Nige Post Match Interview

[Shuffle]

1 minute ago, Son of Fred said:

Which is why, as I've said before, he should not be risked for his & the clubs sake...

Play him as he’s going away with England & could get injured there. He had 16 mins yesterday & nobody questioned his attitude at Watford. There’s risk in every day life & we cannot negate every one.  Not aimed at you but seems lots of over reaction on here to a poor 16 mins out of 80 games.  

[Davefevs]

9 hours ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

I've said many times that the biggest challenge Nige faces is changing the culture within our fan base. 

This is a perfect example of that. 

I'm glad we have a manager who's calling out players for not making an impact. 

That’s very true.

Fans “our players aren’t trying”, “the players are on the beach”, etc, etc.

Manager “ a couple / few players didn’t have the application tonight”

Fans “cry, cry, cry, he’s throwing them under the bus”.

2 hours ago, Robbored said:

I’m not on Twitter but if I were I’d point out that any manager publicly blaming a player’s performance or error is simply not done for obvious reasons, one of which it’s that it poor man management.

Calling a player out or throwing them under the bus is embarrassing for all concerned. I can only think on one former manager who regularly did exactly that.
 

are you saying what Pearson said last night is poor man-management / throwing them under the bus, or have I misunderstood?

1 hour ago, Shuffle said:

Pearson has laid a challenge to be better & make a bigger impact when they come on in the future. He has publically heralded both Conway & Scott so now he’s bringing them back to earth.  No issue with that.

Exactly Shuffs.

[Numero Uno]

Just now, Davefevs said:

That’s very true.

Fans “our players aren’t trying”, “the players are on the beach”, etc, etc.

Manager “ a couple / few players didn’t have the application tonight”

Fans “cry, cry, cry, he’s throwing them under the bus”.

are you saying what Pearson said last night is poor man-management / throwing them under the bus, or have I misunderstood?

Exactly Shuffs.

Nail absolutely smashed on the head.

[W-S-M Seagull]

2 hours ago, Robbored said:

I’m not on Twitter but if I were I’d point out that any manager publicly blaming a player’s performance or error is simply not done for obvious reasons, one of which it’s that it poor man management.

Calling a player out or throwing them under the bus is embarrassing for all concerned. I can only think on one former manager who regularly did exactly that.
 

I completely disagree. 

Nigel is very savy when it comes to the media and using the media for the teams benefit. 

Whatever Nige has said, he's also said it to the players faces. 

He's publicly challenged the players to make a greater impact when they come off of the bench. That's not throwing them under the bus. It's great man management. It's giving them a kick up the backside. If they don't rise to the challenge then they are no good for us and will be out of the door. 

He's setting a culture of every player must work hard for the team. It doesn't matter if they start or come off the bench, they must work hard, even if they are not at their best, they can still work hard. It's about setting standards and sending a message to the whole team that a certain level is expected. 

These players should consider this as a warning and they have to accept the challenge of doing better from the bench, if not, they'll be gone.

Are you happy for players to come on and just be passive for a third of the game? I'm not. 

[Davefevs]

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

I completely disagree. 

Nigel is very savy when it comes to the media and using the media for the teams benefit. 

Whatever Nige has said, he's also said it to the players faces. 

He's publicly challenged the players to make a greater impact when they come off of the bench. That's not throwing them under the bus. It's great man management. It's giving them a kick up the backside. If they don't rise to the challenge then they are no good for us and will be out of the door. 

He's setting a culture of every player must work hard for the team. It doesn't matter if they start or come off the bench, they must work hard, even if they are not at their best, they can still work hard. It's about setting standards and sending a message to the whole team that a certain level is expected. 

These players should consider this as a warning and they have to accept the challenge of doing better from the bench, if not, they'll be gone.

Are you happy for players to come on and just be passive for a third of the game? I'm not. 

Yep (again).

He is also trying to ensure we don’t down tools for the final 3 games.

He’ll want the next win asap.  Starting on Saturday versus Rotherham.  Because it’s Burnley after that.

Culture Club, not Cosy Club.

