Warnock wishes he could have managed us

[Galley is our king]

Well I for one is extremely pleased he hasn't ever been our manager and I hope he never does!!!!

No one else infuriates me more, horrible man.

How people actually want him here is beyond me......

[Finley_Smith10]

Warnock is class

[Davefevs]

3 hours ago, robinforlife2 said:

Anyone whose not listened to it, listen to it at 12 minutes. I think he sums up Pearson very well, in the mistakes he's making here on the pitch. Warnock says how it should be done. 
 

Just listened to that bit and think Warnock is actually saying he has done pretty much what Pearson has.   

[fisherrich]

4 hours ago, BCFCGav said:

I like him I can't lie. His villainy over the years has always been good for a laugh and he seems a good bloke.

Met NW a few years ago and have to say, was quite impressed with him. He loves winding people up I know, but he knows how to win games even if there are dark arts involved. You just know he would have fallen out with SL + MA. Speaks his mind. He also likes Bristol City.

[The turtle]

4 hours ago, steveybadger said:

I’d quite enjoy the winning but the turgid style of play, constant moaning at refs under NW? Not so much. 

Although I have to say I quite warm to him off the pitch.

It's not like we're playing free flowing football currently though, and haven't for quite time.

Most city fans have a dna of not winning the Warnock way, i feel it. Problem is, we're getting boring football lacking identity anyway (only city could have a young side who are somehow boring but that's another story)

 

 

 

 

 

[NcnsBcfc]

Always been a difficult one for me, the question of whether I would support NW becoming our manager.

The memory of the Pulis era still sends shivers down my spine.

However, the guy is a winner; and gets clubs into the PL from our division.

Would the football be attractive, probably not. But we've always said as a club the only way in which we are going to move forward is getting promoted to the PL. At present, we haven't got near it since 2008.

Yes, he would have been a pain in the ass, but in a way he would have been our pain in the ass. It's been 43 years since I last watched us in the top division. Over that period there's been so many false dawns, that at times I truly can't see us getting there for another 10 years at least.

Not sure it would ever happen under SL of course. You could see another Cotts issue rearing it's head from the start.

[beaverface]

A bit before my time, but can anybody with memories of the Alan Dicks side confirm whether our Division 1 side in the 70's was similar to the way Neil Warnocks sides play?

I get the impression that the 1970's side was built on hard work, organisation, not letting many goals in, and having a tough nasty side - everything that we moan that Neil Warnocks teams are like.

[Selred]

3 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

That's unfair, start of the season was great.

Thereafter we have at home anyway created enough to get better results in a few games, some good possession and shot numbers but the finishing has been appalling.

I think in the League we have scored at home 1 goal from 47 shots and in 3 and a half of those games had more of the ball and intent in maybe 2 and a games.

To say nothing of the penalty stuff.

We started well, yes.

However 3 wins in 20. We haven't just been unlucky with finishing, we've been pretty poor quality wise.

Swansea (H) 44% possession, 6 shots, 2 on target (Vs Swans 4 shots, 2 on target).

Coventry 46% possession, 9 shots, 2 on target. (Vs Cov 16 shots, 6 on target).

Millwall 46% possession, 6 shots, 2 on target. (Vs Millwall 9 shots, 0 on target).

West Brom (H) 52% possession, 8 shots, 3 on target (vs 15 shots, 4 on target)

Stoke (H) 51% possession, 14 shots, 5 on target (vs 6 shots, 3 on target)

Rotherham 45% possession, 9 shots, 4 on target (vs 16 shots, 5 on target).

 

Therefore none of those games post WC, we have dominated in terms of shots, or possession. I think you're just used to watching crap football, and accepting it.

[Davefevs]

I quite like NW too….the only real time I don’t like him is when he’s in the opposing dugout, but I think he’s a good manager.

[BUTOR]

How many years can Neil keep giving exactly the same hour long interview for post retirement? 

[robinforlife2]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Just listened to that bit and think Warnock is actually saying he has done pretty much what Pearson has.   

Really, he's stuck with 5-3-2 / 3-5-2 when it doesn't suit us and he has insisted this his whole tenure, rather than assessing what we can do.

Also says you have to give every player a chance and work with them to get the best from them.

I would say this is polar opposite of Pearson.

