Separating the truth from fiction (I’m not encouraged)

[firstdivision]

8 hours ago, IAmNick said:

I think some of my confusion tonight was that it seemed a bit of a step back from the way I thought we were going to be playing, and our success came as you mentioned from a more Pearson style approach to the game.

The passing along and out from the back was more direct, and we were hassling and trying to win the ball higher up the pitch - and getting some success when we did so as well.

It was a bit of a confused performance for me, and that was reflected in how the game changed significantly with both sets of our subs.

My impression of the first half was that the players said ‘let’s go back to how we were playing before LM came in.’ Mind you, it was dire, which is kind of why the board made the change in the first place.
We improved when we started to pass it. Eg lovely move down the right that ended with Knight’s shot saved by keeper to his left. 

Edited December 13, 2023 by firstdivision

[Red Skin]

5 weeks isn't very long to totally change the way we play.

Pearson won't be coming back, and if we sack LM how long do we give the next bloke?  5 weeks?  Less, 3 weeks?  He will still be just putting the cherry on top of a top 6 team after all won't he?  That's the narrative that too many on here seem to be clinging onto.

And the next bloke will still be appointed by the current ownership, so he'll have to deal with the same backlash.  Or will the collective grief of the fan base finally moved on to acceptance of the reality of where we are?

[robin_unreliant]

1 hour ago, firstdivision said:

My impression of the first half was that the players said ‘let’s go back to how we were playing before LM came in.’ Mind you, it was dire, which is kind of why the board made the change in the first place.
We improved when we started to pass it. Eg lovely move down the right that ended with Knight’s shot saved by keeper to his left. 

Yeah, I do wonder if the players are actually doing what LM is asking them to. Maybe, under pressure, they revert to their comfort zone.

It's not like he can drop them en masse as the squad is too small. Comments by Naismith on RTV suggested what he was seeing wasn't what they did in training. All of which makes you wonder if LM is failing to take the players with him.

[The Masked Man]

I think the frustrating thing is the race for the last play off spots is wide open and the trend at the moment is that Manning's appointment is going to set us back at least a season. Longer term I think it might be the way to go but we shouldn't have made the change mid season.

Birmingham fans must feel the same.

[Red Skin]

10 hours ago, Harry said:

100%. 
I thought tonight’s performance was one that you could easily say was a ‘Nige’ performance. 

Thats not a criticism of either Nige nor Liam. It’s more a case of the players reverting to what they were more familiar with. We definitely didn’t look to play too much from the back tonight and were much more direct. 
We did have a couple of good spells where we held good possession inside the opposition half and final 3rd, but there wasn’t a great deal of the much maligned “knocking about between the Cb’s” tonight. 

So yes, if you’d been on the moon the last 6 weeks and this was your first game back, you’d be forgiven for thinking Nige was still in charge. 
The only giveaway to that was that Mehmeti played

I think LM has talked before about not being going more direct to beat a press.  It shouldn't be a surprise that the team are effective playing to a style they are familiar with.   It may be the way Nige set the team up, but as far as I am aware he hasn't invented it.  Indeed the 433 that we ended up playing seemed to be arrived at almost by accident in most peoples' eyes when most fans seemed to want Pearson gone. 

Like @Harry some would probably see me as some kind of LM zealot.  I'm not, but I am not expecting top six and Pep Guardiola levels of coaching, performance and results after 5 weeks.  

It's a sad situation where fans seem to want LM fail just so they can punish the owners.  

Edited December 13, 2023 by Red Skin

[Silvio Dante]

46 minutes ago, Red Skin said:

5 weeks isn't very long to totally change the way we play.

Pearson won't be coming back, and if we sack LM how long do we give the next bloke?  5 weeks?  Less, 3 weeks?  He will still be just putting the cherry on top of a top 6 team after all won't he?  That's the narrative that too many on here seem to be clinging onto.

And the next bloke will still be appointed by the current ownership, so he'll have to deal with the same backlash.  Or will the collective grief of the fan base finally moved on to acceptance of the reality of where we are?

I think you’re missing the point.

