Ayman Benarous

[Engvall’s Splinter]

Probably in the wrong thread, for all the stick about “de conditioning” and too much time off, it was interesting to hear Kevin Nolan (West Ham Coach) reveal that those not on international break for the Hammers had a full week off. This was on Talksport yesterday. 
 

Pearson was involved at elite level as was Rennie. Something JL and Tinnion have never operated at. Would suggest many top level sides perhaps have similar methods to NP/DR.  

Edited November 24, 2023 by Engvall’s Splinter

[And Its Smith]

1 hour ago, exAtyeoMax said:

It’s about timing, rest, and recuperation. If the players who were on their way back from injury have been rushed back, that can’t be DR’s fault (if he definitely had stated before he left that they should have longer recovery before coming back)

That’s a big if.   Seems like outcome bias to me 

[GrahamC]

7 hours ago, CityReds said:

But having put the club in a seemingly ‘good’ place from the absolute mess it was. Then oversaw a team that had 12 players on the injury list. Experienced and professional, yes. Perhaps not as good as the narrative that was peddled to the fan base?

For one exceptional week.

I would agree that the number of injuries was a concern but we had a fair few (Vyner, Naismith, Tanner, James) back in time to beat Sheffield Wednesday.

Rennie might or might not have contributed to the number of absences, we simply don’t know.

Edited November 24, 2023 by GrahamC

[exAtyeoMax]

52 minutes ago, And Its Smith said:

That’s a big if.   Seems like outcome bias to me 

I’m just pointing out how usituations change through time, not blaming anyone

[W-S-M Seagull]

1 hour ago, Engvall’s Splinter said:

Probably in the wrong thread, for all the stick about “de conditioning” and too much time off, it was interesting to hear Kevin Nolan (West Ham Coach) reveal that those not on international break for the Hammers had a full week off. This was on Talksport yesterday. 
 

Pearson was involved at elite level as was Rennie. Something JL and Tinnion have never operated at. Would suggest many top level sides perhaps have similar methods to NP/DR.  

It certainly wasn't Nolan that JL sought advice from then. 

It is a concern of mine that we had the players in for basically a training camp during the international break when now it is pretty relentless all the way til March when the next break is. Lots of 3 game weeks coming up. 

 

Edited November 24, 2023 by W-S-M Seagull

[Numero Uno]

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

It certainly wasn't Nolan that LJ sought advice from then. 

It is a concern of mine that we had the players in for basically a training camp during the international break when now it is pretty relentless all the way til March when the next break is. Lots of 3 game weeks coming up. 

 

Had we given them a week off and Middlesbrough outplay them that would also be questioned (they might still do but that's a different story).................in fact had we given them a week off you can rest assured that the Snake would have been slithering behind the back of the HPC, on the phone straight away to the Crayon Botherer and Manning would have been fired but that's a different story.

I think it was important on this occasion that Manning gets "some" ideas across in terms of what he wants us to do WITH the ball so on this particular break training was needed imo.

[W-S-M Seagull]

2 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

Had we given them a week off and Middlesbrough outplay them that would also be questioned (they might still do but that's a different story).................in fact had we given them a week off you can rest assured that the Snake would have been slithering behind the back of the HPC, on the phone straight away to the Crayon Botherer and Manning would have been fired but that's a different story.

I think it was important on this occasion that Manning gets "some" ideas across in terms of what he wants us to do WITH the ball so on this particular break training was needed imo.

At what expense tho? Playing the 11 v 11 in the break has caused Atkinson to have a set back. We have over 3 months now of relentless football with a very small limited squad.

I have my concerns that Manning isn't the right fit and isn't what we were looking for. If he needs time to get his ideas across then that backs up my concerns. 

[1960maaan]

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

It is a concern of mine that we had the players in for basically a training camp during the international break

Injured players aside, this was an unusual "break". Manning's first chance to work at length with a new team and get to know them. Personally I think it would be madness not to use the time working on what he wants them to do, be that shape , system or whatever. Also that is easier to ingrain on the pitch IMO.

