Match Report: Exhausted City's First Half Boro Assault

[Olé]

After less than 65 hours which included over 450 miles of travel since outplaying Premier League Nottingham Forest for over 2 hours, the last thing Bristol City fans expected was to dominate and beat Middlesbrough at the Riverside Stadium. A match setup for Liam Manning's tired side to collapse instead was as convincing as his group have been - both with and without the ball. By far the better side first half as they raced into a quick 2-0 lead and brilliantly organised in defending a one sided second half fightback from Boro.

City's enterprise in passing sharply through the lines was too much for the home side to deal with - in a breathtaking first half where the lead could have been even bigger. Harry Cornick and Sam Bell both brilliantly sprung clear one on one only to be denied by Boro keeper Tom Glover either side of the visitors actual double jab. First Rob Dickie fed Jason Knight who took his time to turn the keeper to put City ahead just past the quarter hour, then Matty James strode upfield a minute later before slamming home a low second.

Manning went into the game with questions about league form and the hangover of late exit from the FA Cup after City's spirited 120 minutes at Forest, a fourth undefeated cup tie in a month against top flight opponents. He made six changes - resting Joe Williams, Tommy Conway and others, but it was those he restored who seized control, James and defender George Tanner dominant in a one sided opening. The game was all in Boro's half when a half cleared corner saw Tanner loop under the bar and into Glovers hands.

The only response from the hosts saw one time City man Luke Ayling - up against his former side in their urine on grass tribute kit - cross into Hayden Hackney who wriggled this way and that to find space only for Zak Vyner to block his shot. It was a rare attack as for the next 15 minutes the well organised visitors took Boro apart. James brilliant ball  put Cornick clear from the left to race in one on one and see his shot pushed away with players queueing up to tap in the rebound, Sam Bell eventually collecting but blocked.

Then the quick fire City assault. Rob Dickie marauded forward and picked out Knight in the box who showed composure to not take the quick shot and instead shield the ball to turn the helpless keeper six yards out and drill home. A minute later it was two, James roared out of midfield and Boro defenders, already mindful of the visitors quick passing combinations, all picked someone to close the passing lanes to, so instead James kept running before lashing a low shot past the keeper to send the away corner into chaos.

There was more to come - Tanner's corner was almost headed home, then Nahki Wells got in behind from an amazing combination and Cornick dummy, desperately cleared for the latter to hurl in a long throw which Dickie hooked just wide. At the midway point of the half Boro finally found room again via Ayling out right but City were flying into every block and an eventual low cross was turned wide by Hackney. Ten minutes later Tanner stole back possession brilliantly and won a quick free kick from which Knight forced a save. 

It could and so nearly should have been 3-0 minutes later. Boro's attack broke down and City cleared the lines up to Cornick, turning brilliantly in midfield before holding the ball up to tease midfielders before picking out Bell's run with a lifted through ball that sent the winger miles clear one on one down the middle, keeper Glover out to the edge of his box to desperately block. Before half time Max O'Leary - so far untroubled - parried away Finn Azaz' effort, whilst Bell ran clear on the right but under pressure fired well wide.

At half time Anis Mehmeti replaced Cornick - either injury or giving Boro something else to think about at the restart after their rapid comeback at AG in the reverse fixture. This  looked on the cards almost immediately as the hosts got in down the right channel and squared but O'Leary claimed. City didn't sit back. A slide rule lright touchline pass put Tanner into space to send a wicked cross in which begged for a finish, Bell close before having a second attempt blocked. Next Cam Pring stung Glovers hands from Wells cross.

From then on it was all Boro - yet City dealt with everything thrown at them. O'Leary saved from Sam Greenwood, while Dickie's brilliant clearance under pressure fed Anis Mehmeti down the left who put Wells away to win a throw in. The hosts were trying to pick their way through Manning's side and Greenwood sneaked behind the lines to go clear ten minutes into the second half but O'Leary made himself big and smothered the shot. Manning sent on Conway and Ross McCrorie for Wells and Bell to tighten up.

Approaching the hour mark Middlesbrough did everything but score. A well worked flick on and lay off saw Marcus Forss disguised low shot through defenders legs curl wide of the post. Minutes later they drilled a cross into City's box that was inprobably cleared under incredible pressure. It was one way traffic as Boro won corners and free kicks but City tidied up everything thrown at them. Joe Williams, exhausted man of the match on Wednesday night, replaced James as Manning looked to control the final twenty.

In truth City finished the match dealing with attack after attack - although at times it felt like they might never clear their lines. Ayling again was the outlet with 20 left looking for a crossing lane, the visitors twice clearing before Rav Van Den Berg had a split second to fire home and O'Leary showed incredible reactions to parry at point blank. Our final change saw Hayden Roberts replace Pring as we clung on grimly, Sam Silvera bundling one back in injury time and Knight, machine to the end with a 94th minute goal saving tackle.

O'Leary 8

Tanner 9

Pring 7

Vyner 8

Dickie 8

James 9

Gardner-Hickman 8

Knight 9

Bell 7

Cornick 7

Wells 6

 

Mehmeti 6

Conway 6

McCrorie 6

Williams 6

Roberts 7

[W-S-M Seagull]

Good write up.

Surprised you've gone as high as a 6 for Anis tho. He was so bad I thought we'd take him back off. 

[Garland-sweden]

Think we sat back whole second half and invited Boro to the game. Mehmeti for Cornick ? First half we were very good, nice with the win, it was about time.

