FBC POD - Norwich [H] the verdict ..... we have to accept that we are a work in progress

[luke_bristol]

Work in progress normally occurs over the summer. We’ve basically written this season off before Christmas. ST holders must be well chuffed.

[marcofisher]

2 minutes ago, Slippin cider said:

I think we’ve been a ‘work in progress’ for years . Shame there’s been neither …

Problem is the board think they know better and decide to go away from a Cotterill/Pearson type (who do know better). This entails a change of play style that the squad is not equipped for, reinvestment is required (which the Lansdowns apparently don’t want to do anymore), and therefore it is set up to fail for the new coach, who is not equipped with the appropriate players to play the style of football he wants, or just as often in the last few years, is found to be no better tactically than the Manager types who instilled some structure. Plus in the case of LJ, no better at bringing players through the system than Pearson was.

I didn’t agree with Pearson going but I also don’t think Manning is a bad appointment on paper. The problem is that we spent 3 years under Pearson building in one direction, and just when he finished clearing the junk, raised some money through bringing through and developing Scott and Semenyo, and instilled some fortitude in the team, we decide to chop and change back to the Head Coach route again. Now we have to reinvest and clear the decks somewhat again to be able to give Manning the players he would need to play in the way he wants, and there is no guarantee that works with the limited Championship experience he has.

For all the noises about not wanting to continuously pump money into the club, it doesn’t really make sense to rip it all up and start again when you finally had some stability in the club. Are we going to go big in January/Summer to get the players in that suit Manning? Otherwise we will be stuck with a pretty poor cocktail of a group of players that suit playing one way and a manager that wants to play another.

We don’t want to pump money into the club non-stop so let’s keep ripping it up and starting again, you can’t really make it make sense can you?

[REDOXO]

39 minutes ago, NcnsBcfc said:

Yep that was me @REDOXO

What I can't stand is limp defending.

Hence my rant around Vyner on the 2nd goal. Either you win the ball or you take your man out. What you don't do is passively let the ball bounce, then through poor body shape and lack of physicality allow you man to get away from you.

Both Tanner and Vyner have through either poor defending or lack of application given away 4 goals in our last 2 home games. 

Mark and Ian may disagree on their first goal "See it in the prem each week". But that doesn't make it right, does it? I was still angry on the podcast. Tanner isn't good enough, that's why NP bought McCrorie, unfortunately things haven't worked out so far.

I would love to see Tanner's stats re passing the ball backwards @Davefevs. There were periods in the second half where our players stopped passing the ball to him in open positions, as I'm I'm sure they knew that they would just be given it straight back.

He was the worst culprit (although not the only one) in a negative approach to our attacking play yesterday. The worst moment for me though is  when we won a thrown in on the edge of their box and Weimann threw it back to Vyner on the half way line "AAAGGHHH"

Yes as a full back, you learned early go in and be aggressive if you don’t you’ll get hurt. 
 

Tanner looked lost yesterday and clearly phased by what was being asked. This carried through to all parts of his play. He was lack luster in every way yesterday and as you say played the ball backward from his new home on the touch line constantly. (Mehmeti was as bad)

The idea we have players that can go around you from a standing start is ludicrous, particularly since Scott has gone. However it seems My Way Manning wants not to just beat teams he wants to beat teams in one particular fashion.
 

It just reminds me of narcism! 

[fisherrich]

17 hours ago, harvey54 said:

We don't have to accept anything.  

I don't accept that Manning is a better manager than Pearson. 

I don’t accept that we have a better chance of promotion under an untried, inexperienced lower division manager than under a manager who has got a team promoted to the Premier league.

I don't accept that players will buy into Mannings style of play.

I don't accept that the Lansdowns know how to run a football club.

I don't and WILL NOT ACCEPT ANY OF THIS UNTIL STEVE LANSDOWN SELLS OUR CLUB

 

Post of the day. Lansdowns and all the hangers on need to go asap.