The circumstances of Mannings appointment were farcical no doubt and I don’t think anyone believed what the board said. By the same token, I don’t think anyone believes Pearson is coming back. It’s not about top six, it’s about whether on evidence to date we’re progressing or regressing - I acknowledge six games is a small sample but if you’re going to criticise people for observing things that aren’t right, then we’d just as well close the forum down. 

[Numero Uno]

1 minute ago, Red Skin said:

I think LM has talked before about not being going more direct to beat a press.  It shouldn't be a surprise that the team are effective playing to a style they are familiar with.   It may be the way Nige set the team up, but as far as I am aware he hasn't invented it.  Indeed the 433 that we ended up playing seemed to be arrived at almost by accident in most peoples' eyes when most fans seemed to want Pearson gone. 

Like @Harry some would probably see me as some kind of LM zealot.  I'm not, but I am not expecting top six and Pep Guardiola levels of coaching, performance and results after 5 weeks.  

I do agree about not jumping in too early BUT as the weeks go on, IF WE KEEP ON LOSING FOOTBALL MATCHES, that argument disappears into oblivion and we've then recruited a Manager who simply fails to win football matches. If it's 8 weeks and he's still losing half of his games is it ok to comment then? 12 weeks? 16 weeks? What is the acceptable period? There does come a time when his record is either good, ok or totally unacceptable. This 50% defeat rate needs moving on and turning round quite quickly. If we sit here after 16 games, in my opinion, and he's lost 8 plus then he's in trouble.

[W-S-M Seagull]

11 minutes ago, Red Skin said:

I think LM has talked before about not being going more direct to beat a press.  It shouldn't be a surprise that the team are effective playing to a style they are familiar with.   It may be the way Nige set the team up, but as far as I am aware he hasn't invented it.  Indeed the 433 that we ended up playing seemed to be arrived at almost by accident in most peoples' eyes when most fans seemed to want Pearson gone. 

Like @Harry some would probably see me as some kind of LM zealot.  I'm not, but I am not expecting top six and Pep Guardiola levels of coaching, performance and results after 5 weeks.  

It's a sad situation where fans seem to want LM fail just so they can punish the owners.  

I didn't expect miracles but the very least I expected was to maintain our position. 

We've gone backwards. We've moved further away from the play offs and now looking over our shoulder at the relegation zone. 

None of us want LM to fail so please stop saying that. We all want LM to be a roaring success. 

[oldstandrobin]

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

I didn't expect miracles but the very least I expected was to maintain our position. 

We've gone backwards. We've moved further away from the play offs and now looking over our shoulder at the relegation zone. 

None of us want LM to fail so please stop saying that. We all want LM to be a roaring success. 

Of course we do. And we also want a £100 Xmas Bonus to all BCFC supporters from Crayon Boy. ( We wait with anticipation !)

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Silvio Dante said:

I think you’re missing the point.

The circumstances of Mannings appointment were farcical no doubt and I don’t think anyone believed what the board said. By the same token, I don’t think anyone believes Pearson is coming back. It’s not about top six, it’s about whether on evidence to date we’re progressing or regressing - I acknowledge six games is a small sample but if you’re going to criticise people for observing things that aren’t right, then we’d just as well close the forum down. 

1 hour ago, Numero Uno said:

I do agree about not jumping in too early BUT as the weeks go on, IF WE KEEP ON LOSING FOOTBALL MATCHES, that argument disappears into oblivion and we've then recruited a Manager who simply fails to win football matches. If it's 8 weeks and he's still losing half of his games is it ok to comment then? 12 weeks? 16 weeks? What is the acceptable period? There does come a time when his record is either good, ok or totally unacceptable. This 50% defeat rate needs moving on and turning round quite quickly. If we sit here after 16 games, in my opinion, and he's lost 8 plus then he's in trouble.

Exactly, fine to voice opinions every game as to what you’re seeing.

Is it wrong to suggest on 6 games evidence our CMs don’t screen the CBs.  I saw it at QPR his first game in charge and every game since.

You don’t need to be Nostradamus to see their goal was coming from the 4th minute.

Pic1 - Look at MJ and JW’s position!

Look at how far ZV is from RD, how CP has had to come infield to help RD.  It’s a shambolic structure, even worse so early in the game.

