Too Much Negativity

[Silvio Dante]

6 hours ago, Tim Monaghan said:

Did you actually read what I wrote? 
 

“I think we are more composed and thoughtful in possession. I love how Manning is encouraging the team to retain the ball and build up play patiently. This contrasts with more direct approaches seen in the past which sometimes was a bit hit and hope at times.” 
 

Just because you automatically think Sky Sports possession percentages, when you hear the word possession, I get why you think that would sound “bizarre”, so let me help you out.

Just because you’re more thoughtful in possession doesn’t mean you have more of it, you’re looking at it really simplistically. You don’t have to have a higher percentage than your opposition to be more effective whilst you have it. 

Fun fact, depending on what’s happening within the game, I’ll keep it easy, sometimes you’re okay with the opponents having the ball believe it or not. 

So when people talk about possession, there is so much more to it than simple “we’ve got the ball” longer than you. The fact you think that is bizarre. 

I did read what you wrote. You appear to have a “background” as you stated earlier in the thread as a reason as to why you think you’re right - which again, Mr Rider, on a public forum, is again bizarre. Your somewhat uppity response here suggests you don’t like people questioning you as you have that unknown “background”. Tough that in a public forum. So I’ll make it really simple for you.

I don’t look at the Sky Sports stats (but thanks). You can love how Liam has us more patient in possession, and I’ll never knock anyone for preferring style A to style B, but that doesn’t mean we’re more patient and thoughtful - we’re actually more slow and ponderous. Our speed of movement, our speed of thought, is less. When we are more instinctive we’re better (and that based on results is a stone cold fact), such as in the Soton game. Take the Cornick goal - that isn’t patient and thoughtful possession. Thats incisive, quick play.

Where you are correct is in your fun fact. Sometimes opponents are happy to let you have the ball. And that’s why we are more “patient and thoughtful”. Opponents are letting us have it, because they know when we do play that way, we have been evidenced not to get results.

And it’s perfectly fine for you to love that. But it is bizarre.

 

[Tim Monaghan]

11 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

I did read what you wrote. You appear to have a “background” as you stated earlier in the thread as a reason as to why you think you’re right - which again, Mr Rider, on a public forum, is again bizarre. Your somewhat uppity response here suggests you don’t like people questioning you as you have that unknown “background”. Tough that in a public forum. So I’ll make it really simple for you.

I don’t look at the Sky Sports stats (but thanks). You can love how Liam has us more patient in possession, and I’ll never knock anyone for preferring style A to style B, but that doesn’t mean we’re more patient and thoughtful - we’re actually more slow and ponderous. Our speed of movement, our speed of thought, is less. When we are more instinctive we’re better (and that based on results is a stone cold fact), such as in the Soton game. Take the Cornick goal - that isn’t patient and thoughtful possession. Thats incisive, quick play.

Where you are correct is in your fun fact. Sometimes opponents are happy to let you have the ball. And that’s why we are more “patient and thoughtful”. Opponents are letting us have it, because they know when we do play that way, we have been evidenced not to get results.

And it’s perfectly fine for you to love that. But it is bizarre.

 

I appreciate your opinion. 

As for my background, someone once asked me if I’d played the game, I hadn’t mentioned it until then as someone asked me directly. But as an FYI, I’m sorry if it came across that I think I’m right because of it, because I’ll never be right because of it, but I do feel as though I can have a strong opinion because of it, because once it was actually my job. But that doesn’t necessarily mean I’m right. 

Anyway, I appreciate the debate, but let’s reframe from calling each others option as bizarre, as they both actually have merit and it’s kinda disrespectful and I don’t want to do that. 

[Cowshed]

7 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I did wonder whether you were playing the goalie up top, or modern methods now quoted the keeper in formations!

I have seen this refereed to as 4-2-5. 

  

 

[Dan11]

11 hours ago, Cowshed said:

Having a footballing goal keeper gives Ipswich a consistent overload at the back, and he can with ease take part in the patterns of play, he also can pop balls efficiently over the top into team mates. When you have that behind the lines providing balance it makes teams bolder. They can ping it about, and put their foot on it, and their CBs can drive to release. 

he lays off and someone else makes the pass instead, but it’s done quickly - Up back and through. It appears relentless. 

If they don't go up, second season may see teams letting them have it. 4-2-4-1 they have quite frequently five players behind the ball, let them have it. 

 

It's quite funny because we sort of stumbled on this by virtue of Walton being injured at the start of the season. Walton is a superior goalkeeper to Hladky in every facet other than with his feet and played all 46 league games in L1 last season. Ipswich fans would have laughed in August if you suggested Walton wouldn't come straight back in. But Hladky has become so important to us now with how most Championship teams look to press us high, and we kind of accept the odd soft goal against or flap from a cross that Walton would have dealt with better. In L1 you couldn't get away with having a keeper that couldn't deal with aerial bombardment.