[Charlie BCFC]

34 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

Yep, I keep looking at Cifuentes, now that’s someone who has had to implement an even bigger shift in style & in 5 games he’s already managed it..

No worries, I just don’t think this style is for me, & how anyone can seriously can call it “front foot” is beyond me.

QPR for me had the wrong manager for the players they had, I remember last season where Beale’s QPR were one of the best teams that came to Ashton Gate playing the way Cifuentes has them now. Ainsworth isn’t a bad manager but his style of football for me doesn’t suit the likes of Chair and Willock

[ray savino]

20 minutes ago, marcofisher said:

Problem is the board think they know better and decide to go away from a Cotterill/Pearson type (who do know better). This entails a change of play style that the squad is not equipped for, reinvestment is required (which the Lansdowns apparently don’t want to do anymore), and therefore it is set up to fail for the new coach, who is not equipped with the appropriate players to play the style of football he wants, or just as often in the last few years, is found to be no better tactically than the Manager types who instilled some structure. Plus in the case of LJ, no better at bringing players through the system than Pearson was.

I didn’t agree with Pearson going but I also don’t think Manning is a bad appointment on paper. The problem is that we spent 3 years under Pearson building in one direction, and just when he finished clearing the junk, raised some money through bringing through and developing Scott and Semenyo, and instilled some fortitude in the team, we decide to chop and change back to the Head Coach route again. Now we have to reinvest and clear the decks somewhat again to be able to give Manning the players he would need to play in the way he wants, and there is no guarantee that works with the limited Championship experience he has.

For all the noises about not wanting to continuously pump money into the club, it doesn’t really make sense to rip it all up and start again when you finally had some stability in the club. Are we going to go big in January/Summer to get the players in that suit Manning? Otherwise we will be stuck with a pretty poor cocktail of a group of players that suit playing one way and a manager that wants to play another.

We don’t want to pump money into the club non-stop so let’s keep ripping it up and starting again, you can’t really make it make sense can you?

Ran out of likes for today, but this is absolutely spot on. As a fan this for me is the frustration. Maybe this time they stick at this latest philosophy. It would be a first! We might even have a plan (think Brighton, Brentford and Luton!!!)

[Engvall’s Splinter]

1 hour ago, NcnsBcfc said:

Yep that was me @REDOXO

What I can't stand is limp defending.

Hence my rant around Vyner on the 2nd goal. Either you win the ball or you take your man out. What you don't do is passively let the ball bounce, then through poor body shape and lack of physicality allow you man to get away from you.

Both Tanner and Vyner have through either poor defending or lack of application given away 4 goals in our last 2 home games. 

Mark and Ian may disagree on their first goal "See it in the prem each week". But that doesn't make it right, does it? I was still angry on the podcast. Tanner isn't good enough, that's why NP bought McCrorie, unfortunately things haven't worked out so far.

I would love to see Tanner's stats re passing the ball backwards @Davefevs. There were periods in the second half where our players stopped passing the ball to him in open positions, as I'm I'm sure they knew that they would just be given it straight back.

He was the worst culprit (although not the only one) in a negative approach to our attacking play yesterday. The worst moment for me though is  when we won a thrown in on the edge of their box and Weimann threw it back to Vyner on the half way line "AAAGGHHH"

Re Tanners stats around passing backwards, context is required here. Very rare do we see any movement in front of him. Conway often runs in straight lines, if not sat on the centre halves toes. Our wingers are often very narrow with Bell offering an outlet more so than Sykes.. However he is a 50 yard switch away. 

[W-S-M Seagull]

1 hour ago, Charlie BCFC said:

I was very pro Pearson and still think his sacking was harsh, but the reality is that decision has been and gone and we have to move on. I was happy with the Manning appointment and whilst we should’ve got atleast a point yesterday, I’ve seen positive changes in every game we’ve played under Manning (I’ve been to all 4) that I think will put us in good stead. Yes there’s clear areas to improve but give him a chance to do that

What are those positives? 