[CodeRed]

'Urine on grass tribute kit'- best line ever Olé 

[mozo]

11 hours ago, Olé said:

After less than 65 hours which included over 450 miles of travel since outplaying Premier League Nottingham Forest for over 2 hours, the last thing Bristol City fans expected was to dominate and beat Middlesbrough at the Riverside Stadium. A match setup for Liam Manning's tired side to collapse instead was as convincing as his group have been - both with and without the ball. By far the better side first half as they raced into a quick 2-0 lead and brilliantly organised in defending a one sided second half fightback from Boro.

City's enterprise in passing sharply through the lines was too much for the home side to deal with - in a breathtaking first half where the lead could have been even bigger. Harry Cornick and Sam Bell both brilliantly sprung clear one on one only to be denied by Boro keeper Tom Glover either side of the visitors actual double jab. First Rob Dickie fed Jason Knight who took his time to turn the keeper to put City ahead just past the quarter hour, then Matty James strode upfield a minute later before slamming home a low second.

Manning went into the game with questions about league form and the hangover of late exit from the FA Cup after City's spirited 120 minutes at Forest, a fourth undefeated cup tie in a month against top flight opponents. He made six changes - resting Joe Williams, Tommy Conway and others, but it was those he restored who seized control, James and defender George Tanner dominant in a one sided opening. The game was all in Boro's half when a half cleared corner saw Tanner loop under the bar and into Glovers hands.

The only response from the hosts saw one time City man Luke Ayling - up against his former side in their urine on grass tribute kit - cross into Hayden Hackney who wriggled this way and that to find space only for Zak Vyner to block his shot. It was a rare attack as for the next 15 minutes the well organised visitors took Boro apart. James brilliant ball  put Cornick clear from the left to race in one on one and see his shot pushed away with players queueing up to tap in the rebound, Sam Bell eventually collecting but blocked.

Then the quick fire City assault. Rob Dickie marauded forward and picked out Knight in the box who showed composure to not take the quick shot and instead shield the ball to turn the helpless keeper six yards out and drill home. A minute later it was two, James roared out of midfield and Boro defenders, already mindful of the visitors quick passing combinations, all picked someone to close the passing lanes to, so instead James kept running before lashing a low shot past the keeper to send the away corner into chaos.

There was more to come - Tanner's corner was almost headed home, then Nahki Wells got in behind from an amazing combination and Cornick dummy, desperately cleared for the latter to hurl in a long throw which Dickie hooked just wide. At the midway point of the half Boro finally found room again via Ayling out right but City were flying into every block and an eventual low cross was turned wide by Hackney. Ten minutes later Tanner stole back possession brilliantly and won a quick free kick from which Knight forced a save. 

It could and so nearly should have been 3-0 minutes later. Boro's attack broke down and City cleared the lines up to Cornick, turning brilliantly in midfield before holding the ball up to tease midfielders before picking out Bell's run with a lifted through ball that sent the winger miles clear one on one down the middle, keeper Glover out to the edge of his box to desperately block. Before half time Max O'Leary - so far untroubled - parried away Finn Azaz' effort, whilst Bell ran clear on the right but under pressure fired well wide.

At half time Anis Mehmeti replaced Cornick - either injury or giving Boro something else to think about at the restart after their rapid comeback at AG in the reverse fixture. This  looked on the cards almost immediately as the hosts got in down the right channel and squared but O'Leary claimed. City didn't sit back. A slide rule lright touchline pass put Tanner into space to send a wicked cross in which begged for a finish, Bell close before having a second attempt blocked. Next Cam Pring stung Glovers hands from Wells cross.

From then on it was all Boro - yet City dealt with everything thrown at them. O'Leary saved from Sam Greenwood, while Dickie's brilliant clearance under pressure fed Anis Mehmeti down the left who put Wells away to win a throw in. The hosts were trying to pick their way through Manning's side and Greenwood sneaked behind the lines to go clear ten minutes into the second half but O'Leary made himself big and smothered the shot. Manning sent on Conway and Ross McCrorie for Wells and Bell to tighten up.

Approaching the hour mark Middlesbrough did everything but score. A well worked flick on and lay off saw Marcus Forss disguised low shot through defenders legs curl wide of the post. Minutes later they drilled a cross into City's box that was inprobably cleared under incredible pressure. It was one way traffic as Boro won corners and free kicks but City tidied up everything thrown at them. Joe Williams, exhausted man of the match on Wednesday night, replaced James as Manning looked to control the final twenty.

In truth City finished the match dealing with attack after attack - although at times it felt like they might never clear their lines. Ayling again was the outlet with 20 left looking for a crossing lane, the visitors twice clearing before Rav Van Den Berg had a split second to fire home and O'Leary showed incredible reactions to parry at point blank. Our final change saw Hayden Roberts replace Pring as we clung on grimly, Sam Silvera bundling one back in injury time and Knight, machine to the end with a 94th minute goal saving tackle.

O'Leary 8

Tanner 9

Pring 7

Vyner 8

Dickie 8

James 9

Gardner-Hickman 8

Knight 9

Bell 7

Cornick 7

Wells 6

 

Mehmeti 6

Conway 6

McCrorie 6

Williams 6

Roberts 7

I said on the MDT that I wish I'd been there. You can't beat an away day like that. The nerves at the end almost add to the experience. Travelling fans sounded good on RTV 

[Davefevs]

9 minutes ago, mozo said:

The nerves at the end almost add to the experience

It made me a wreck!

That free-kick at the end…..phew!

[And Its Smith]

Great write up and can’t argue with the marks.  Good to see Max getting some credit as in the match day thread quite a few posters said that everything he did was just standard stuff for a keeper, but 8 is fair. 
 