[Carey 6]

1 hour ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Given he's a lifelong Bladesman, I assume that was a joke.

I’ve just found it on BBC Sounds with Kammy & Ben Shephard. 
 

42.20 in. 
 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p0cqqdv1

Edited January 10, 2023 by Carey 6

[Mr Popodopolous]

10 minutes ago, Selred said:

We started well, yes.

However 3 wins in 20. We haven't just been unlucky with finishing, we've been pretty poor quality wise.

Swansea (H) 44% possession, 6 shots, 2 on target (Vs Swans 4 shots, 2 on target).

Coventry 46% possession, 9 shots, 2 on target. (Vs Cov 16 shots, 6 on target).

Millwall 46% possession, 6 shots, 2 on target. (Vs Millwall 9 shots, 0 on target).

West Brom (H) 52% possession, 8 shots, 3 on target (vs 15 shots, 4 on target)

Stoke (H) 51% possession, 14 shots, 5 on target (vs 6 shots, 3 on target)

Rotherham 45% possession, 9 shots, 4 on target (vs 16 shots, 5 on target).

 

Therefore none of those games post WC, we have dominated in terms of shots, or possession. I think you're just used to watching crap football, and accepting it.

Outshot Swansea, Stoke. Marginally outposssessed Stoke. Vs West Brom 1st half we were alright and seemed to have our chances- two interventions wirh the legs by Palmer and Phillips hit his own bar at 1-0. 2nd half another matter.

Accept our performance overmatched by result at Rotherham, but think the two away points were not bad really.

[ExiledAjax]

7 minutes ago, Selred said:

We started well, yes.

However 3 wins in 20. We haven't just been unlucky with finishing, we've been pretty poor quality wise.

Swansea (H) 44% possession, 6 shots, 2 on target (Vs Swans 4 shots, 2 on target). -0.11

Coventry 46% possession, 9 shots, 2 on target. (Vs Cov 16 shots, 6 on target). -0.45

Millwall 46% possession, 6 shots, 2 on target. (Vs Millwall 9 shots, 0 on target). +0.15

West Brom (H) 52% possession, 8 shots, 3 on target (vs 15 shots, 4 on target) -0.84

Stoke (H) 51% possession, 14 shots, 5 on target (vs 6 shots, 3 on target) +0.79

Rotherham 45% possession, 9 shots, 4 on target (vs 16 shots, 5 on target). -0.04

 

Therefore none of those games post WC, we have dominated in terms of shots, or possession. I think you're just used to watching crap football, and accepting it.

average xG deficit/surplus in bold above. If you're going to use shots to show that we are shit then really you need to use xG IMO.

In the same time frame you've omitted to mention Watford where we had 9 shots and 2 on target to their 2 shots with none on target. xG of +0.9 in that one. Also Sheff Utd where we dominated shots by 16 - 4 and shots on target were equal at 3 apiece. xG was +0.83 there.

It is still not pretty, but we have dominated some games. Watford, Stoke and Sheff Utd really could have returned us 9 points rather than the 1 they actually did.

[Selred]

7 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Outshot Swansea, Stoke. Marginally outposssessed Stoke. Vs West Brom 1st half we were alright and seemed to have our chances- two interventions wirh the legs by Palmer and Phillips hit his own bar at 1-0. 2nd half another matter.

Accept our performance overmatched by result at Rotherham, but think the two away points were not bad really.

You could argue the only reason we "outshot" Swansea and Stoke were because we were behind. 

We saw the West Brom game very different. 10 mins in we were completely outnumbered and pinned back. 25 mins in we should of been 1 nil down, a proper let off. West Brom weren't anything special, very shaky at the back and were there for the taking. However our passing, movement, formation was poor.

[LoyalRed]

5 hours ago, Stockwood gate said:

I met him a few weeks ago on a train going to Leeds he said he almost got the job a few years ago really nice bloke 

Possibly 2020/2021 then... instead of Pearson or Holden.  If we gave up the chance to sign Warnock by opting for the cheap option that would have been the worst decision ever.

Edited January 10, 2023 by LoyalRed

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 minutes ago, Selred said:

You could argue the only reason we "outshot" Swansea and Stoke were because we were behind. 