And do those positives outweighs the negatives we've all seen? 

[Sir Geoff]

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

What are those positives? 

And do those positives outweighs the negatives we've all seen? 

Exactly this. On another thread someone said they could see small spells yesterday where we had improved. I'm still awaiting a reply to my question, "but what about the long periods where we were worse?"

[W-S-M Seagull]

1 hour ago, GrahamC said:

I’ll assume you were too young for Pulis as no one can seriously not think that was a nadir.

Whilst I was at Ashton Gate yesterday I was sat there and thinking this very much has a Pulis era sort of feeling to it. 

Not the football as thats obviously a different style and we actually have a good set of players here now. But just the whole feeling around the club feels the same as it did back then. Fans were pissed off that we appointed Pulis and we didn't buy into his style. 

Although fans aren’t pissed off with Manning, they are pissed off with the owners and BT. Most of us as struggling to buy into Manning ball just like we struggled to buy into Pulis ball. 

The boredom I felt at AG yesterday was akin to the Pulis era. 

Edited December 4, 2023 by W-S-M Seagull

[W-S-M Seagull]

1 minute ago, Sir Geoff said:

Exactly this. On another thread someone said they could see small spells yesterday where we had improved. I'm still awaiting a reply to my question, "but what about the long periods where we were worse?"

If those positives puts us in good steed for the future then my question too them is, what do those negatives set us up for? 

[2015]

2 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

Exactly this. On another thread someone said they could see small spells yesterday where we had improved. I'm still awaiting a reply to my question, "but what about the long periods where we were worse?"

I'm not sure I can see much of any improvement. Feels very much the same as when NP was in charge. Some good moments in games, and some really bad ones. The side is inconsistent. 

So far our best performance this season was under NP, at Swansea. We were brilliant that day, and our worst was probably Coventry at home, where we ironically got the 3 points. 

I just am not seeing a difference in performance than before, just the same inconsistency. 

I'll make no bones about it now, I didn't want NP gone, and I think the decision to sack him is up there with the poor decision to appoint Holden, but i'm happy to be proven wrong.

[DaveInSA]

52 minutes ago, marcofisher said:

Problem is the board think they know better and decide to go away from a Cotterill/Pearson type (who do know better). This entails a change of play style that the squad is not equipped for, reinvestment is required (which the Lansdowns apparently don’t want to do anymore), and therefore it is set up to fail for the new coach, who is not equipped with the appropriate players to play the style of football he wants, or just as often in the last few years, is found to be no better tactically than the Manager types who instilled some structure. Plus in the case of LJ, no better at bringing players through the system than Pearson was.

I didn’t agree with Pearson going but I also don’t think Manning is a bad appointment on paper. The problem is that we spent 3 years under Pearson building in one direction, and just when he finished clearing the junk, raised some money through bringing through and developing Scott and Semenyo, and instilled some fortitude in the team, we decide to chop and change back to the Head Coach route again. Now we have to reinvest and clear the decks somewhat again to be able to give Manning the players he would need to play in the way he wants, and there is no guarantee that works with the limited Championship experience he has.

For all the noises about not wanting to continuously pump money into the club, it doesn’t really make sense to rip it all up and start again when you finally had some stability in the club. Are we going to go big in January/Summer to get the players in that suit Manning? Otherwise we will be stuck with a pretty poor cocktail of a group of players that suit playing one way and a manager that wants to play another.

We don’t want to pump money into the club non-stop so let’s keep ripping it up and starting again, you can’t really make it make sense can you?

Cyclical Steve I call him. He's done this for nigh on 20 years. And we as fans are surprised. Well I am not.
We have a nepotistic love in at the highest levels of the club. It's pathetic. And I wonder if that is what Manning was getting at yesterday with his culture comment actually.

[Sir Geoff]

5 minutes ago, 2015 said:

I'm not sure I can see much of any improvement. Feels very much the same as when NP was in charge. Some good moments in games, and some really bad ones. The side is inconsistent. 