 

[mozo]

20 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

It made me a wreck!

That free-kick at the end…..phew!

Yeah I was on my feet pacing the living room and could barely watch 

[Severn Beach Pigeon]

Rating for Max is high, 7 about right 

Very nearly 2 howlers from him first half, but other than that did the stuff he should.

[Gimme Shelton]

10 hours ago, CodeRed said:

'Urine on grass tribute kit'- best line ever Olé 

And quite apt when Ayling is playing!

[The Dolman Pragmatist]

15 minutes ago, Gimme Shelton said:

And quite apt when Ayling is playing!

He was great for us.  As a result, won’t hear a word against him.

[The Gasbuster]

Agree with all the marks.

Thought Matty J was brilliant yesterday; even without the goal and celebration ! 

[italian dave]

1 hour ago, transfer reader said:

Rating for Max is high, 7 about right 

Very nearly 2 howlers from him first half, but other than that did the stuff he should.

How can you get “very nearly” a howler? Surely it’s either a howler or it isn’t? 

[Severn Beach Pigeon]

4 minutes ago, italian dave said:

How can you get “very nearly” a howler? Surely it’s either a howler or it isn’t? 

In that circumstances meant he got away with it but had Boro scored, the majority of the fault would have been on him 

 

First instance was at 0-0 where under almost no pressure at all he passed the ball to a Boro player with no City player near him (the Boro player) and only about 25 yards from goal.

 

The other was also the first half where he had a rush of blood to the head and came bolting out of the area, almost causing a mix up, but we managed to retain possession (just about).

I believe that was also at 0-0, a minute or 2 before we scored.

 

However, I also know you're so one eyed with Max that he could have the ball in his hands under no pressure, turn around and drop kick the ball into the goal in the most obvious example of a deliberate own goal you'd ever see and you would be finding a way to suggest he wasn't to blame whatsoever.

Edited February 11, 2024 by transfer reader

[REDOXO]

14 minutes ago, transfer reader said:

In that circumstances meant he got away with it but had Boro scored, the majority of the fault would have been on him 

 

First instance was at 0-0 where under almost no pressure at all he passed the ball to a Boro player with no City player near him (the Boro player) and only about 25 yards from goal.

 

The other was also the first half where he had a rush of blood to the head and came bolting out of the area, almost causing a mix up, but we managed to retain possession (just about).

I believe that was also at 0-0, a minute or 2 before we scored.

 

However, I also know you're so one eyed with Max that he could have the ball in his hands under no pressure, turn around and drop kick the ball into the goal in the most obvious example of a deliberate own goal you'd ever see and you would be finding a way to suggest he wasn't to blame whatsoever.

Max is an extremely competent goalkeeper behind/in one of the tightest defenses in the league. 
 

Just sayin! 

[italian dave]

22 minutes ago, transfer reader said:

In that circumstances meant he got away with it but had Boro scored, the majority of the fault would have been on him 

 

First instance was at 0-0 where under almost no pressure at all he passed the ball to a Boro player with no City player near him (the Boro player) and only about 25 yards from goal.

 

The other was also the first half where he had a rush of blood to the head and came bolting out of the area, almost causing a mix up, but we managed to retain possession (just about).

I believe that was also at 0-0, a minute or 2 before we scored.

 

However, I also know you're so one eyed with Max that he could have the ball in his hands under no pressure, turn around and drop kick the ball into the goal in the most obvious example of a deliberate own goal you'd ever see and you would be finding a way to suggest he wasn't to blame whatsoever.

Why do you say that you know I'm "one eyed" with Max?

My comment above wasn't about Max at all; it was about the English language!

And, aside from the very rare comment about his performance in a particular game, I don't have a very strong view on him either way and I'm not aware that I've said very much about him at all.

[TheReds]

24 minutes ago, transfer reader said:

However, I also know you're so one eyed with Max

Said with no irony whatsoever. 

How many negative posts have you made about Max in the last few match threads?

Any person who has the audacity to say he's a fairly decent Championship keeper gets shot down by you every single time to be part of a mythical "Max O Leary fan club". Yet say nothing about the same group of people constantly having a dig at anything he does get wrong. He's made some mistakes, he's made some great saves, he's probably won us more points than he has cost us imo, but the chance to get a dig in at any slight error is just tiresome.

[TheReds]

5 minutes ago, italian dave said:

Why do you say that you know I'm "one eyed" with Max?

My comment above wasn't about Max at all; it was about the English language!

And, aside from the very rare comment about his performance in a particular game, I don't have a very strong view on him either way and I'm not aware that I've said very much about him at all.

The poster thinks anyone who has one single good thing to say about Max is "one eyed", but cannot see he is exactly what he is describing you as, but just the other way around. 

[broodje]

34 minutes ago, italian dave said:

How can you get “very nearly” a howler? Surely it’s either a howler or it isn’t? 

Schrödinger's howler

[mozo]

I thought Max was generally very good yesterday. His kicking let him down a few times but he made good saves.

[REDOXO]

What amazes me about threads like this is people actually take notice and remember what some other pleb on a footy forum has said. 
 

 

[mozo]

4 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

What amazes me about threads like this is people actually take notice and remember what some other pleb on a footy forum has said. 
 

 

Haha, thanks for reminding me... I want dig someone's post out on the match day thread... 

[Severn Beach Pigeon]

1 hour ago, italian dave said:

Why do you say that you know I'm "one eyed" with Max?

My comment above wasn't about Max at all; it was about the English language!

And, aside from the very rare comment about his performance in a particular game, I don't have a very strong view on him either way and I'm not aware that I've said very much about him at all.