Pic2 - Ennis and Szmodics in pockets, Moran could get between MJ and JW and turn.  That was 8th minute.

Their goal was coming!

I don’t think MJ is the best screener anyway but he’s being dragged away from what his does best.  He’s not a presser, he’s a reader, a positional midfielder, everyone floats around him.

LM is exposing our CBs playing this way.  It’s no wonder ZV is starting to make mistakes, he’s being exposed.

Now the test is whether LM identifies and stops this, or whether he accepts it because he thinks the benefits of playing this way lead to better things elsewhere on the pitch.

The 6-game vuew from me, is no, it’s worsening us.  But I’m prepared to continue to observe before declaring whether he’s good, bad or indifferent.

Thats what this forum is for isn’t it?

 

[Numero Uno]

6 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Exactly, fine to voice opinions every game as to what you’re seeing.

Is it wrong to suggest on 6 games evidence our CMs don’t screen the CBs.  I saw it at QPR his first game in charge and every game since.

You don’t need to be Nostradamus to see their goal was coming from the 4th minute.

Pic1 - Look at MJ and JW’s position!

Look at how far ZV is from RD, how CP has had to come infield to help RD.  It’s a shambolic structure, even worse so early in the game.

Pic2 - Ennis and Szmodics in pockets, Moran could get between MJ and JW and turn.  That was 8th minute.

Their goal was coming!

I don’t think MJ is the best screener anyway but he’s being dragged away from what his does best.  He’s not a presser, he’s a reader, a positional midfielder, everyone floats around him.

LM is exposing our CBs playing this way.  It’s no wonder ZV is starting to make mistakes, he’s being exposed.

Now the test is whether LM identifies and stops this, or whether he accepts it because he thinks the benefits of playing this way lead to better things elsewhere on the pitch.

The 6-game vuew from me, is no, it’s worsening us.  But I’m prepared to continue to observe before declaring whether he’s good, bad or indifferent.

Thats what this forum is for isn’t it?

 

That’s my concern. Do we have an inexperienced Manager trying to change too much too soon? Do we rein the changes in a little and go full throttle when new players are recruited to fit the style.

[Harry]

20 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Exactly, fine to voice opinions every game as to what you’re seeing.

Is it wrong to suggest on 6 games evidence our CMs don’t screen the CBs.  I saw it at QPR his first game in charge and every game since.

You don’t need to be Nostradamus to see their goal was coming from the 4th minute.

Pic1 - Look at MJ and JW’s position!

Look at how far ZV is from RD, how CP has had to come infield to help RD.  It’s a shambolic structure, even worse so early in the game.

Pic2 - Ennis and Szmodics in pockets, Moran could get between MJ and JW and turn.  That was 8th minute.

Their goal was coming!

I don’t think MJ is the best screener anyway but he’s being dragged away from what his does best.  He’s not a presser, he’s a reader, a positional midfielder, everyone floats around him.

LM is exposing our CBs playing this way.  It’s no wonder ZV is starting to make mistakes, he’s being exposed.

Now the test is whether LM identifies and stops this, or whether he accepts it because he thinks the benefits of playing this way lead to better things elsewhere on the pitch.

The 6-game vuew from me, is no, it’s worsening us.  But I’m prepared to continue to observe before declaring whether he’s good, bad or indifferent.

Thats what this forum is for isn’t it?

 

Yes. I agree with the defensive screening from midfield. 
Neither James or Williams are traditional ‘DM’s’ in the truest sense (ie a Makelele). 
Looking at LM’s Oxford team, Branningan & McGuane were also not strict DM’s. 
How they tend to play is to sit slightly deeper, but not in a strict screen. 
In the back 3 which he likes to adopt you almost find a pentagon shape. 
 

                CB. 
     CB.                  CB. 
  
           CM.     CM. 
 

This does leave a gap between the lines that a traditional DM would usually fill. 
The thing with Brannigan and McGuane though is that they are much more mobile than James & Williams (and TGH for that matter). 
Knight would be much more suited to filling the McGuane role. 
 

Edit - and I saw that pentagon shape quite a lot in the Huddersfield game. 