So far our best performance this season was under NP, at Swansea. We were brilliant that day, and our worst was probably Coventry at home, where we ironically got the 3 points. 

I just am not seeing a difference in performance than before, just the same inconsistency. 

I'll make no bones about it now, I didn't want NP gone, and I think the decision to sack him is up there with the poor decision to appoint Holden, but i'm happy to be proven wrong.

Same players same inconsistencies. Everyone (except the 3 wise men)that has closely followed the development of the team over the past couple of years could see that after losing Scott a bit more quality would be needed to push on. Instead we are told about 'nest eggs' and the budget being maxed out.

[2015]

22 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

Same players same inconsistencies. Everyone (except the 3 wise men)that has closely followed the development of the team over the past couple of years could see that after losing Scott a bit more quality would be needed to push on. Instead we are told about 'nest eggs' and the budget being maxed out.

Perhaps we need to be a bit more like Luton

[Davefevs]

@NcnsBcfc

stats taken from before Sunday’s game.

Taking each circled but in turn:

General Passing:

Volume of passing:

Grey bars - He generally makes more passes than his peers (Champ FBs), as almost all grey bars are past the mid-point.  The circled but shows the actual numbers made, e.g. 40.9 passes per 90 mins.

Passing Accuracy:

Blue bars - he is generally more accurate than his peers. You can see in the blue circles his % accuracy.  His long passes at 59% is one of the best in the Champ!

Passing Breakdown:

4% of his passes are crosses vs 6% for his peers.

19% of his passes are creative vs 21% for his peers.

78% of his passes are simple / general vs 73% for his peers.  Therefore he errs on the safer pass than his peers.

Pass Direction:

He makes 36% of passes forward (35% peers)

He makes 43% lateral (46% peers)

He makes 20% back (19% peers)

Its pretty borderline, but he is not dissimilar to his peers.

For every Cafu there’s a Gary Neville!!!

George is very slightly safe.  But in being safe he keeps the ball better than his peers.

Ball at his Feet:

Top Right, I didn’t circle, but basic summary, he’ll run with the ball into space, but tends not to take his opponent on.

I suspect some of this might surprise you a bit.

[Ashtongreight]

1 hour ago, marcofisher said:

Problem is the board think they know better and decide to go away from a Cotterill/Pearson type (who do know better). This entails a change of play style that the squad is not equipped for, reinvestment is required (which the Lansdowns apparently don’t want to do anymore), and therefore it is set up to fail for the new coach, who is not equipped with the appropriate players to play the style of football he wants, or just as often in the last few years, is found to be no better tactically than the Manager types who instilled some structure. Plus in the case of LJ, no better at bringing players through the system than Pearson was.

I didn’t agree with Pearson going but I also don’t think Manning is a bad appointment on paper. The problem is that we spent 3 years under Pearson building in one direction, and just when he finished clearing the junk, raised some money through bringing through and developing Scott and Semenyo, and instilled some fortitude in the team, we decide to chop and change back to the Head Coach route again. Now we have to reinvest and clear the decks somewhat again to be able to give Manning the players he would need to play in the way he wants, and there is no guarantee that works with the limited Championship experience he has.

For all the noises about not wanting to continuously pump money into the club, it doesn’t really make sense to rip it all up and start again when you finally had some stability in the club. Are we going to go big in January/Summer to get the players in that suit Manning? Otherwise we will be stuck with a pretty poor cocktail of a group of players that suit playing one way and a manager that wants to play another.

We don’t want to pump money into the club non-stop so let’s keep ripping it up and starting again, you can’t really make it make sense can you?

Excellent post, spot on.

[Davefevs]

Here’s Cam Pring for comparison:

 

Very different players.  But I think GT gets a bad press!

[NcnsBcfc]

25 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

@NcnsBcfc

stats taken from before Sunday’s game.