Apologies, I mixed you up with another poster there then.

 

Usually the ones responding to anyone who dares to be anything other than effusive in praise for Max are his lead cheerleaders and heads of the Max O'Leary fan club.

 

Edit- I did indeed have you mixed up with another poster. Apologies 

Edited February 11, 2024 by transfer reader

[Severn Beach Pigeon]

51 minutes ago, TheReds said:

The poster thinks anyone who has one single good thing to say about Max is "one eyed", but cannot see he is exactly what he is describing you as, but just the other way around. 

Not at all 

I generally don't give that much in terms of over the top praise to goalkeepers as saving shots is what they're there for, so unless is something particularly good it is what is expected from them.

I also generally don't go over the top in criticisms. Have a look for yourself and find me being particularly critical. You won't find it.

I don't criticise the balls into touch from goal kicks the way some others do because I recognise it as a risk of the instruction to play the ball to those in the wide areas.

What I have done is pushed back against the bizarre fan club of his who act as though we have Manuel Neuer in goal for us.

[Severn Beach Pigeon]

1 hour ago, TheReds said:

The poster thinks anyone who has one single good thing to say about Max is "one eyed", but cannot see he is exactly what he is describing you as, but just the other way around. 

Back up your bullshit or **** off and stop lying.

[TheReds]

44 minutes ago, transfer reader said:

Back up your bullshit or **** off and stop lying.

Just go and read your own posts on the match day threads, any chance of a dig at Max and you seem to be there.

My initial post basically shows exactly how it is, I've mentioned how you say its a "Max fan club" and your own reply to @italian dave is calling anyone who refuses to give him anything but praise are his "lead cheerleaders". Plenty of your posts are along the same lines. If he makes a save and gets a bit of praise you are on it with "he should save that", "it's straight at him", "awful strike" etc etc, and then start calling people cheerleaders and his fan club. Reality imo, is in general people are saying he has done something decent, as he gets plenty of flak on here (something which you seem to have missed). He's probably a standard Championship keeper, not the best and not the worst.

[Severn Beach Pigeon]

21 hours ago, TheReds said:

Just go and read your own posts on the match day threads, any chance of a dig at Max and you seem to be there.

My initial post basically shows exactly how it is, I've mentioned how you say its a "Max fan club" and your own reply to @italian dave is calling anyone who refuses to give him anything but praise are his "lead cheerleaders". Plenty of your posts are along the same lines. If he makes a save and gets a bit of praise you are on it with "he should save that", "it's straight at him", "awful strike" etc etc, and then start calling people cheerleaders and his fan club. Reality imo, is in general people are saying he has done something decent, as he gets plenty of flak on here (something which you seem to have missed). He's probably a standard Championship keeper, not the best and not the worst.

No, when a shot is straight at him and people are giving ridiculous praise for it, I will state it's straight at him to stop them presenting a false narrative as factual.

In fact your final sentence is precisely what I've been saying about Max, much to the annoyance of his pathetic fan club 

[SecretSam]

From the highlights it looks like Cornick played really well- good to see. 

[Davefevs]

FWIW here’s Max’s saves and aerial takes yesterday.

doesn’t include shots off target, or shots blocked by defenders obviously.

[Robbored]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

FWIW here’s Max’s saves and aerial takes yesterday.doesn’t include shots off target, or shots blocked by defenders obviously.

Not this again Dave……………… Let it go.

City won the game having been 2 up at half time. Second half the change of shape enabled City to defend that lead successfully.

I’d understand the critique City had lost the match having changed shape but the change obviously paid off.

[Davefevs]

6 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Not this again Dave……………… Let it go.

City won the game having been 2 up at half time. Second half the change of shape enabled City to defend that lead successfully.

I’d understand the critique City had lost the match having changed shape but the change obviously paid off.

Theres a good debate going between two or three posters.  I’m merely giving them the reel of what Max did yesterday.  No opinion from me.

So, genuinely, just **** off!

[Robbored]

12 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Theres a good debate going between two or three posters.  I’m merely giving them the reel of what Max did yesterday.  No opinion from me.

So, genuinely, just **** off!

This is a forum Dave - we’re all entitled to comment. You’re quite aware that this is not an exclusive platform for “two or three” posters on any particular thread.

[Severn Beach Pigeon]

45 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

FWIW here’s Max’s saves and aerial takes yesterday.

doesn’t include shots off target, or shots blocked by defenders obviously.

I'd say most of those are 'bread and butter' type saves. A lot of them either close to his body or a comfortable height.

Does well coming out for the 3rd chance and reacts well to the long range one that takes a slight deflection, though maybe should have found a safer area to parry the ball into. However Max's reactions have never been in question. They're probably the strongest element of his game.

 

The first one I think is the chance that came from an awful kick of his, but that may be mixed up with a cross that was cleared away.

 

That and his rush of blood where he came storming 5-10 yards out the area needlessly is why I disagreed with the rating of 8 for him. I think a 7 is about right. He saves the shots he'd be expected to, wasn't overly tested in terms of really difficult to save shots, and was unfortunate with the one he did concede taking an almighty deflection off a forwards back.

 

I remain unconvinced by Max when he's claiming the ball from crosses, but that's likely a me issue because of his very slight frame and isn't a criticism I would use against him for yesterday's game.

35 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Not this again Dave……………… Let it go.

City won the game having been 2 up at half time. Second half the change of shape enabled City to defend that lead successfully.

I’d understand the critique City had lost the match having changed shape but the change obviously paid off.

What are you on about? Max was being discussed and so Dave provided a relevant clip.