The whole thing around the injured players is unfortunate, specially the long term ones. The new men coming in may have different ideas and the likes of Atkinson would have built up a trust and routine, we just have to hope that the change only has impact for the better. 

 

[W-S-M Seagull]

4 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

Injured players aside, this was an unusual "break". Manning's first chance to work at length with a new team and get to know them. Personally I think it would be madness not to use the time working on what he wants them to do, be that shape , system or whatever. Also that is easier to ingrain on the pitch IMO.

The whole thing around the injured players is unfortunate, specially the long term ones. The new men coming in may have different ideas and the likes of Atkinson would have built up a trust and routine, we just have to hope that the change only has impact for the better. 

 

Where as I find it to be madness that we had the players in during the break for a training camp when we have a relentless 3 months coming up. 

I get what you're saying but it's a big risk. Our small squad should be wrapped up in cotton wool when it can be. 

3 games coming up in the next week. 

A couple more injuries and we could find ourselves in huge bother again.

Edited November 24, 2023 by W-S-M Seagull

[Guest]

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

At what expense tho? Playing the 11 v 11 in the break has caused Atkinson to have a set back. We have over 3 months now of relentless football with a very small limited squad.

I have my concerns that Manning isn't the right fit and isn't what we were looking for. If he needs time to get his ideas across then that backs up my concerns. 

Many clubs have an 11 v 11 midweek when there is no real midweek game, it gives the coach a chance to replicate as near as possible real match conditions and it gives the players a chance to reproduce the things they have worked on during training on the stage where it’s going to happen.

The exception being no silly contact that might lead to injury, although the chance of a muscle injury is a risk, which can also happen at any time in training.

I remain a Nige in person, and he definitely used the 11 v 11 scenario. Manning deserves his chance and to not use the break to get across some of his ideas would have been unprofessional.

At this stage of the season players are really ticking over fitness wise, they’ve done the heavy lifting earlier and are now maintaining fitness not withstanding any general niggles.

Is he the right fit? Well JL and BT think so, me, my doubts are around him not having worked at this level before but every coach starts somewhere, it could be spectacularly successful or it could bomb….. we shall see.

[downendcity]

31 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

Had we given them a week off and Middlesbrough outplay them that would also be questioned (they might still do but that's a different story).................in fact had we given them a week off you can rest assured that the Snake would have been slithering behind the back of the HPC, on the phone straight away to the Crayon Botherer and Manning would have been fired but that's a different story.

I think it was important on this occasion that Manning gets "some" ideas across in terms of what he wants us to do WITH the ball so on this particular break training was needed imo.

I think we have to accept that there are fans  with vehement anti SL and/or pro NP views and who will find fault with any decisions the club/owners/head coach now make, if it helps prove their point.

Train during the break and player injured = wouldn't have happened with NP.

Don't train during the break ( as was the case underNP ) and poor result against 'Boro = Mannings fault for not using the break to get his ideas across.

Poor performance against QPR after LM having only 2 days with the players = players not taking to new coach and/or not understanding his ideas.

Had it been a good performance against QPR = down to the work NP out in over the season, nothing to do with Manning as he'd only been here 2 days.

I can understand those that have issues with SL's ownership, but unfortunately, until someone comes along who is willing and able to fund the purchase, we are "stuck" with him. Similarly, we can moan all we like but it is not going to bring NP back.

A line needs to be drawn under NP's time here, otherwise in the eyes of many fans Manning is going to be damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. He needs to be given a chance to get his feet properly under the table before being judged. As I said in another post,  some fans' feelings about SL, and his sacking of NP, are running so high now that it feels that they almost want things to go badly under Manning, just so they can be proved right.

 

 

[Alessandro]

12 hours ago, And Its Smith said:

So Rennie isn’t to blame for our bad injury record but these injuries are because he got sacked?