Taking each circled but in turn:

General Passing:

Volume of passing:

Grey bars - He generally makes more passes than his peers (Champ FBs), as almost all grey bars are past the mid-point.  The circled but shows the actual numbers made, e.g. 40.9 passes per 90 mins.

Passing Accuracy:

Blue bars - he is generally more accurate than his peers. You can see in the blue circles his % accuracy.  His long passes at 59% is one of the best in the Champ!

Passing Breakdown:

4% of his passes are crosses vs 6% for his peers.

19% of his passes are creative vs 21% for his peers.

78% of his passes are simple / general vs 73% for his peers.  Therefore he errs on the safer pass than his peers.

Pass Direction:

He makes 36% of passes forward (35% peers)

He makes 43% lateral (46% peers)

He makes 20% back (19% peers)

Its pretty borderline, but he is not dissimilar to his peers.

For every Cafu there’s a Gary Neville!!!

George is very slightly safe.  But in being safe he keeps the ball better than his peers.

Ball at his Feet:

Top Right, I didn’t circle, but basic summary, he’ll run with the ball into space, but tends not to take his opponent on.

I suspect some of this might surprise you a bit.

I await the addition of yesterday's game some trepidation....

[NcnsBcfc]

Just now, Davefevs said:

Here’s Cam Pring for comparison:

 

Very different players.  But I think GT gets a bad press!

I also thing Pring has had a poor start to the season, by the standards of the second half of last season.

Neither of them have been particularly good in my opinion.

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, NcnsBcfc said:

I await the addition of yesterday's game some trepidation....

Why? 66 passes - 16 forward / 27 lateral / 23 backwards isn’t gonna change 13 games-worth much.

[NcnsBcfc]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Why? 66 passes - 16 forward / 27 lateral / 23 backwards isn’t gonna change 13 games-worth much.

It was just the numbers for the Norwich game. In the 2nd half, it was quite noticeable at times that other players were forgoing passing to Tanner (even though he was in space0 as they knew they were getting the ball straight back.

Just my impression of course, but an uber defensive rb doesn't really fit the pattern of inverted full backs and internal triangle movements that were apparent on the left hand side yesterday.

[Charlie BCFC]

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

What are those positives? 

And do those positives outweighs the negatives we've all seen? 

I’ll list them:

- We look better in possession

- We’ve created better chances than the opposition in 3 of the 4 games and the only one being Southampton where they wouldn’t count Conway’s big chance when he tried to round the keeper

- Beat Middlesbrough who are one of the form teams in the league

- First half of Southampton was the best we’ve played for a while 

- Out of possession structure for the most part been very good, only things that have let us down is player mistakes

 

We need to be more clinical and better in second halves but that’s something to work on

 

[Sir Geoff]

Come on Dave, where's the consistency. Just listened to the end of the pod where you quote Manning's record of 4 points from 12.

Followed up by your usual Extrapolation.........Oh no you conveniently forgot it this time.

I'll do it for you 1 point per game between now and the end of the season gives us 52 points and an 18th / 19th position.

Work in progress...my ar*e.

[Sir Geoff]

16 minutes ago, Charlie BCFC said:

I’ll list them:

- We look better in possession

- We’ve created better chances than the opposition in 3 of the 4 games and the only one being Southampton where they wouldn’t count Conway’s big chance when he tried to round the keeper

- Beat Middlesbrough who are one of the form teams in the league

- First half of Southampton was the best we’ve played for a while 

- Out of possession structure for the most part been very good, only things that have let us down is player mistakes

 

We need to be more clinical and better in second halves but that’s something to work on

 

Better in possession, than what and to what end.

Better chances than the opposition. Really I thought Norwich hit the inside of a post first half, Ashley Barnes should have scored when through and they scored 2 goals. From memory Middlesborough also hit the woodwork and had several decent chances.

Beat Middlesborough who were one point and one place above us in the table. Hardly world beaters.

Out of possession etc - Boro passed through us with ease at times as did Southampton. Norwich and QPR were both poor teams that seemed happy for a point.