[Jacki]

29 minutes ago, Shuffle said:

Play him as he’s going away with England & could get injured there. He had 16 mins yesterday & nobody questioned his attitude at Watford. There’s risk in every day life & we cannot negate every one.  Not aimed at you but seems lots of over reaction on here to a poor 16 mins out of 80 games.  

Completely agree.

Scott’s performances and conduct have been exemplary throughout his time with us. He could have thrown his toys out and pushed for a move in January when he knew there was interest like Gordon did at Everton, but he has done the exact opposite. He’s worked hard, shown a humble attitude, and continued to perform at an exceptionally high level for a kid who is so young. By all accounts he played well at Watford so I don’t understand the reaction to a poor cameo appearance from him last night.

As long as he is fully fit I would be playing him in the last few games. He has shown great durability despite being the most fouled player in the league, and quite apart from anything else from a selfish point of view I love watching him play. A couple of vintage Scott performances might even increase his value further too. 

[LondonBristolian]

2 hours ago, spudski said:

Imo...although his best position is up front, we have others that are equally as good. 

It's his engine, experience, willingness to run, and press that imo, gets him put deeper. Those parts of his game are great. Sadly...it's let down often, by his final ball when passing, controlling in the final third. It's often rushed, off balance, not composed, under or over hit, gambled. 

I think this is a valid point but I think the other issue is working out where Weimann sits in our current system. Last season - when Weimann was absolutely on fire - we were playing an extremely fluid counter-attacking front three which really played into Weimann's strengths in that Semenyo and Weimann in that we were relying on Weimman's and Semenyo's movement and ability to take up unexpected positions to catch out defences.

Since we changed to the 4-3-3, we've controlled games a bit more and our system relies on players being where their teammates expect them to be and utilising a clearer shape. Within that, Weimann doesn't function as well in the front three for the simple reason that he's at his best when he drops deeper, moves around the pitch and pops up in unexpected places and we sort of need the central player in the 3 to be maintain the shape of the team. I agree Weimann's best positoion is in the middle of a front 3 but I don't think it's in the middle of the front 3 we actually play. I think changing the system to get the best out of Weimann would impact less well on others in the team.

Within our system, I think that number 10 role is the best place Weimann can play but I also don't think he's the type of number 10 we'd have an ideal world. Which leaves NP with a bit of a dilemma as Weimann is one of our best players but others fit the system better than he does. 

[Davefevs]

2 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

I think this is a valid point but I think the other issue is working out where Weimann sits in our current system. Last season - when Weimann was absolutely on fire - we were playing an extremely fluid counter-attacking front three which really played into Weimann's strengths in that Semenyo and Weimann in that we were relying on Weimman's and Semenyo's movement and ability to take up unexpected positions to catch out defences.

Since we changed to the 4-3-3, we've controlled games a bit more and our system relies on players being where their teammates expect them to be and utilising a clearer shape. Within that, Weimann doesn't function as well in the front three for the simple reason that he's at his best when he drops deeper, moves around the pitch and pops up in unexpected places and we sort of need the central player in the 3 to be maintain the shape of the team. I agree Weimann's best positoion is in the middle of a front 3 but I don't think it's in the middle of the front 3 we actually play. I think changing the system to get the best out of Weimann would impact less well on others in the team.

Within our system, I think that number 10 role is the best place Weimann can play but I also don't think he's the type of number 10 we'd have an ideal world. Which leaves NP with a bit of a dilemma as Weimann is one of our best players but others fit the system better than he does. 

Spot on, good synopsis!

 

[Clutton Caveman]

11 hours ago, GrahamC said:

Exactly how I see it, Conway & Scott.

Scott has been incredible this season but as well as his rubbish free kick at the end, he certainly didn’t go into challenges the way he has & you do wonder if the speculation is getting to him.

Conway didn’t do much tonight & seems to have pissed Pearson off.

He said he thought the team that started the game did well overall so although Bell’s crossing was poor, it doesn’t appear he meant him.

Everybody's crossing was poor. We got into some great areas and the cross was either awful or all of our forwards were nowhere near the ball. It has been the same for some weeks now. Sam Bell looked a bit off. Had his touch been a bit better on the half turn on the edge of the box he would have been in 2 or 3 times. I think young players often struggle to maintain 100% performance when the first enter the first team. I think some work on the training ground on crosses and making space to receive the ball would work wonders. It would be a miracle if 19 year old Alex Scott was not somewhat distracted. I hope it doesn't rub off on his flat mate Conway.