Edited December 13, 2023 by Harry

[Davefevs]

13 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

That’s my concern. Do we have an inexperienced Manager trying to change too much too soon? Do we rein the changes in a little and go full throttle when new players are recruited to fit the style.

I said that on FBC this morning.

I would’ve used these opening 6, 8, 10 games (and training) more for evaluation.  He’s jumped straight into “change”.  Even QPR after 2 days, he’s tweaked the press.

And now he’s saying the players heads are overloaded…in both Saturday and last night’s post match interview.

This is gonna be a rough ride I think on early evidence…for us and him.

[Numero Uno]

14 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I said that on FBC this morning.

I would’ve used these opening 6, 8, 10 games (and training) more for evaluation.  He’s jumped straight into “change”.  Even QPR after 2 days, he’s tweaked the press.

And now he’s saying the players heads are overloaded…in both Saturday and last night’s post match interview.

This is gonna be a rough ride I think on early evidence…for us and him.

It’s a rougher ride for us. We pay to watch it and are emotionally invested in the fall out. He gets 12 months at £5k per week or whatever he’s on if it goes wrong and moves on to a £2k per week job in the lower leagues!!

[Silvio Dante]

30 minutes ago, Harry said:

Yes. I agree with the defensive screening from midfield. 
Neither James or Williams are traditional ‘DM’s’ in the truest sense (ie a Makelele). 
Looking at LM’s Oxford team, Branningan & McGuane were also not strict DM’s. 
How they tend to play is to sit slightly deeper, but not in a strict screen. 
In the back 3 which he likes to adopt you almost find a pentagon shape. 
 

                CB. 
     CB.                  CB. 
  
           CM.     CM. 
 

This does leave a gap between the lines that a traditional DM would usually fill. 
The thing with Brannigan and McGuane though is that they are much more mobile than James & Williams (and TGH for that matter). 
Knight would be much more suited to filling the McGuane role. 
 

Edit - and I saw that pentagon shape quite a lot in the Huddersfield game. 

Can I just thank you for reverting to “Pentagon”. When you posted this the other day you called it a Pentagram and I couldn’t work out for the life of me why we were introducing satanic rituals to our game!

[W-S-M Seagull]

40 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I said that on FBC this morning.

I would’ve used these opening 6, 8, 10 games (and training) more for evaluation.  He’s jumped straight into “change”.  Even QPR after 2 days, he’s tweaked the press.

And now he’s saying the players heads are overloaded…in both Saturday and last night’s post match interview.

This is gonna be a rough ride I think on early evidence…for us and him.

Really enjoyed listening to you Dave. You even managed to keep Ian quiet with your calm and collected delivery of your thoughts! Oh how I would love for you to have an audience with BT and JL! 

We've spoken about this before. But Manning came in and he set his stool out by pretty much saying we do things my way now. Now you can understand a manager doing that with a team that's struggling but in our circumstances? I'm not sure that was the correct way to do things. 

He has to take responsibility for overloading them but more importantly he needs to find a way to not overload them as much and to have greater clarity. 

[W-S-M Seagull]

1 hour ago, Numero Uno said:

That’s my concern. Do we have an inexperienced Manager trying to change too much too soon? Do we rein the changes in a little and go full throttle when new players are recruited to fit the style.

I'm not sure he can reign it in now. He's too far down that path. 

If he suddenly changes his approach then we are once again back to the LJ days of constantly ripping up plans and trying different things until something works. 

At this moment in time, I'm not convinced about spending money to fit this style. 

One of LJs strategies when losing was to say "we need more players" look how that turned out! 

[Harry]

1 hour ago, Silvio Dante said:

Can I just thank you for reverting to “Pentagon”. When you posted this the other day you called it a Pentagram and I couldn’t work out for the life of me why we were introducing satanic rituals to our game!

Ha ha. I’ll casually blame the evils of autocorrect. 
Anyway, must go, I have that goat burning in the back garden I need to go see to. 

[Sheltons Army]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I said that on FBC this morning.

I would’ve used these opening 6, 8, 10 games (and training) more for evaluation.  He’s jumped straight into “change”.  Even QPR after 2 days, he’s tweaked the press.