Stop trying so hard to troll, especially as Dave is one of the more sensible posters for the most part.

[Davefevs]

20 minutes ago, Robbored said:

This is a forum Dave - we’re all entitled to comment. You’re quite aware that this is not an exclusive platform for “two or three” posters on any particular thread.

So why tell me to “let it go”, especially when I wasn’t even offering an opinion, as I’ve explained.  Nor was I one of the two or three posters I was referring to as having the debate. So that makes your post even more baseless.

FFS!

[W-S-M Seagull]

49 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Not this again Dave……………… Let it go.

City won the game having been 2 up at half time. Second half the change of shape enabled City to defend that lead successfully.

I’d understand the critique City had lost the match having changed shape but the change obviously paid off.

It so nearly didn't. That's why there is debate. Boro came close a few times and they had a goal ruled out which looked to be onside.

So I think it's debatable to say the change obviously paid off. 

[Davefevs]

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

It so nearly didn't. That's why there is debate. Boro came close a few times and they had a goal ruled out which looked to be onside.

So I think it's debatable to say the change obviously paid off. 

Just to clear-up the offside.  It was offside….close, but was offside.

This is the point the cameras decided the ball was passed, Greenwood’s foot on 18 yard line, all our players outside the box.

 

Then after the ball is passed:

and then, just a check Roberts wasn’t loitering inside the box, (now in-frame) he wasn’t:

 

it was tight, but correct decision…and Lino has done very well to pick-up the point if the pass.

[mozo]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Just to clear-up the offside.  It was offside….close, but was offside.

This is the point the cameras decided the ball was passed, Greenwood’s foot on 18 yard line, all our players outside the box.

 

Then after the ball is passed:

and then, just a check Roberts wasn’t loitering inside the box, (now in-frame) he wasn’t:

 

it was tight, but correct decision…and Lino has done very well to pick-up the point if the pass.

Who's the lino? They're good!

[Davefevs]

5 minutes ago, mozo said:

Who's the lino? They're good!

One of Fox or Gill.

[W-S-M Seagull]

6 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Just to clear-up the offside.  It was offside….close, but was offside.

This is the point the cameras decided the ball was passed, Greenwood’s foot on 18 yard line, all our players outside the box.

 

Then after the ball is passed:

and then, just a check Roberts wasn’t loitering inside the box, (now in-frame) he wasn’t:

 

it was tight, but correct decision…and Lino has done very well to pick-up the point if the pass.

Thanks Dave. Certainly seems off. 

Having watched a lot of premier league games with VAR I do wonder if Dickies upper body is over hanging the line? But either way a tight call and I'm just glad that it's gone our way, especially after the dodgy VAR call at Forest. 

[Davefevs]

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

Thanks Dave. Certainly seems off. 

Having watched a lot of premier league games with VAR I do wonder if Dickies upper body is over hanging the line? But either way a tight call and I'm just glad that it's gone our way, especially after the dodgy VAR call at Forest. 

Looking at the position of Dickie’s feet and the metrics of a pitch, the distance from edge of box to edge of “D” is 4 yards / 12 feet.  My guess is that Dickie’s feet are 4-5 feet outside the box.  So I reckon he’d have to be…

…to be ahead of Greenwood.  That would’ve been a criminal (smooth criminal) decision to give it onside!

[sh1t_ref_again]

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

It so nearly didn't. That's why there is debate. Boro came close a few times and they had a goal ruled out which looked to be onside.

So I think it's debatable to say the change obviously paid off. 

It's not debatable the change paid off, fact we won, despite you trying to twist it that an onside goal was not aloud, therfore they drew really.

It is debatable what may have happened to the result had we not changed, we may have continued as we were or the very obvious tiredness of certain players may have become worse and cost us the game.

[Natchfever]

Manning knows his players now.

I have questioned his nous responding to opposition managers changes but maybe he played a blinder v Boro.

Credit where its due.

[W-S-M Seagull]

17 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

It's not debatable the change paid off, fact we won, despite you trying to twist it that an onside goal was not aloud, therfore they drew really.

It is debatable what may have happened to the result had we not changed, we may have continued as we were or the very obvious tiredness of certain players may have become worse and cost us the game.

Fair enough you have that opinion. 

I think the change made it more difficult for us. Let's not pretend it was a tactical masterclass when in the second half we were shite and the changes invited the pressure we were put under. 

As someone else on here mentioned, against Leeds we didn't make any in game changes and ended the game on a whimper. 

Yesterday we made in game changes and just about got across the line. 

If you like it or not there is a over arching concern about in game management. 

 

[sh1t_ref_again]

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

Fair enough you have that opinion. 

I think the change made it more difficult for us. Let's not pretend it was a tactical masterclass when in the second half we were shite and the changes invited the pressure we were put under. 

As someone else on here mentioned, against Leeds we didn't make any in game changes and ended the game on a whimper. 

Yesterday we made in game changes and just about got across the line. 

If you like it or not there is a over arching concern about in game management. 

 

Not sure who is pretending it was some sort of masterclass, but it did result in a win, 

Had we not just played 120 minutes against a prem side with significant travelling, the change would have been more questionable.

Dickie towards the end of the game was like running in treacle and could hardly move.

All decisions are easy with hindsight, but not so easy in game when you are up against what the opposition do and having to manage other factors like injury and tiredness 

[mozo]

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

Fair enough you have that opinion. 

I think the change made it more difficult for us. Let's not pretend it was a tactical masterclass when in the second half we were shite and the changes invited the pressure we were put under. 

As someone else on here mentioned, against Leeds we didn't make any in game changes and ended the game on a whimper. 