[LondonBristolian]

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

I completely disagree. 

Nigel is very savy when it comes to the media and using the media for the teams benefit. 

Whatever Nige has said, he's also said it to the players faces. 

He's publicly challenged the players to make a greater impact when they come off of the bench. That's not throwing them under the bus. It's great man management. It's giving them a kick up the backside. If they don't rise to the challenge then they are no good for us and will be out of the door. 

He's setting a culture of every player must work hard for the team. It doesn't matter if they start or come off the bench, they must work hard, even if they are not at their best, they can still work hard. It's about setting standards and sending a message to the whole team that a certain level is expected. 

These players should consider this as a warning and they have to accept the challenge of doing better from the bench, if not, they'll be gone.

Are you happy for players to come on and just be passive for a third of the game? I'm not. 

I think it's very pleasing in a way that we've lost 1-0 away from home to one of the best teams in the division after a good performance in a game where we've had nothing to pay for and the manager's annoyed about it. This isn't meant as a dig at Lee Johnson or Dean Holden but I think either would have emphasised the positives and been satisfied with the performance. Pearson is setting very clear standards. As you say, I've no doubt he's said the same to the players and it is consistent with the approach he has taken since he became manager. I doubt the players are particularly surprised or alarmed by it. 

[Sir Geoff]

11 hours ago, Cityboy1954 said:

 

Take away weinmanns goal a while back whats he done ? 

You obviously didn't see the superb turn taking two players out then nutmegging a third with a superbly waited ball to Wells who then put it on a plate for Mehmeti to score the other day.

[Northern Red]

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

I completely disagree. 

Nigel is very savy when it comes to the media and using the media for the teams benefit. 

Whatever Nige has said, he's also said it to the players faces. 

He's publicly challenged the players to make a greater impact when they come off of the bench. That's not throwing them under the bus. It's great man management. It's giving them a kick up the backside. If they don't rise to the challenge then they are no good for us and will be out of the door. 

He's setting a culture of every player must work hard for the team. It doesn't matter if they start or come off the bench, they must work hard, even if they are not at their best, they can still work hard. It's about setting standards and sending a message to the whole team that a certain level is expected. 

These players should consider this as a warning and they have to accept the challenge of doing better from the bench, if not, they'll be gone.

Are you happy for players to come on and just be passive for a third of the game? I'm not. 

I also think he's savvy enough to know how the players are likely to react to him saying it publicly. I.e if he thought it would do more harm than good he'd keep it behind closed doors.

[TomThumb84]

May have already been said, but could it be possible Scott was jarred off about not starting?

Could argue he has been our fulcrum all season, is fit again, and could reasonably have expected to start following a 0-2 reverse in which he played well after coming on?

Easily our best player, in a huff, and frustrated cause a losing side is not adjusted for him against one of the divisions top tests?

Not saying this is even close to it and the professionalism should still be there regardless.

Just a thought. I suppose “head turned/on the beach/protecting a move/attitude problem” flies better.

[spudski]

37 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

I think this is a valid point but I think the other issue is working out where Weimann sits in our current system. Last season - when Weimann was absolutely on fire - we were playing an extremely fluid counter-attacking front three which really played into Weimann's strengths in that Semenyo and Weimann in that we were relying on Weimman's and Semenyo's movement and ability to take up unexpected positions to catch out defences.

Since we changed to the 4-3-3, we've controlled games a bit more and our system relies on players being where their teammates expect them to be and utilising a clearer shape. Within that, Weimann doesn't function as well in the front three for the simple reason that he's at his best when he drops deeper, moves around the pitch and pops up in unexpected places and we sort of need the central player in the 3 to be maintain the shape of the team. I agree Weimann's best positoion is in the middle of a front 3 but I don't think it's in the middle of the front 3 we actually play. I think changing the system to get the best out of Weimann would impact less well on others in the team.