We saw the West Brom game very different. 10 mins in we were completely outnumbered and pinned back. 25 mins in we should of been 1 nil down, a proper let off. West Brom weren't anything special, very shaky at the back and were there for the taking. However our passing, movement, formation was poor.

West Brom are in fantastic form. You'll note that I said the 1st half only, the 2nd half they ran away with it. Squad is excellent all told, we outposssessed them and nearly equally shot them.

Were we? Early on we attacked a bit, they attacked a bit more. Vyner caught badly. Agreed really build much until 35 mins in perhaps. What is Phillips header thst hits bar is an own goal and goes in though? 1-1 improvement, confidence- momentum?

Stoke we conceded 2 very weak goals and were not very good but we hit the woodwork at 1 up. That goes in we probably win.

[NcnsBcfc]

11 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

average xG deficit/surplus in bold above. If you're going to use shots to show that we are shit then really you need to use xG IMO.

In the same time frame you've omitted to mention Watford where we had 9 shots and 2 on target to their 2 shots with none on target. xG of +0.9 in that one. Also Sheff Utd where we dominated shots by 16 - 4 and shots on target were equal at 3 apiece. xG was +0.83 there.

It is still not pretty, but we have dominated some games. Watford, Stoke and Sheff Utd really could have returned us 9 points rather than the 1 they actually did.

Thanks @ExiledAjax

I think therein lies the issue. At times we have played some decent stuff, but the inconsistencies of our performances that NP has highlighted has really blighted us this season. People forget the good stuff, and focus on the fact that yet again we didn't win.

The problem is that however well you are playing at times, we are in a results business; and 3 wins in 20 tells it's own story. We need to win at least 1 of the next 2 home games as a massive imperative for me.

[Stockwood gate]

6 minutes ago, LoyalRed said:

Possibly 2020/2021 then... instead of Pearson or Holden.  If we gave up the chance to sign Warnock by opting for the cheap option that would have been the worst decision ever.

He had a rye smile as I said I was a friendly Bristol city fan , he was off to Leeds from Plymouth 

[Selred]

5 minutes ago, NcnsBcfc said:

Thanks @ExiledAjax

I think therein lies the issue. At times we have played some decent stuff, but the inconsistencies of our performances that NP has highlighted has really blighted us this season. People forget the good stuff, and focus on the fact that yet again we didn't win.

The problem is that however well you are playing at times, we are in a results business; and 3 wins in 20 tells it's own story. We need to win at least 1 of the next 2 home games as a massive imperative for me.

It also comes down to a conversation on Sunday during Swansea I was having with another fan.

I'd rather play direct ugly football and get results right now, than nice football and only win 3 in 20. Ideally we get to a stage where we play nice football and win.

I don't however agree we are playing "nice" football right now anyway, I find out football completely set up for counter attack and our midfield is often overran. But that's a different point.

[hollydog]

1 hour ago, beaverface said:

A bit before my time, but can anybody with memories of the Alan Dicks side confirm whether our Division 1 side in the 70's was similar to the way Neil Warnocks sides play?

I get the impression that the 1970's side was built on hard work, organisation, not letting many goals in, and having a tough nasty side - everything that we moan that Neil Warnocks teams are like.

All of that but no shortage of skill either. Better to watch than a Warnock team.

[Top Robin]

5 hours ago, alexukhc said:

Him n Pearson would be a scary team

Pearson doesn't appear to frighten any of our players

[Top Robin]

2 hours ago, Galley is our king said:

Well I for one is extremely pleased he hasn't ever been our manager and I hope he never does!!!!

No one else infuriates me more, horrible man.

How people actually want him here is beyond me......

Er.... coz he's a good manager

[DT The Optimist]

The book ‘Neil Warnock. Made in Sheffield’ is a quality read…recommend to any football fan.  I picked it up on holiday some years ago and could not put it down…managing lower league teams and players.  

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, robinforlife2 said:

Really, he's stuck with 5-3-2 / 3-5-2 when it doesn't suit us and he has insisted this his whole tenure, rather than assessing what we can do.

Also says you have to give every player a chance and work with them to get the best from them.

I would say this is polar opposite of Pearson.