Player mistakes. Why are they making these mistakes ? Unused to the way we are now playing, not prepared properly.

More clinical. No sh** sherlock.

[Clutton Caveman]

6 hours ago, Charlie BCFC said:

Early days I don’t blame you for thinking most of this.

But the thing around players not buying into his style of play is rubbish, they already have and you can see the difference. You’re just sulking over Pearson still and not accepting that Manning needs the same patience as we have Pearson as a fanbase 

Didn't look like they bought into his style of play in the 2nd half. I lost count of the times we hit a simple pass to a close by team mate but they were on a totally different wavelength and the ball went out for a throw in. They look confused and leaderless on and off the field and had no plan to tackle the second half formation of Norwich.

[headhunter]

8 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

Come on Dave, where's the consistency. Just listened to the end of the pod where you quote Manning's record of 4 points from 12.

Followed up by your usual Extrapolation.........Oh no you conveniently forgot it this time.

I'll do it for you 1 point per game between now and the end of the season gives us 52 points and an 18th / 19th position.

Work in progress...my ar*e.

, had to laugh in a friendly way at some of those comments.

Yes, I do like to extrapolate but it was not a case of conveniently forgetting.

First & foremost I support the football club and don't pin my colours to any manager. We have to be objective on FBC and offer both sides of any argument. Ian is regularly criticised on here for his opinions but you'll note he's been broadly supportive of Manning and often refers to the "cult of Nige".

As I have said more than once, the manner of Nigel's exit was badly managed. He has a lot to be proud of from his time here, the main one being he took us through a reset without losing our Championship status. If I'm coming across as being supportive of Liam it is solely borne out of reflecting my inner sentiment of "ffs, I hope they [Lansdowns] have not got this wrong".

Two tough away games coming up and this forum will become even more rabid if we secure less than 2 points. 

 

[Charlie BCFC]

6 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

Better in possession, than what and to what end.

Better chances than the opposition. Really I thought Norwich hit the inside of a post first half, Ashley Barnes should have scored when through and they scored 2 goals. From memory Middlesborough also hit the woodwork and had several decent chances.

Beat Middlesborough who were one point and one place above us in the table. Hardly world beaters.

Out of possession etc - Boro passed through us with ease at times as did Southampton. Norwich and QPR were both poor teams that seemed happy for a point.

Player mistakes. Why are they making these mistakes ? Unused to the way we are now playing, not prepared properly.

More clinical. No sh** sherlock.

We’re better in possession than we were under Pearson, we kept trying to rush it forward but now we’re keeping and (GOD FORBID!!!) play it sideways to keep chances alive and create higher quality chances

 

Hernandez had one shot off the post but other than that not a lot else, we had a Knight header well saved, two Conway chances and Sykes narrowly wide. Middlesbrough scoreline flattered, Vyner own goal a freak and we had many more chances with Conway and Mehmeti coming to mind

 

Again Middlesbrough we limited well other than a mad 5 minute period, Southampton had chances but O’Leary not massively tested a hell of a strike with their right backs weaker foot was the difference 

 

Vyner freak own goal v Boro, Tanner caught on the ball v Boro, a lot of people mentioned Weimann yesterday for their first and Vyner completely got the wrong side of Idah for the winner

[Charlie BCFC]

7 minutes ago, Clutton Caveman said:

Didn't look like they bought into his style of play in the 2nd half. I lost count of the times we hit a simple pass to a close by team mate but they were on a totally different wavelength and the ball went out for a throw in. They look confused and leaderless on and off the field and had no plan to tackle the second half formation of Norwich.

But even the second half, we were poor but we were very possession heavy. Pearson sides wouldn’t be that possession heavy and would force it forward

[frenchred]

26 minutes ago, Charlie BCFC said:

But even the second half, we were poor but we were very possession heavy. Pearson sides wouldn’t be that possession heavy and would force it forward

Possession for the sake of it, I can't wait!

It's boring football, almost tedious at times