Within our system, I think that number 10 role is the best place Weimann can play but I also don't think he's the type of number 10 we'd have an ideal world. Which leaves NP with a bit of a dilemma as Weimann is one of our best players but others fit the system better than he does. 

I agree with your sentiments. Hence me saying he's a square peg in a round hole...

[Robbored]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Fans “our players aren’t trying”, “the players are on the beach”, etc, etc.

Manager “ a couple / few players didn’t have the application tonight”

Fans “cry, cry, cry, he’s throwing them under the bus”.

are you saying what Pearson said last night is poor man-management / throwing them under the bus, or have I misunderstood?

 

You’ve misunderstood Dave - Nige is way too experienced and professional to throw any player under the bus. He’s been in the football industry all his adult life, was a decent CB and captain in his playing days.Therefore he understands the mindset of professional footballers and that’s reflected in his management style.

Tbf - I can only think of one former City manager who threw players under the bus - certainly an attempt to deflect his own inadequacies………….

 

[Kolsch]

3 hours ago, One Team said:

Thanks for this; which all adds to the ‘heads been turned’ cliche. 

I don’t blame him, he’s a very young lad and who knows how any of us would react in that situation.

He may well not feature that much now before he’s off. 

It’s a very hard one to call because it’ll be in the back of his mind whether he’s consciously thinking about it on the pitch or not. It’ll be a great shame if his City career just fizzles out now until the end of the season though. 

3 hours ago, Port Said Red said:

One has to Tanner, he allowed himself to be sucked into the middle, which he does too often for me. McAtee had acres of space to run into. Not sure who the other would be without watching the replay.

I disagree. Full backs have to tuck in so it doesn’t leave big gaps to the side of the centre backs. You only have to watch Kings reaction after it goes in to see that it’s the fault of the midfield. Looking at the video James failed to track him but it looks like Sykes was nowhere on that side also. I thought Jay and Tanner were superb positionally last night, they were trying to play through the channels and we managed to suppress them for the majority of the game.

2 hours ago, 1960maaan said:

TBF when anyone has dropped below a level that Pearson has been happy with, or a player has previously achieved, he has mentioned it (I wont say moaned about it). This is just trying to make sure that players stay at that level.  
I don't think it would have been easy to make a positive impression last night, playing a promotion team that had a half time bolloxing and had got up a head of steam, that said  I don't think it does any harm to want that.

I think with the character of the lads in question it’ll just motivate them and make them realise that they can’t drop levels in this league.

Nige has faults but I thought this reaction was good and it showed that we’re still pushing for the rest of the season.

[Leveller]

20 minutes ago, Robbored said:

You’ve misunderstood Dave - Nige is way too experienced and professional to throw any player under the bus. He’s been in the football industry all his adult life, was a decent CB and captain in his playing days.Therefore he understands the mindset of professional footballers and that’s reflected in his management style.

Tbf - I can only think of one former City manager who threw players under the bus - certainly an attempt to deflect his own inadequacies………….

 

You, and others, are being hypocritical on this issue. It doesn't matter to me whether or not you approve of managers criticising players in public, but at least be consistent. Other managers are being scorned for scapegoating players or "throwing them under the bus" but apparently Saint Nige is immune from criticism.

Personally I don't mind if managers are frank about players in public, but please at least judge them all by the same standards and refrain from this playground favouritism.

[Numero Uno]

1 hour ago, Northern Red said:

I also think he's savvy enough to know how the players are likely to react to him saying it publicly. I.e if he thought it would do more harm than good he'd keep it behind closed doors.

You would like to think so wouldn't you? I mean the guy only sees these lads for hours a day, five times a week for nine solid months of the year. yet a couple of our fans seemingly know these lads characters better.................unlike Dave the Twitter user from Knowle West my sneaking suspicion is that Nige puts a bit more thought into his post-match reaction.

[Robbored]

5 minutes ago, Leveller said:

You, and others, are being hypocritical on this issue. It doesn't matter to me whether or not you approve of managers criticising players in public, but at least be consistent. Other managers are being scorned for scapegoating players or "throwing them under the bus" but apparently Saint Nige is immune from criticism.

Personally I don't mind if managers are frank about players in public, but please at least judge them all by the same standards and refrain from this playground favouritism.