And now he’s saying the players heads are overloaded…in both Saturday and last night’s post match interview.

This is gonna be a rough ride I think on early evidence…for us and him.

I thought the pod was one of the best I’ve heard over it’s time due to some of the debates and points raised , 

It was actually much better , and a far better and interesting listen , to have yourself on to challenge and debate , whereas I have to say normally it’s the loudest voice bossing it and all nodding.

I thought your points about changing so quickly and the overall discussion and agreement on the pod about evaluation periods etc was particularly spot on and thought provoking.

Its clear to see and hear that LM is a ‘process’ coach , that takes time but he and similar relies on and is self confident that if you keep following the method , it will be productive in time.

As I said in another post, that takes time , and he’s been thrust into a toxic or simmering cauldron and thus needing , actually to concentrate on results and some breathing space.

The wish to put in processes does not necessarily align with doing what you need to do to win a game , and results

 

I do wonder whether as a clearly studied , ambitious , driven , young coach he’s gone in eager to put his skills on show in quite an intense method, whereas a more pragmatic or sensible / wiser approach would have been as you suggest, evaluate , look for some results , don’t over coach , buy yourself some time and work from there gradually.

I also concur about the points regarding defensive shields and the changes of formation

Im not a fan at all of constant flip flopping in formations and it is rarely successful 

As you and the pod highlighted , it makes recruitment even more difficult and complicated.

 

Like many I’m not convinced we have the right squad profile to fit Mannings and right at this point it all looks a real mess.

If LM is going to be successful here it’s going to need some time , some luck , some excellent recruitment and he’s going to have to as I’ve said elsewhere , because of the pot he’s landed in , nerves of steel and a really strong mentality.

Is he up to it ? Really difficult to even start to judge but I do have some worries - some points you’ve raised and others , @Silvio Dante springs to mind are very interesting and thought provoking.

 

You summed up what they’ve done in saying NP was steadily building something pretty reasonable / decent and they’ve ripped it up and gambled (Or words to that effect)

I said when NP was discarded that he was your Pontoon 19 and they’ve flipped a coin and called twist - a massive gamble 

What particularly concerns me is the level of expertise and experience around him , above him - It’s actually frightening

I think most of us would concur that if he somehow succeeds he’s going to have to do it not thanks in part to those around him , but in spite of them

I do think if he pushes through with all that you’d have to have some real respect for him

Thats a bloody big ask , whoever you are -

Ironically there’s only a few who you’d back in that task and ironically the bloke they’ve just stabbed is one of them 

His post match last night concerned me in that , understandably , it appears that he can feel the heat and noise and no one can work at their best if that’s the case

You can see it starting to look very ragged quickly , and I go back to my concern about a toxic Ashton Gate and  how it would accelerate that.

 

Edited December 13, 2023 by Sheltons Army

[Davefevs]

@Sheltons Army I didn’t really get a chance to talk about the overall game this morning, and I don’t think it was all bad either.

- opening 20 we actually pinched it high up and looked threatening

- I saw Jamo making two proactive runs early on to give Tanner an inside pass rather than a cul-de-sac

- I can’t believe how quickly Blackburn got beyond our first line / front 4 and how slow Bell is to start his recovery runs. We get overloaded or bypassed too easily

- much better 20 min spell after the subs, Dickie is the leader, James fed off of him.

[numbeast]

Bringing in a new man in November with a different philosophy was probably not the right thing to do. Had the board used some common sense they would of held off replacing Pearson until the end of the season whereby they’d have saved paying off his contract and who knows where we’d finish.

Had they waited, Manning would have the entire pre-season to change, not only the game plan/philosophy, but the squad as well and brought in players more suited to his game plan. I believe, once he gets in the type of players his system requires, it will bring about some entertaining football. Injuries in the squad haven’t help but then that was true for Pearson.

I’m sure it isn’t time for doom and gloom, but it does call into question the timing of Nige’s departure.  Could that timing have been down to the fact there were green shoot sprouting and once the injury list got shorter then he could have achieved the desired aim of the club and got us to, or at least, close to the play-offs. I suppose only the board and owner would know the truth and I don’t see them sharing that information.