No i’m joking really - but just very ironic that Rennie was fired and the club briefed they were annoyed the players were left under conditioned after an international break as they’d been given rest time - and the following international break, they’ve clearly done the opposite and in a closed doors 11 v 11 we hear this news…non contact injuries -  just rather…ironic and very Bristol City

Edited November 24, 2023 by Alessandro

[Engvall’s Splinter]

I’m not suggesting the players shouldn’t have come during this recent break. It makes sense for Manning to use the time available to in-still his ideas. He probably had to. I’m solely highlighting the fact that our senior leaders and many posters on this forum have suggested the rest periods that were afforded by NP perhaps, were not normal at elite level. They obviously are. 

[Port Said Red]

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

Manning said Atkinson picked up this latest injury in the 11 v 11 training match. 

Would Nige have had an 11 v 11 during the international break? And if he did would he have played Atkinson? Both doubtful imo. 

Nige was extremely big on player welfare. He often spoke about how players will tell you they are able to play when they are probably not ready. He's previously spoken about having to curb a players enthusiasm about returning from injury for their own good. 

Manning said he bases his decisions based on what the player says. Two very different styles. 

There was no need not to play Rob in the 11 v 11, having watched his 45 on the Monday he looked perfectly healthy enough for a game at that intensity and the 11v11 wouldn't have been anymore strenuous, in fact breaks would be built in to the game to prevent that.

Robs injury is not related to his knee, although as others have said hamstring pulls are not uncommon, probably some sort of compensation by the body. Robs hamstring injury is not the leg they took the tendon from, and was caused in a very innocuous way (running backwards into position from a free kick). It could just as easily happened in a training session or playing in the next U21 game.

This constant sniping at the manager for the apparent crime of not being Pearson is becoming very, very boring.

Edited November 24, 2023 by Port Said Red

[Simon bristol]

48 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

No i’m joking really - but just very ironic that Rennie was fired and the club briefed they were annoyed the players were left under conditioned after an international break as they’d been given rest time - and the following international break, they’ve clearly done the opposite and in a closed doors 11 v 11 we hear this news…non contact injuries -  just rather…ironic and very Bristol City

To be fair, we usually struggle on the first game back after a break, perhaps it wasnt a coincidence?

[REDOXO]

3 hours ago, Engvall’s Splinter said:

Probably in the wrong thread, for all the stick about “de conditioning” and too much time off, it was interesting to hear Kevin Nolan (West Ham Coach) reveal that those not on international break for the Hammers had a full week off. This was on Talksport yesterday. 
 

Pearson was involved at elite level as was Rennie. Something JL and Tinnion have never operated at. Would suggest many top level sides perhaps have similar methods to NP/DR.  

Exactly!

[The Journalist]

23 minutes ago, Port Said Red said:

There was no need not to play Rob in the 11 v 11, having watched his 45 on the Monday he looked perfectly healthy enough for a game at that intensity and the 11v11 wouldn't have been anymore strenuous, in fact breaks would be built in to the game to prevent that.

Robs injury is not related to his knee, although as others have said hamstring pulls are not uncommon, probably some sort of compensation by the body. Robs hamstring injury is not the leg they took the tendon from, and was caused in a very innocuous way (running backwards into position from a free kick). It could just as easily happened in a training session or playing in the next U21 game.

This constant sniping at the manager for the apparent crime of not being Pearson is becoming very, very boring.

I completely agree with this - and I say that as a huge Pearson fan who thinks the way it was all handled was a disgrace.

IMO, the very fact different clubs have different ways of operating during an international break tells me there’s no perfect way of navigating it. There are pros and cons to everything.

We need to move on, for now at least, and then hold the club to account depending on how it all pans out. It’s time to sit back, get behind the staff and players and see how everything develops.

And, if we’re not in play-off contention, I’ll be the first to give the board pelters because they’ve either lied or just got it horribly wrong (in reality I suspect a combination of the two, but let’s see!)

[Major Isewater]

1 hour ago, Countryfile said:

, it could be spectacularly successful or it could bomb…

C’mon , this is Bristol City we’re talking about  we all know which is the more likely.

 

[1960maaan]

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

Where as I find it to be madness that we had the players in during the break for a training camp when we have a relentless 3 months coming up. 

I get what you're saying but it's a big risk. Our small squad should be wrapped up in cotton wool when it can be. 