Why do suppose that proper managers don’t throw players under the bus?

Firstly it can be seen as an attempt to deflect the blame from the manager in question. Secondly it humiliates and embarrasses said players and  can have a negative effect on future performances.

If a player deserves a bollocking then it’s done in the dressing room or the managers office - not in public.

[Leveller]

2 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Why do suppose that proper managers don’t throw players under the bus?

Firstly it can be seen as an attempt to deflect the blame from the manager in question. Secondly it humiliates and embarrasses said players and  can have a negative effect on future performances.

If a player deserves a bollocking then it’s done in the dressing room or the managers office - not in public.

So what exactly was NP doing when he publicly identified a couple of his substitutes as having failed to perform yesterday?? They're clearly identifiable even if he doesn't use their names, so he's bollocking them in public.

And your recent snide references to Lee Johnson are pretty ironic as you were largely supportive of him before he was sacked. You just love a bandwagon.

[italian dave]

2 hours ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

I completely disagree. 

Nigel is very savy when it comes to the media and using the media for the teams benefit. 

Whatever Nige has said, he's also said it to the players faces. 

He's publicly challenged the players to make a greater impact when they come off of the bench. That's not throwing them under the bus. It's great man management. It's giving them a kick up the backside. If they don't rise to the challenge then they are no good for us and will be out of the door. 

He's setting a culture of every player must work hard for the team. It doesn't matter if they start or come off the bench, they must work hard, even if they are not at their best, they can still work hard. It's about setting standards and sending a message to the whole team that a certain level is expected. 

These players should consider this as a warning and they have to accept the challenge of doing better from the bench, if not, they'll be gone.

Are you happy for players to come on and just be passive for a third of the game? I'm not. 

 

1 hour ago, Northern Red said:

I also think he's savvy enough to know how the players are likely to react to him saying it publicly. I.e if he thought it would do more harm than good he'd keep it behind closed doors.

Yes, agree WSM, but I also think the point that NR makes is crucial. It’s not as simple as ‘calling players out’ being good or bad per se. Depends on the player. You have to trust (and I do) that NP knows that and knows the players better than we do.

Someone like Liam Fontaine, or more recently perhaps Zak Vyner, it probably wouldn’t have helped in the slightest.

 

[Robbored]

38 minutes ago, Leveller said:

So what exactly was NP doing when he publicly identified a couple of his substitutes as having failed to perform yesterday?? They're clearly identifiable even if he doesn't use their names, so he's bollocking them in public.

And your recent snide references to Lee Johnson are pretty ironic as you were largely supportive of him before he was sacked. You just love a bandwagon.

Nige criticising the lack of impact the subs had made is not calling out a particular player but all of them. I certainly don’t have an issue with that. In fact I go as far to say that it was good man management. No doubt that he’d have spoken to them post match - they need to know what happens when they don’t perform as expected.
 

Btw - It wasn’t LJ that I was referring to.

[Selred]

9 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Btw - It wasn’t LJ that I was referring to.

You can’t be referring to a bloke who managed us well over a decade ago surely? 

[Swede]

14 hours ago, Cityboy1954 said:

Well you can always nit pick i suppose just admit hes past his best and we cant keep these blokes forever.

Actually he's getting up to speed & getting better the more games he plays since his injury. He's also playing in different positions. He is quite prepared to play in a number of positions for the team and is a model professional and an International still as well. What am I not seeing?

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, Robbored said:

You’ve misunderstood Dave - Nige is way too experienced and professional to throw any player under the bus. He’s been in the football industry all his adult life, was a decent CB and captain in his playing days.Therefore he understands the mindset of professional footballers and that’s reflected in his management style.

Tbf - I can only think of one former City manager who threw players under the bus - certainly an attempt to deflect his own inadequacies………….

 

Ta, thought I had.

1 hour ago, Leveller said:

You, and others, are being hypocritical on this issue. It doesn't matter to me whether or not you approve of managers criticising players in public, but at least be consistent. Other managers are being scorned for scapegoating players or "throwing them under the bus" but apparently Saint Nige is immune from criticism.

Personally I don't mind if managers are frank about players in public, but please at least judge them all by the same standards and refrain from this playground favouritism.