Yesterday we made in game changes and just about got across the line. 

If you like it or not there is a over arching concern about in game management. 

 

You could argue that the first half was a tactical masterclass. He probably deserves a thread dedicated to how right he got it in the first 45.

Edited February 11, 2024 by mozo

[Davefevs]

5 minutes ago, mozo said:

You could argue that the first half was a tactical masterclass. He probably deserves a thread dedicated to how right he got it in the first 45.

You could always start one?

[Leabrook]

Under Manning when we win we don’t win well enough it seems.  

[Robbored]

12 minutes ago, mozo said:

You could argue that the first half was a tactical masterclass. He probably deserves a thread dedicated to how right he got it in the first 45.

It could also be argued that the second 45 was also tactical masterclass. Keeping Boro at bay for the vast majority only conceding a fluke goal late on.

Manning post match comments are well worth a listen - I’m definitely warming to him.

[mozo]

11 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

You could always start one?

I'll start one about the first 45 against [ten men] Southampton 

[Cole Not Gas]

3 minutes ago, Leabrook said:

Under Manning when we win we don’t win well enough it seems.  

I think i know what you are saying; one or two very very frequent posters found it very easy to defend the previous manager (even when Pearson was guilty of awful performances and poor results) and as soon as we win away with an ace result, and have the lead 2-0 lead for over 90 mins, the very same poster complains like hell about Manning!; Weirdness makes many forums readable but some posters on here must enjoy their posts a hell of a lot more than those trying to get a fair set of opinions.

[mozo]

Just now, Robbored said:

It could also be argued that the second 45 was also tactical masterclass. Keeping Boro at bay for the vast majority only conceding a fluke goal late on.

Manning post match comments are well worth a listen - I’m definitely warming to him.

I'm warming to him too. I'm moving from 'benefit of the doubt' stage, to the 'I think it's all going to be okay' stage. 

[Leabrook]

27 minutes ago, Cole Not Gas said:

I think i know what you are saying; one or two very very frequent posters found it very easy to defend the previous manager (even when Pearson was guilty of awful performances and poor results) and as soon as we win away with an ace result, and have the lead 2-0 lead for over 90 mins, the very same poster complains like hell about Manning!; Weirdness makes many forums readable but some posters on here must enjoy their posts a hell of a lot more than those trying to get a fair set of opinions.

Spot on. And it’s the time spent on here as well which mystifies me. One poster in particular must post 50+ times every day!  Just relentlessly posting negatively day after day. 

[W-S-M Seagull]

39 minutes ago, Leabrook said:

Under Manning when we win we don’t win well enough it seems.  

Same under Pearson. 

I remember the fall out when we beat Coventry at Ashton Gate. 

Some people have VERY short memories it seems. 

Edited February 11, 2024 by W-S-M Seagull

[italian dave]

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

Same under Pearson. 

I remember the fall out when we beat Coventry at Ashton Gate. 

Some people have VERY short memories it seems. 

And here’s your summary from that particular game. Which, to me, doesn’t seem to include too much by way of fallout, buts or indeed any sign of critique of our poor game management. Just the positives spin on a game we won. And in which, incidentally, we didn’t romp to a two goal lead, and didn’t play well at any stage. 

“Coventry got all the way to the play off final last season whilst putting in many performances which were similar to our performance yesterday. They just had the ability to grind out results whilst not playing particularly well. Something which up until now we've struggled with.

Yes we'd all love to watch free flowing attacking football every week. But sometimes you do just need to grind out results when you're not playing well etc or have a depleted team. 

In the early days of Nige being here, wed have took a hiding yesterday. The fact we won shows the mentality we now have in the squad.”

 

[Phantom]

14 hours ago, Leabrook said:

Under Manning when we win we don’t win well enough it seems.  

Or when we do it was all down to Pearson, yet when we lose it is all down to Manning 

[mozo]

17 minutes ago, phantom said:

Or when we do it was all down to Pearson, yet when we lose it is all down to Manning 

There is a bit of that, but to be fair that's what OTIB has always been like and forever will. Twas always thus when Lee Johnson was in charge, for example.

[Davefevs]

23 minutes ago, phantom said:

Or when we do it was all down to Pearson, yet when we lose it is all down to Manning 

Rarely was that the case.  Because most on here saw Nige as a tactical dinosaur, so he was very unlikely to get credit for tactically outwitting his opponent in the other dugout.  He maybe got credit for getting results out of gutsy team performances, but I’m struggling to recall a “Pearson tactical masterclass” thread.  Far more common to see things like “Nige’s subs almost cost us the game”, when the context is the bench had bugger all on it to do much else! .

And on Saturday, even though I think Manning made an error in the second half set-up, I’ll happily concede that the plan could’ve been right, just poorly executed by the players.  So there’s give and take.

But the Nige / LM point-scoring is tiresome.  I never mentioned Nige in my thread, it was a thread about 45 minutes of Liam Manning.

[Colemanballs]

5 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

But the Nige / LM point-scoring is tiresome.  I never mentioned Nige in my thread, it was a thread about 45 minutes of Liam Manning.

100%. And bizarrely, it's the Manning must never be criticised brigade who keep doing it. Please stop.

For me, it's far too early to make a judgment on Manning. The first half was a big credit in the ledger, the second a small debit. Overall, then, for me, he's in credit from that game.

[Robbored]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

And on Saturday, even though I think Manning made an error in the second half set-up, I’ll happily concede that the plan could’ve been right, just poorly executed by the players.  So there’s give and  take

Nobody here seem to give any credit to Boro for their second half performance despite City changing shape to try and defend the lead - instead we see criticism of Citys second 45 performance. I’d argue that it was down to Boro improving their game which ultimately City dealt with.