3 games coming up in the next week. 

A couple more injuries and we could find ourselves in huge bother again.

Agree , to a point. If Nige was still here they would absolutely have had a week off to rest. They would probably have then trained , and Pearson advocated training intensity like in a game, so the Atkinson injury could still have happened. 

Then if they didn't come in, it could take weeks to get Manning's ideas across. Several more weeks of the first half at QPR ?

It's unusual for a new Coach to get that time, uninterrupted time , on the grass when coming in mid season. Makes sense to use it. 
I don't know how hard they trained , but as Manning said he was impressed with the players running and fitness I doubt he did too much on pure physicality , so I imagine it was all ( or mostly )  shape and patterns of play. Of course , any time they run, pass and tackle they can get injured , but I  feel it was important for Manning to use this time to get his ideas across. If we play like we did at QPR , we will lose to M'boro , maybe the time over the break will make enough difference to give us a chance.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Countryfile said:

Many clubs have an 11 v 11 midweek when there is no real midweek game, it gives the coach a chance to replicate as near as possible real match conditions and it gives the players a chance to reproduce the things they have worked on during training on the stage where it’s going to happen.

The exception being no silly contact that might lead to injury, although the chance of a muscle injury is a risk, which can also happen at any time in training.

I remain a Nige in person, and he definitely used the 11 v 11 scenario. Manning deserves his chance and to not use the break to get across some of his ideas would have been unprofessional.

At this stage of the season players are really ticking over fitness wise, they’ve done the heavy lifting earlier and are now maintaining fitness not withstanding any general niggles.

Is he the right fit? Well JL and BT think so, me, my doubts are around him not having worked at this level before but every coach starts somewhere, it could be spectacularly successful or it could bomb….. we shall see.

Yep, we’ve used “training matches” against local opponents in the past too, e.g. Cheltenham - behind closed doors.

Its nothing new.

56 minutes ago, Port Said Red said:

This constant sniping at the manager for the apparent crime of not being Pearson is becoming very, very boring.

I think some of this is happening because we have some posters sniping the other way too.  The real targets, if there should be any target(s) at all, is Tins and JL.  I think you should be able to treat Pearson and Manning separately.  Love Pearson doesn’t have to mean Hate Manning and vice-versa.

29 minutes ago, The Journalist said:

I completely agree with this - and I say that as a huge Pearson fan who thinks the way it was all handled was a disgrace.

IMO, the very fact different clubs have different ways of operating during an international break tells me there’s no perfect way of navigating it. There are pros and cons to everything.

We need to move on, for now at least, and then hold the club to account depending on how it all pans out. It’s time to sit back, get behind the staff and players and see how everything develops.

And, if we’re not in play-off contention, I’ll be the first to give the board pelters because they’ve either lied or just got it horribly wrong (in reality I suspect a combination of the two, but let’s see!)

Spot on, and in the last break the “team” agreed the approach was to give players time away from the HPC, which appears to have been a fairly regular approach to the breaks (see Curtis Fleming’s comments that they’d done similarly in several previous breaks).

As we all know the players weren’t straight off to drink themselves silly and eat shit food for 8/9 days.  This is a group of players that are responsible, they’ll do their schedules, report them in, etc.

This is what you get when you build the culture Nige had built, have senior pros around who manage / police the “levels”.  You can give players time “off” (away from the HPC), because you know and trust their character.

I think you have to respect the decision made by the experts to the international break approach.  For JL to make this public further evidences what I think of him and his dad.  He’s put unnecessary pressure on Manning re some things said, and he’s also put pressure on a new medical team structure / personnel with his shitty “de-conditioned” comments.

And on that, if LM wants to bring them in, that’s fine too.

[Bob Turnip]

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

At what expense tho? Playing the 11 v 11 in the break has caused Atkinson to have a set back. We have over 3 months now of relentless football with a very small limited squad.

I have my concerns that Manning isn't the right fit and isn't what we were looking for. If he needs time to get his ideas across then that backs up my concerns. 

Yes it's unfortunate, but players get injured in training all of the time. Are you suggesting Manning played him despite being told he shouldn't by the medical team?