But still, if we didn’t have these situations it would feel like Bristol City. Regardless we will still support the club wherever we finish in the table because that’s what we do.

[sh1t_ref_again]

Not sure I seen last night as the terrible performance some on here think it was, but yes the result was. But at any level of football, if you do not take your chances then a mistake or a good bit of opposition play, is going to leave you loosing.

A common theme, over not just Manning time but just prior to that our forwards are not scoring, Tommy scored a fantastic brace on his return against Rotherham at the start of October and only once in open play since, Bell (who has been awful recently), last goal was against Stoke in September, Skyes (dont understand why he was taken off, last night) has scored twice since manning took over but prior to that was Plymouth. Since the start of October we have managed just under an average of a goal a game, which if you can shut up shop at the back, which we did better under Nige, or at least less mistakes gives a chance of getting something, but it makes so much harder if you are just not taking your chances.
According to the BBC,

last night we had 46% possession (exactly the same as Leeds did), with 11 shots, 5 on target, leeds had 8 shots with 4 on target but scored twice.

"Bristol City had been the better side but only had Tommy Conway's fierce rising drive to show for it before going behind", "Manning and Bristol City will rue the fact they failed to take their chances when they were on top"

I had to watch on Blackburns output, but there commentary was very much we were on top and Manning would be the happier manager until the goal.

I though for a spell just before the goal, we played some very good possession football  and again after the 1st round of subs, but no cutting edge.

Hopefully Manning will quickly learn his best team, as taking off Skyes & Knight made no sense, not starting with TGH, who had been very good and again last night when he came on, At least he reverted to starting Pring and playing Skyes on the right, now needs to put Bell on the bench, probable for Mehmeti who at least had a go when he came on and decide if to drop Tommy and play either Cornick or Weimann in his place.

Whilst obviously not happy with the result, it was far from the worse performance of recent times. 

[Davefevs]

28 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

Not sure I seen last night as the terrible performance some on here think it was, but yes the result was. But at any level of football, if you do not take your chances then a mistake or a good bit of opposition play, is going to leave you loosing.

You may be surprised (because I'm often tarred with cult of Nige), but I don’t think we were terrible.  I don’t think we were great btw either!

What did me was the deviation from LM’s “identity”.

Pre-game someone suggested we should sit-in and play on the counterattack.  My own view was that we should be crystallising on LM’s control / patient football, and there should be no reason not to.  Blackburn aren’t high flying, they had 2 more points than us before last night.

So what actually manifested with the ball felt almost a betrayal of his way of playing.

It obviously wasn’t controlled possession, but to make matters worse, it wasn’t counterattacking (like Saints, like Hull) either.  It was a brand of long ball / lack of options attacking, hoping to win a loose ball, which we didn’t.

The positive in the opening 20 mins was pinching it high up.

The 20 min spell in the second half, felt more Nige-like…a bit of dogged determination to get a goal, and then to try and salvage the match.

 

[sh1t_ref_again]

10 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

You may be surprised (because I'm often tarred with cult of Nige), but I don’t think we were terrible.  I don’t think we were great btw either!

What did me was the deviation from LM’s “identity”.

Pre-game someone suggested we should sit-in and play on the counterattack.  My own view was that we should be crystallising on LM’s control / patient football, and there should be no reason not to.  Blackburn aren’t high flying, they had 2 more points than us before last night.

So what actually manifested with the ball felt almost a betrayal of his way of playing.

It obviously wasn’t controlled possession, but to make matters worse, it wasn’t counterattacking (like Saints, like Hull) either.  It was a brand of long ball / lack of options attacking, hoping to win a loose ball, which we didn’t.

The positive in the opening 20 mins was pinching it high up.

The 20 min spell in the second half, felt more Nige-like…a bit of dogged determination to get a goal, and then to try and salvage the match.

 

I thought we played differently at times of the game, the 1st 20 felt a bit back to how we were playing, trying to stay compact at the back and hitting longer balls to try and get behind them, we then grew into the game and had our best spell when we seemed to be playing more Manning ball, retaining and keeping the ball well, but without the final cutting edge, they scored which started with us just playing the ball out and loosing possession, maybe slack marking but also a great bit of skill, not great until the start of the 2nd half we got at them, but the 2nd goal killed our momentum until the subs were made on the hour, and then it was all us, but taking off Skyes and Knight blunted the attack, even if we were dominating the game.

