) or an out of form Weimann for Conway. But assume most of you would (a) agree with formation and (b) agree with at least 9 of this 11

                     O’Leary

Tanner.  Vyner.  Atkinson.   Pring

           Scott. James. Williams.

        Conway.  Wells.  Semenyo 

 

1 win in 12 and 3 wins in 20 playing 5-3-2 (or whatever formation you want to call it).   Surely 4-3-3 cannot return fewer wins than that!!

Yes but id rather Naismith as a sweeper to James who looked a but lethargic today (personal view) and have Williams and scott slightly in front of him. Looked quite scary when we had Wells Weimann and Semenyo in a wide 3 I thought today 

[Marina's Rolls Royce]

4 minutes ago, And Its Smith said:

Is it not true?  Apologies if I’ve got that wrong 

It's too true, I just struggle to come to terms with how bad it is.

 

[Slippin cider]

1 hour ago, Percy Pig said:

Why? They all give everything for the shirt, a large proportion are our own. If this isn't a team we can get behind and back to improve I've got to ask what the hell you're doing supporting Bristol City?

It was said tongue in cheek , get a sense of humour mate ffs 

[Dan Robin]

Shame that we didn't do turnover: I understand that the cup can bring money, but I can't see us doing a cup run at the moment, so maybe it was not worth the risk.

That being said...I wouldn't risk Weimann and Conway in the next match if they're not 100% fit: Semenyo + Wells, with Scott/Sykes behind them and Bell/Martin on the bench.

I'd not be surprised to see King back in defence, after Rob's error.

Edited January 8, 2023 by Dan Robin

[Shuffle]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Let’s not think changing formation is the golden ticket. Let’s also consider the type of team we played against, how they set up, etc.

I’m in favour of a back four, but ultimately it’s how the players perform in the match that will count more often than not.

It took us 40 minutes to find a way to squeeze them into corners, and in that last few minutes if the first half we put them under pressure and could’ve had a couple of pens.

Second half, we got closer, we pressed well, undoubtedly aided by the change in system, also by Swansea intent on trying to over pass, especially with Cabango off for Darling who weakened them.

I wouldn’t change shape for Brum as not wishing to sound like Ian Gay, we need to be physically as strong as we can be, as we will have to be fully on alert for Deeney, Long, Austin, Roberts, Sanderson as everything will be long.  I think we can change shape for certain games but not this one. 

[Feral Williams]

5 minutes ago, Dan Robin said:

Shame that we didn't do turnover: I understand that the cup can bring money, but I can't see us doing a cup run at the moment, so maybe it was not worth the risk.

That being said...I wouldn't risk Weimann and Conway in the next match if they're not 100% fit: Semenyo + Wells, with Scott/Sykes behind them and Bell/Martin on the bench.

I'd not be surprised to see King back in defence, after Rob's error.

I’d hope not on the latter point. Max way more at fault giving Rob a hospital pass in the first place 

[Loosey Boy]

Let’s hope the injuries to Tommy and Andi aren’t going to keep them out of the squad/team next week

[Davefevs]

20 minutes ago, Dan Robin said:

I'd not be surprised to see King back in defence, after Rob's error.

Nige gave Rob a bit of praise in his after-match press interview.

[The Swan and Cemetery]

Wonder if by now, if we had another healthy RCB, Zak might have been tried in a defensive mid role in a 4-3-3 or 4-1-2-3? Whilst our most consistent and most improved player, not sure he has the physicality to play in a two man central defence, but have often thought he could potentially be a decent defensive mid. Probably a bit high risk to be trying in anger right now, but a fit Kalas would at least give us options. 

[Loosey Boy]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Nige gave Rob a bit of praise in his after-match press interview.

To be fair to Rob A, his response was brilliant and for that alone, should ensure that he retains his place…..we will need him against Brum

[Vidal]

3 hours ago, And Its Smith said:

Surely, surely, surely it is now time for Pearson to get over the ‘this squad has to play with a back 5’ nonsense and give 4-3-3 a go against Birmingham and a fair few games after that.  
 

We can debate the selection but I don’t think anyone would disagree with majority of this side.  Could argue needing to find a place for Naismith (defence or midfield) or an out of form Weimann for Conway. But assume most of you would (a) agree with formation and (b) agree with at least 9 of this 11

                     O’Leary

Tanner.  Vyner.  Atkinson.   Pring

           Scott. James. Williams.

        Conway.  Wells.  Semenyo 

 

1 win in 12 and 3 wins in 20 playing 5-3-2 (or whatever formation you want to call it).   Surely 4-3-3 cannot return fewer wins than that!!

Max

tanner Vyner Naismith pring

scott James Williams

Weimann wells semenyo 

[spudski]

Quoted post match by NP to Bristol live.

We went 4-3-3 (in the second half). It was to give us more width and more threat at their defence. We still had the same formation in midfield it just allowed us to put more pressure on their full-backs and be a bit more aggressive going forward and we did that.

"To be fair the players' efforts in both halves, I've got no complaints. Second half we played much better and looked like we were going to go on to win it once we got the equaliser. 

It wasn't about being braver. In the first half our wing-backs didn't really get forward enough and I understand why they didn't. They were fearful of going to press the full-back.

"They got their timings wrong. They didn't go early enough both Pring and Tanner in the first half couldn't release themselves early enough to put pressure on the ball so consequently, as they were getting to their man, the ball was going past them." 

With City lining up as a back four in the second period, they were able to pin Swansea back which allowed Weimann to have a greater influence on proceedings. Asked whether that performance would give Pearson food for thought to change shape for the visit of Birmingham next weekend, he added: "Yeah possibly, but I’ve played 4-3-3 plenty of times here before.

"It’s really about who’s available, you know the reasons we’ve played with a back three for probably a year now. You’ve written enough about that, but it was a good response in the second half, I think we needed to change it at half-time just to give ourselves a chance of not conceding as much possession.

The players know how to play 4-3-3 because we’ve done it plenty of times, so they were able to get into that routine pretty quickly, I think they did it well."

He also mentioned that both Conway and Weimann were possible Hamstrings. 

 

 

[redpole]

15 minutes ago, Vidal said:

Max

tanner Vyner Naismith pring

scott James Williams

Weimann wells semenyo 

If Weimann is injured as well as Conway, I would put Atkinson in Defence as I thought he played well today, got a bad ball from max on his wrong foot, push Naismith into the midfield 3 along with James and Williams and have Scott and Semenyo either side of Wells.