A masterclass in how to defend a 2 goal lead?

[Davefevs]

2 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Nobody here seem to give any credit to Boro for their second half performance despite City changing shape to try and defend the lead - instead we see criticism of Citys second 45 performance. I’d argue that it was down to Boro improving their game which ultimately City dealt with.

A masterclass in how to defend a 2 goal lead?

That’s your opinion, you’re entitled to it.

I’m happy with my view too…I’d much rather watch how we defended a 1-0 lead against Sunderland than a 2-0 lead against Boro.

You thought it was a masterclass, I didn’t.

Each to their own.

 

[Phantom]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Rarely was that the case.  Because most on here saw Nige as a tactical dinosaur, so he was very unlikely to get credit for tactically outwitting his opponent in the other dugout.  

But the Nige / LM point-scoring is tiresome.  I never mentioned Nige in my thread, it was a thread about 45 minutes of Liam Manning.

My reply wasn't aimed at you, it was more a general response to the forum

There are still those that see all current success down to Pearson and all errors down to Manning

It it tiresome how many threads are still referencing Pearson, when he has been gone for a long time now - I have said before that I wasn't happy with the way it all played out or who took over, but it's what we have and it is what we chose to support

[Davefevs]

31 minutes ago, phantom said:

My reply wasn't aimed at you, it was more a general response to the forum

There are still those that see all current success down to Pearson and all errors down to Manning

It it tiresome how many threads are still referencing Pearson, when he has been gone for a long time now - I have said before that I wasn't happy with the way it all played out or who took over, but it's what we have and it is what we chose to support

No, I know you weren’t.  I just see that because I was a huge Pearson advocate, some take my critique of Manning as being “cult of Nige”.  If only they took off their blinkers off (and sheepskin nosebands ) and read the positive stuff I wrote too.  But hey-no.

Everyone should go and watch today’s press conference.  It’s his best one imho.

[W-S-M Seagull]

5 hours ago, italian dave said:

And here’s your summary from that particular game. Which, to me, doesn’t seem to include too much by way of fallout, buts or indeed any sign of critique of our poor game management. Just the positives spin on a game we won. And in which, incidentally, we didn’t romp to a two goal lead, and didn’t play well at any stage. 

“Coventry got all the way to the play off final last season whilst putting in many performances which were similar to our performance yesterday. They just had the ability to grind out results whilst not playing particularly well. Something which up until now we've struggled with.

Yes we'd all love to watch free flowing attacking football every week. But sometimes you do just need to grind out results when you're not playing well etc or have a depleted team. 

In the early days of Nige being here, wed have took a hiding yesterday. The fact we won shows the mentality we now have in the squad.”

 

Not sure of the point you're trying to make here? I think you're excluding the context. 

We played King and Pring at centre back. We only had 14 fit players. 

I'm not sure of the relevance of my comment about the Coventry game in a conversation about the Boro game where we played well first half and didn't have a depleted squad. 

There was a massive fallout on here about our performance against Coventry despite the circumstances. So to add balance I pointed out that the criticism isn't unique to Manning as was being framed. 

The Coventry game was more comfortable viewing than Saturdays game. 

If you check back my posts you'll see I was full of praise of our front foot football in the first half at Boro. 

 

Edited February 12, 2024 by W-S-M Seagull

[mozo]

4 hours ago, Davefevs said:

No, I know you weren’t.  I just see that because I was a huge Pearson advocate, some take my critique of Manning as being “cult of Nige”.  If only they took off their blinkers off (and sheepskin nosebands ) and read the positive stuff I wrote too.  But hey-no.

Everyone should go and watch today’s press conference.  It’s his best one imho.

I think you've innocently walked into this one a tad by posting a strongly worded criticism of Manning shortly after one of his best wins. You  praised the result and three of the players, so the optics are that the success was in spite of LM.

It's also off the backdrop of a couple of weeks of OTIB accusations (not you) that Manning can't motivate players, uses the wrong formation, gets his selections wrong, is devaluing Conway (okay, that one was you ) and is rubbish at ingame management etc etc.

There was so much decisive criticism of him that for a couple of days I had some fun with it and debated the various strands.

So, by proxy, I'm the thou shalt not criticise Manning to your cult of Nige  In truth, we both rated Nige, and neither have turned against Manning. 

Even if we beat Southampton tomorrow, it doesn't mean that everyone was wrong and actually Manning is astute in all of those areas, but there will inevitably be some I told you so type posts whatever the result is.

For me, the truth will come in the long run. I'd bloody love those 3 points though!

[W-S-M Seagull]

5 minutes ago, mozo said:

I think you've innocently walked into this one a tad by posting a strongly worded criticism of Manning shortly after one of his best wins. You  praised the result and three of the players, so the optics are that the success was in spite of LM.

It's also off the backdrop of a couple of weeks of OTIB accusations (not you) that Manning can't motivate players, uses the wrong formation, gets his selections wrong, is devaluing Conway (okay, that one was you ) and is rubbish at ingame management etc etc.

There was so much decisive criticism of him that for a couple of days I had some fun with it and debated the various strands.

So, by proxy, I'm the thou shalt not criticise Manning to your cult of Nige  In truth, we both rated Nige, and neither have turned against Manning. 

Even if we beat Southampton tomorrow, it doesn't mean that everyone was wrong and actually Manning is astute in all of those areas, but there will inevitably be some I told you so type posts whatever the result is.

For me, the truth will come in the long run. I'd bloody love those 3 points though!