[W-S-M Seagull]

1 hour ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

I though for a spell just before the goal, we played some very good possession football and again after the 1st round of subs, but no cutting edge.

This is becoming an all too familiar theme with Manning ball.

Lots of pointless possesion that leads to nothing. 

[sh1t_ref_again]

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

This is becoming an all too familiar theme with Manning ball.

Lots of pointless possesion that leads to nothing. 

Or very wasteful strikers, not taking chances

[robin_unreliant]

47 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

Or very wasteful strikers, not taking chances

Are we creating any more chances than we were under Nige though? I think I saw a post saying xG has hardly changed. In which case you can't pin the worse PPG on them, it is more about letting in more goals.

Whether that is down to the changes made by LM or just worse performance by individual players is quite hard for me, as an average fan, to fathom.

[sh1t_ref_again]

1 hour ago, robin_unreliant said:

Are we creating any more chances than we were under Nige though? I think I saw a post saying xG has hardly changed. In which case you can't pin the worse PPG on them, it is more about letting in more goals.

Whether that is down to the changes made by LM or just worse performance by individual players is quite hard for me, as an average fan, to fathom.

Agree, it's both ends of the pitch, we have conceded some poor goals, which I don't see tham all being down to a change in system. 

[GrahamC]

7 hours ago, Harry said:

Yes. I agree with the defensive screening from midfield. 
Neither James or Williams are traditional ‘DM’s’ in the truest sense (ie a Makelele). 
Looking at LM’s Oxford team, Branningan & McGuane were also not strict DM’s. 
How they tend to play is to sit slightly deeper, but not in a strict screen. 
In the back 3 which he likes to adopt you almost find a pentagon shape. 
 

                CB. 
     CB.                  CB. 
  
           CM.     CM. 
 

This does leave a gap between the lines that a traditional DM would usually fill. 
The thing with Brannigan and McGuane though is that they are much more mobile than James & Williams (and TGH for that matter). 
Knight would be much more suited to filling the McGuane role. 
 

Edit - and I saw that pentagon shape quite a lot in the Huddersfield game. 

Genuine question for you & possibly @Davefevs re Williams.

If he’s not a DM, what on earth is he? He certainly isn’t box to box, maybe he was before his time with us & it could be the injury he suffered on arrival but I don’t see him as that now.

He certainly is no goal threat, he is even less likely to score than James.

I am not asking the question just so posters can slag the bloke off but to me if he isn’t a defensive midfielder I am at a loss to know what he is.

James I get, a better passer, often keeps it simple, keeps the ball moving, good reader of the game & not a DM in the truest sense of the definition but a player you can rely on (in a side that’s lacking them) to retain possession.

[Red Skin]

10 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

I think you’re missing the point.

The circumstances of Mannings appointment were farcical no doubt and I don’t think anyone believed what the board said. By the same token, I don’t think anyone believes Pearson is coming back. It’s not about top six, it’s about whether on evidence to date we’re progressing or regressing - I acknowledge six games is a small sample but if you’re going to criticise people for observing things that aren’t right, then we’d just as well close the forum down. 

I am expressing an opinion in response to yours, not denying you your opinion.   

The football isn't great.  Change is painful.  Sometimes you go backwards to go forwards.  Is LM the answer?  I have no idea, but he needs time.  

Your original post started with an apology to @Harry for playing on the words of his original thread.  I think his thread offered something new to what's been said in numerous other threads.  Whereas this one is just expressing the same discontent that permeates every other thread on here right now.  

You haven't addressed the point I made above.  If 6 games is enough time to judge LM.  How long do we give the next bloke? 

I think LM can be criticised, but the level of of criticism is quite unprecedented for someone in post for such a short period.  I'm not accusing you, but as @Harry post laid out I still think alot of that is down to anger with the decision to sack Pearson.

If Pearson had been sacked in response to calls from the fans for his sacking, would LM really be held up to the scrutiny and criticism as is being now?  I don't think he would.