Edited February 23 by Dan11

[W-S-M Seagull]

2 hours ago, Tim Monaghan said:

Yes, Dave.

So you've considered it and have then decided that other teams allowing us to have the ball is a positive for Manning as head coach. Strange. 

[Davefevs]

3 hours ago, ExiledAjax said:

Yep. 

Also, we don't create enough. That is true. We didn't create enough at the start of the season either. It is something that needs fixing if we're going to be a serious top 6 perspect.

Shots for should be around 14 or 15, not 11 like it is now. Shots on target needs another increase to 5 rather than 4.

That's what you see the big boys put down, and somehow - and I don't know enough abouts tactics and shapes and passing etc to say how - we need to match that.

We're not doing it now.

Will DM you, can’t seem to copy and paste pics at the mo’

 

[Lorenzos Only Goal]

I think overtime we will see less of Pearsons influence on the team which I think is a bad thing because we've spent a long time pivoting the team in that direction.  I think Manning in my opinion needs to grow as a manager at this level, he doesn't have all the answers yet.  And then we will need pivot the team again to suit a different style of play.

[Robbored]

3 hours ago, ExiledAjax said:

Also, we don't create enough. That is true. We didn't create enough at the start of the season either. It is something that needs fixing if we're going to be a serious top 6 perspect.

We're not doing it now.

I’m sure Manning and Hogg are aware of that fact. 

Taking a simplistic view - we don’t have enough creative midfielders.TGH is more creative than James, Williams but but he doesn’t start every game.

Nor do we have a powerful CF to occupy and bully defenders. The number of times City have go into decent crossing positions only to have limited options - very frustrating to watch.

I’ve pretty much written off the season already and unless City go on an unlikely run of wins, mid table obscurity is the best we can hope for.

Hopefully Manning will be addressing the squad deficiencies in the summer window.

[CodeRed]

15 minutes ago, Robbored said:

 

Hopefully Manning will be addressing the squad deficiencies in the summer window.

Tinnion is already on it and has said he's looking for a striker with the following attributes:

*A big strong No 9 who can bully defenders

*Quick enough to run in behind

*Able to run and press all game

*A player with a proven goals and assist record

*Under 23 but with 150 - 200 game experience

*Available for a modest fee and wage.

*Able to improve and further develop sufficiently to be sold to Bournemouth within 2 years for >£15M

Should be quite easy to find  , Trust Me on Tinnion

[Tim Monaghan]

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

So you've considered it and have then decided that other teams allowing us to have the ball is a positive for Manning as head coach. Strange. 

I think you look at things overly simplistically. Yes. 

[W-S-M Seagull]

1 hour ago, CodeRed said:

Tinnion is already on it and has said he's looking for a striker with the following attributes:

*A big strong No 9 who can bully defenders

*Quick enough to run in behind

*Able to run and press all game

*A player with a proven goals and assist record

*Under 23 but with 150 - 200 game experience

*Available for a modest fee and wage.

*Able to improve and further develop sufficiently to be sold to Bournemouth within 2 years for >£15M

Should be quite easy to find  , Trust Me on Tinnion

Haaland then  

[CodeRed]

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

Haaland then  

Only if we can buy him for £2M and pay him 10 grand a week.

[Robbored]

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

Haaland then  

No sure City can afford his £800k pw wages…….

[REDOXO]

15 hours ago, Tim Monaghan said:

Did you actually read what I wrote? 
 

“I think we are more composed and thoughtful in possession. I love how Manning is encouraging the team to retain the ball and build up play patiently. This contrasts with more direct approaches seen in the past which sometimes was a bit hit and hope at times.” 
 

Just because you automatically think Sky Sports possession percentages, when you hear the word possession, I get why you think that would sound “bizarre”, so let me help you out.

Just because you’re more thoughtful in possession doesn’t mean you have more of it, you’re looking at it really simplistically. You don’t have to have a higher percentage than your opposition to be more effective whilst you have it. 

Fun fact, depending on what’s happening within the game, I’ll keep it easy, sometimes you’re okay with the opponents having the ball believe it or not. 

So when people talk about possession, there is so much more to it than simple “we’ve got the ball” longer than you. The fact you think that is bizarre. 

Part of the problem in some games is the “thoughtfulness” if you are giving yourself a long time to think about it you seconded guess yourself and don’t just do it, like Nike say. 
 

If you are limiting your spontaneity you will get caught in possession more which we did constantly against Leeds and QPR. 

The idea of extremes in this case retention at all costs versus hit and hope is absurd. You have to find ways to win. Winners have multiple ways to win in the same way as narcissists have one way to win beat you verbally until you comply. 
 

Point is we are going nowhere if we don’t adapt and the players continue to be afraid of a different ball. You will get found out if you don’t and in three maybe four of Mr Mannings games we comprehensively were. The scoreline of a 1/0 defeat simply didn’t reflect how crap and mono we were. 

[Pip King]

4 hours ago, Robbored said:

No sure City can afford his £800k pw wages…….