Ultimately any manager is going to recieve criticism when their team goes 6 games without a win. Him being in a honeymoon period (according to some) and our Fa Cup results probably saw him recieve far less criticism than would be considered normal. 

It's also worth remembering that it was said that Manning was brought in here to get us challenging this season. 

So a lot of the criticisms isn't really a criticism of Manning, it's a criticism of a the board. People are still very angry at the board. Not for getting rid of NP, but the lies and the self sabotage by not signing players in the summer. 

Yes Manning takes the heat but he signed up to this knowing the situation. 

[mozo]

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

Ultimately any manager is going to recieve criticism when their team goes 6 games without a win. Him being in a honeymoon period (according to some) and our Fa Cup results probably saw him recieve far less criticism than would be considered normal. 

It's also worth remembering that it was said that Manning was brought in here to get us challenging this season. 

So a lot of the criticisms isn't really a criticism of Manning, it's a criticism of a the board. People are still very angry at the board. Not for getting rid of NP, but the lies and the self sabotage by not signing players in the summer. 

Yes Manning takes the heat but he signed up to this knowing the situation. 

Yep, I've got no issue with criticism of the board or of the sacking of Nige and BS that came with it.

But for me some criticism of Manning either didn't make sense or was premature.

Doesn't mean I'm right, but I felt like I made some good points. I didn't dig the posts put and do an I told you so after Saturday though because that would have been childish! 

[Davefevs]

9 minutes ago, mozo said:

I think you've innocently walked into this one a tad by posting a strongly worded criticism of Manning shortly after one of his best wins. You  praised the result and three of the players, so the optics are that the success was in spite of LM

The thing was, it wasn’t anything of the sort.

It was a question, first and foremost.

Followed by a summary of what I saw happening.

Followed by a recognition (by myself) that there was a bigger picture, the win.

Ended with relax, and to go and start some threads reflecting the positive things.

+++++

I tried to point a number of posters back to what I’d actually posted, to no avail.

If that’s a strongly worded criticism of Manning, I’m stunned!

[mozo]

15 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

The thing was, it wasn’t anything of the sort.

It was a question, first and foremost.

Followed by a summary of what I saw happening.

Followed by a recognition (by myself) that there was a bigger picture, the win.

Ended with relax, and to go and start some threads reflecting the positive things.

+++++

I tried to point a number of posters back to what I’d actually posted, to no avail.

If that’s a strongly worded criticism of Manning, I’m stunned!

No, that's what it was interpreted as I think

[italian dave]

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

Not sure of the point you're trying to make here? I think you're excluding the context. 

We played King and Pring at centre back. We only had 14 fit players. 

I'm not sure of the relevance of my comment about the Coventry game in a conversation about the Boro game where we played well first half and didn't have a depleted squad. 

There was a massive fallout on here about our performance against Coventry despite the circumstances. So to add balance I pointed out that the criticism isn't unique to Manning as was being framed. 

The Coventry game was more comfortable viewing than Saturdays game. 

If you check back my posts you'll see I was full of praise of our front foot football in the first half at Boro. 

 

OK: the context

- we hardly have a full or large squad at the moment either - and add to that the gruelling schedule we are facing which is placing us at a disadvantage against every team we face.

- the relevance of the Coventry game is that it's the one you mentioned as evidence your proposition that posters were equally critical after that game. I was simply responding to your having talked about that game.

- Subjective I know, but my view is that the game on Saturday was far more comfortable viewing than the Coventry one. I don't think we were unlucky Saturday: I think we played well going forward first half and defended resolutely second half. As I've said elsewhere, it never felt to me - until the very end - that it was just a matter of time til Boro scored. Coventry we were dead lucky: they did everything but score, hit the woodwork, more than once as I recall. Also, we actually played well for long spells on Saturday - we didn't v Coventry. But as I say, I accept that's just my view and yours is different, that's fair enough.

I didn't read all your posts in the first half, no. I never read the forum when I'm at a match and watching the game. So I tend to go by the - in theory more considered - comments people make afterwards.

And I have to say that yours weren't terribly positive! Mostly critical in fact.

The contrast I was making wasn't between a generic summary of 'the feeling' after both games. There were, and are, lots of different views. It was more between your own reaction to the Coventry game, which was to focus on the positives, the need to grind out results, the mentality of the squad, the quality of the opposition. And yet on Saturday your over-riding post match repose was one that was critical of Manning, of the changes to personnel and formation.

Edited February 12, 2024 by italian dave

[italian dave]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

The thing was, it wasn’t anything of the sort.

It was a question, first and foremost.

Followed by a summary of what I saw happening.

Followed by a recognition (by myself) that there was a bigger picture, the win.

Ended with relax, and to go and start some threads reflecting the positive things.

+++++

I tried to point a number of posters back to what I’d actually posted, to no avail.

If that’s a strongly worded criticism of Manning, I’m stunned!

You’ll know that I was critical of the post on Saturday, Dave.

I’ve not joined in much since: I’ve said my piece, I take the points you’ve made since, and I’m not going to get into a debate with you on tactics and data!

But I do think @mozo has a point.

Whether you’re writing a novel, a political manifesto or a corporate press release, the one thing you’ll get told is to never underestimate the importance of the headline/title and of the opening lines.

When we’d just come away from Middlesbrough with a win, your headline had a very big “but” (and no question mark), and your opening line talked about disappointment, frustration and anger.

And, quite honestly, if you’d asked me to come up with three words after the game on Saturday then disappointment, frustration and anger would have been pretty much the last ones I’d have thought of!

So, whatever else you went on to say, you’d lost me by then!