In fairness, all Nige has said is he was disappointing by the level of application, and that he expected the subs to make an impact when they came on.  The three players under the spotlight, Scott, Sykes and Conway have all received heaps of praise this season too…so hardly any favouritism (lack of favouritism) in that respect last night

I know people like to think of Weimann as a bit of Nige pet, but he’s not really been treated any differently to say Conway or Scott.  Came back from injury, spent 7 of the 8 games coming off the bench…wasn’t straight back in was he?  A lot thought he would come straight in.

I think Nige doesn’t pick or drop based overly on individual game performances but mainly on the team, and how it did as a collective.  Albeit a succession of poor performances will have an outcome.

[LondonBristolian]

3 hours ago, Leveller said:

You, and others, are being hypocritical on this issue. It doesn't matter to me whether or not you approve of managers criticising players in public, but at least be consistent. Other managers are being scorned for scapegoating players or "throwing them under the bus" but apparently Saint Nige is immune from criticism.

Personally I don't mind if managers are frank about players in public, but please at least judge them all by the same standards and refrain from this playground favouritism.

I don't think it is necessarily hypocritical to judge superficially similar behaviour differently where different contexts apply. For example, the worst example I remember with Johnson was his scathing criticism of Magnússon after a 5-0 defeat at Preston where, as I recall, Magnússon had not even been on the pitch for the first couple of goals. The major issue with it for me was the fact that it felt very clearly a kneejerk from LJ  where he was under pressure and facing criticism and blamed someone else to deflect away from himself. On the other hand - aside from a few people on Facebook who seem to think we should win every game 9-0 irrespective of opposition - I don't really feel anyone was putting pressure on Pearson for last night's performance. His response seemed to be from a disappointment that the team had worked incredibly hard but the work had been undone by a couple of players not fully applying themselves. I feel very differently about a manager who is angry as an excuse for himself and a manager who is angry on behalf of his players.

Obviously it isn't clearcut - there were points where LJ called players out on public where I agreed with it and there have been points where Pearson has made comments about players that have felt a bit like him blaming others when he was under pressure around Christmastime. So I'm not saying Pearson is a brilliant man manager and Johnson was a terrible one. My point is more that not all public criticism of players is the same and it is legitimate to not judge it all the same way. The context as to why someone is doing it is as important as what they are doing. On top of which - as others have said - I don't know the players but Pearson does (and Johnson did). They're likely to know better than I do what players will and won't respond to. 

[cityexile]

7 hours ago, One Team said:

Thanks for this; which all adds to the ‘heads been turned’ cliche. 

I don’t blame him, he’s a very young lad and who knows how any of us would react in that situation.

He may well not feature that much now before he’s off. 

The elephant in the room is that there may well be clear interest in Scott that is known to him from Premier League sides, but that is different to that interest being sufficient for them to part with a value we are content with.

Will be an interesting summer. Of course wish him well wherever he ends up, and we have generally treated players fairly in relation to transfers. Nothing is certain until it is certain however.

 

[miketh2nd]

I think weimann had a similar game to Wells worked very hard but couldn't quite find that cutting edge in the final 3rd. 

Scott has raised the levels hugely when it comes to what we expect from a player playing in the 10 role . I do feel sorry for weimann who got put  Lw first round of subs then rw wing once tanner went off. As said said by others central up top is his best position. 

For me what I find the most interesting is the lack of minutes Mehmeti has got recently and the fact he has barely had much time in the 10 role ( think think was his position for wycombe?) espcially when Scott was out. 

Also not to bring on Naismith this game was calling out for early risky passes for the front 3. 

[steviestevieneville]

17 hours ago, Cityboy1954 said:

Should start slagging the senior players such as weinmann and wells not putting it in lacking the fight.

Utter bollocks 

[Super]

6 hours ago, Shuffle said:

Play him as he’s going away with England & could get injured there. He had 16 mins yesterday & nobody questioned his attitude at Watford. There’s risk in every day life & we cannot negate every one.  Not aimed at you but seems lots of over reaction on here to a poor 16 mins out of 80 games.  

Totally agree. Should we stop him training as well?! Nonsense.