Also, you seem to be suggesting that his ideas should be adopted instantly by the players. Is that realistic?

[bcfc01]

2 hours ago, Port Said Red said:

There was no need not to play Rob in the 11 v 11, having watched his 45 on the Monday he looked perfectly healthy enough for a game at that intensity and the 11v11 wouldn't have been anymore strenuous, in fact breaks would be built in to the game to prevent that.

Robs injury is not related to his knee, although as others have said hamstring pulls are not uncommon, probably some sort of compensation by the body. Robs hamstring injury is not the leg they took the tendon from, and was caused in a very innocuous way (running backwards into position from a free kick). It could just as easily happened in a training session or playing in the next U21 game.

This constant sniping at the manager for the apparent crime of not being Pearson is becoming very, very boring.

Spot on and thanks for the info re Rob.

The last sentence sums it up for me and is the reason my ignore list has probably trebled in the last few weeks.

[Port Said Red]

2 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

Spot on and thanks for the info re Rob.

The last sentence sums it up for me and is the reason my ignore list has probably trebled in the last few weeks.

I think it's fair to point out that Rennie had Rob down to play an U21 game the day after he left the club, so the idea that idea that Robs injury has been caused by the new regimes desperate need to rush him back doesn't fit with @W-S-M Seagulls agenda at all.

[Bat Fastard]

Ayman strikes me as an intelligent and highly motivated chap. Maybe it would be sensible if the club helped him to study for coaching badges whilst he is laid up. Although very young, it would add depth to his understanding of the game if he eventually returns to action and it would be insurance for him if his career was curtailed in any way.  I really hope that he recovers well because he would be a great addition to the matchday squad.

[W-S-M Seagull]

5 hours ago, Port Said Red said:

I think it's fair to point out that Rennie had Rob down to play an U21 game the day after he left the club, so the idea that idea that Robs injury has been caused by the new regimes desperate need to rush him back doesn't fit with @W-S-M Seagulls agenda at all.

I have a legitimate concern that following the 21s game the appearance in the 11 v 11 may have been too soon. Especially as it would have been a step up in tempo and intensity from the 21s game. 

The fact you're describing my concerns as an agenda, says a lot about you.

[Port Said Red]

1 hour ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

I have a legitimate concern that following the 21s game the appearance in the 11 v 11 may have been too soon. Especially as it would have been a step up in tempo and intensity from the 21s game. 

The fact you're describing my concerns as an agenda, says a lot about you.

I think your username is very apt, the only way you could be more annoying is by stealing my chips on the seafront.

[SecretSam]

Back on topic, it's not looking good for the lad...

[exAtyeoMax]

On 24/11/2023 at 19:28, Port Said Red said:

I think your username is very apt, the only way you could be more annoying is by stealing my chips on the seafront.

What happened to attack the post and not the poster?

Did that end when we changed web platform provider?

[Port Said Red]

4 minutes ago, exAtyeoMax said:

What happened to attack the post and not the poster?

Did that end when we changed web platform provider?

I attacked the post with those pesky little things called "facts", his response was to say he "had a legitimate concern" with no evidence or facts to back up what that concern was. To be honest Max he's been doing it every single post lately and just trying to reason with his posts has become incredibly irritating, so I don't think it's surprising that myself and others have resorted to other tactics. 

[exAtyeoMax]

23 minutes ago, Port Said Red said:

I attacked the post with those pesky little things called "facts", his response was to say he "had a legitimate concern" with no evidence or facts to back up what that concern was. To be honest Max he's been doing it every single post lately and just trying to reason with his posts has become incredibly irritating, so I don't think it's surprising that myself and others have resorted to other tactics. 

I usually walk away when it gets to that stage. That’s probably annoying for people wanting a debate with me but I don’t want to have a pointless argument with someone. From an outsider’s pov it can get annoying when you are just reading it as an interesting debate/discussion and then abuse starts flying between posters. I suppose I take every post as supposition not defining fact. I don’t know exactly what is happening but I’m interested in people’s concerns, and some of them are valid.