That’s just your view that it doesn’t suit.  Nige is saying it does suit, hence why he’s playing it when his preference is a back four.  He hasn’t insisted on it (a back 3) his whole tenure either.  That’s blatantly not true.

Re your second point, tell me who hadn’t been given a chance and not been worked with.  Even Bakinson got several bites of the cherry before Nige realised he was wasting his time.

42 minutes ago, NcnsBcfc said:

Thanks @ExiledAjax

I think therein lies the issue. At times we have played some decent stuff, but the inconsistencies of our performances that NP has highlighted has really blighted us this season. People forget the good stuff, and focus on the fact that yet again we didn't win.

The problem is that however well you are playing at times, we are in a results business; and 3 wins in 20 tells it's own story. We need to win at least 1 of the next 2 home games as a massive imperative for me.

So, a group of players that have the ability to play well in patches, but inconsistent….how does that equate to a good squad?  Not aimed at you btw.

[NcnsBcfc]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

That’s just your view that it doesn’t suit.  Nige is saying it does suit, hence why he’s playing it when his preference is a back four.  He hasn’t insisted on it (a back 3) his whole tenure either.  That’s blatantly not true.

Re your second point, tell me who hadn’t been given a chance and not been worked with.  Even Bakinson got several bites of the cherry before Nige realised he was wasting his time.

So, a group of players that have the ability to play well in patches, but inconsistent….how does that equate to a good squad?  Not aimed at you btw.

I think it means that it's very difficult to actually come down on one side or another against NP. On one hand, we have a team which has demonstrated (the home wins run at the start of the season being a case in point) that they can play well, and get results.

Then on the other hand, when we have moved away from that first couple of months of the season, that real same nucleus of players haven't performed to anywhere near those same levels. NP must be frustrated as anyone to watch a squad that is quite evidently capable of winning games in this division (how many other managers have expressed surprise that we are where we are in the division), but ultimately have only won 3 in 20.

It's almost the belief that kills @Davefevs. You believe that the team has the potential to win each and every game, but for whatever reason hasn't done so at home for 4 months, and as I say only the 3 wins in 20. It's not like 12-13 season, where there was more hope than actually belief we could win. In that way, does it feel like a relegation season, no it doesn't.  But results don't lie, and we have to start winning soon, and stop relying on other teams results.

Every game so far this season (Even the Burnley, or Norwich ones) I would say on the podcast, that there are no free passes for the weekend, and on our day, if we turn up, and play to our potential we can match anyone. The fact of the matter is at the moment the wins just aren't coming. Fingers crossed for the weekend.

[GrahamC]

6 hours ago, Bristol Oil Services said:

No-one can manage us. Not at this level. We are unmanageable, in this division. 

Gary Johnson had a pretty good go.

[GrahamC]

1 hour ago, Bouncearoundtheground said:

How many years can Neil keep giving exactly the same hour long interview for post retirement? 

Until he shuffles off this mortal coil, I guess?

Can’t stand him but do understand the argument that he might have been the answer once, but Boro fans reckon he was awful & at 74 we need to look elsewhere when the time comes now.

[NcnsBcfc]

3 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

Gary Johnson had a pretty good go.

He had to throw a few hand grenades of course.

I wonder whether after all of those NP's "If there not on the bus, I will get rid of them" mantras over the last two years, He finally realised that he couldn't get rid of them, and was stuck with them.

With that in mind, losing his proverbial with them wasn't going to work, as with a lot of players nowadays, shouting, threatening and balling at them won't motivate them.

I've been surprised how few of the senior players have actually gone out on loan. Getting rid of Palmer was a masterstroke, but unfortunately we just haven't been able to shift some of the other players off the payroll.

 

[pongo88]

2 hours ago, beaverface said:

A bit before my time, but can anybody with memories of the Alan Dicks side confirm whether our Division 1 side in the 70's was similar to the way Neil Warnocks sides play?

I get the impression that the 1970's side was built on hard work, organisation, not letting many goals in, and having a tough nasty side - everything that we moan that Neil Warnocks teams are like.

The Alan Dicks side was nothing like a Warnock team. There was organisation and a tight defence but the players were quite skilful. Alan Dicks achieved success by getting the right blend of players who achieved more as a team than might be expected. It went wrong after promotion when he let the team stagnate and some players kept their place in the team for too long.