FBC Podcast: SHEFF WED. [A] the verdict ...... patterns & behaviours not up to scratch?

[Chrizzler]

2 hours ago, Beni71 said:

This is the point though isn’t it and I hate to go back to NP reign but…

Under NP we knew what we would get and the average City performance would range from a 6 to a 7.5 out of 10 across 2023. Every player knew their role and there were always very honest performances who bought into the NP philosophy.

Under LM the consistency of performance is much broader. Southampton and West Ham 8 out of 10. QPR & Wednesday 4 out of 10. And more worrying is the cracks in terms of team togetherness, Conways reaction on the pitch suggests there is frustration creeping in.

its going to be a bumpy ride till the end of the season.

This is what concerns me, there are certainly signs that the team spirit that was so evident earlier in the season is starting to crack. 

[frenchred]

I listened to 3 peaps podcast today for the first time in a long time, in all honesty I got bored with their club "love in"! After listening today it is now more apt, punchier and relevant then the FBC one, I'm afraid Mr Gay is dragging the whole pod down, and I was very tolerant of him previously.

I just cannot accept him snake charming!

[luke_bristol]

3 minutes ago, frenchred said:

I listened to 3 peaps podcast today for the first time in a long time, in all honesty I got bored with their club "love in"! After listening today it is now more apt, punchier and relevant then the FBC one, I'm afraid Mr Gay is dragging the whole pod down, and I was very tolerant of him previously.

I just cannot accept him snake charming!

What does Matt Withers think of LM now?

[exAtyeoMax]

I just listened to the pod on the train back from Wales. Not as explosive as I expected, but a good discussion none the less. 
I suppose IG is a walking contradiction, I don’t buy his reasoning on lots of his opinions. I think possibly only Tom could challenge him directly (if he so wished of course because he also disagreed) as others just get shot down

[Alessandro]

3 hours ago, headhunter said:

I picked this from James Piercy's excellent piece on the game in Bristol Live and highlighted the part that sums up so many things in our normal day to day lives:

The narrative is being allowed to grow that this City team is defined by QPR, Sheffield Wednesday, Preston, Leeds and Millwall rather than Southampton, Middlesbrough, Watford, West Ham, Nottingham Forest and Hull City. In this binary world we live in, where you have to pick a side, and a point of conflict, it’s one or the other, not where it really sits, somewhere in the middle. That’s just boring.

Ian Gay's narrative is what it is and I invite anyone to come on the pod and challenge him and no doubt create a point of conflict. I will call him out whilst recognising that I myself flip flop with my views and in so doing rightly labelled for being a knee jerker! 

He may be right about this binary world - however it has ALWAYS been this way in football - long before the right wing started their culture war.

Football is and always has been tribal - fans generally either like or dislike a manager, or should I say rate or not rate - often for some intangible emotional reason and will focus on the negatives (defeats and sometimes even wins!) rather than the positives (wins and good performances) or excuse the negatives and focus on the positives.

Has been that way with teams and managers for as long as I can remember. Nothing new. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

3 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

He may be right about this binary world - however it has ALWAYS been this way in football - long before the right wing started their culture war.

Football is and always has been tribal - fans generally either like or dislike a manager, or should I say rate or not rate - often for some intangible emotional reason and will focus on the negatives (defeats and sometimes even wins!) rather than the positives (wins and good performances) or excuse the negatives and focus on the positives.

Has been that way with teams and managers for as long as I can remember. Nothing new. 

This is it.

Tribal, partisan...passionate. That is football, there are teams and within that there are sides of debates- pick one, defend, analyse. Doesn't even have to be that rational too.

Edited February 25 by Mr Popodopolous

[Alessandro]

4 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

This is it.

Tribal, partisan...passionate. That is football, there are teams and within that there are sides of debates- pick one, defend, analyse. Doesn't even have to be that rational too.

 Out of reactions

[luke_bristol]

40 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

He may be right about this binary world - however it has ALWAYS been this way in football - long before the right wing started their culture war.

Football is and always has been tribal - fans generally either like or dislike a manager, or should I say rate or not rate - often for some intangible emotional reason and will focus on the negatives (defeats and sometimes even wins!) rather than the positives (wins and good performances) or excuse the negatives and focus on the positives.

Has been that way with teams and managers for as long as I can remember. Nothing new. 

The right wing didn’t start the culture war, but absolutely agree. This is a global issue that goes well beyond football.

[Silvio Dante]

2 minutes ago, luke_bristol said:

The right wing didn’t start the culture war, but absolutely agree. This is a global issue that goes well beyond football.

To be fair, if it’s our right wing and Mehmeti’s playing there I don’t expect them to start anything.

[W-S-M Seagull]

4 hours ago, headhunter said:

I picked this from James Piercy's excellent piece on the game in Bristol Live and highlighted the part that sums up so many things in our normal day to day lives:

The narrative is being allowed to grow that this City team is defined by QPR, Sheffield Wednesday, Preston, Leeds and Millwall rather than Southampton, Middlesbrough, Watford, West Ham, Nottingham Forest and Hull City. In this binary world we live in, where you have to pick a side, and a point of conflict, it’s one or the other, not where it really sits, somewhere in the middle. That’s just boring.

Ian Gay's narrative is what it is and I invite anyone to come on the pod and challenge him and no doubt create a point of conflict. I will call him out whilst recognising that I myself flip flop with my views and in so doing rightly labelled for being a knee jerker! 

I like Piercy but to include the cup games shows he's not being impartial. 

He's clearly trying to spin a narrative of 'it's not as bad as people are making out' and trying to frame it as some sort of battle is just bizarre. I guess the intention is an attempt to take the heat off. 

Edited February 25 by W-S-M Seagull

[TDarwall]

Just now, W-S-M Seagull said:

I like Piercy but to include the cup games shows he's not being impartial. 

No it doesn't, it just shows he doesn't agree with your view. Some allow the cup games, some don't, there is no right / wrong answer. 

No reason at all for Piercey to be impartial, he's a good journo, not afraid to ask tough questions.

[W-S-M Seagull]

Just now, TDarwall said:

No it doesn't, it just shows he doesn't agree with your view. Some allow the cup games, some don't, there is no right / wrong answer. 

No reason at all for Piercey to be impartial, he's a good journo, not afraid to ask tough questions.

Cup games are one off games. They have no relevance to the bread and butter of the league. 

Maidstone are not Championship promotion contenders because they've beaten Ipswich. 

If you take out the cup games then his arguement looks like this - The narrative is being allowed to grow that this City team is defined by QPR, Sheffield Wednesday, Preston, Leeds and Millwall rather than Southampton, Middlesbrough, Watford and Hull City.

 

[TDarwall]

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

Cup games are one off games. They have no relevance to the bread and butter of the league. 

Maidstone are not Championship promotion contenders because they've beaten Ipswich. 

 

 

No one is suggesting Maidstone are better than Ipswich. You said Piercey wasn't being impartial- there is zero evidence of that. He is just saying something you don't agree with, however it's a perfectly valid view that people are entitled to agree or disagree with. 

 

[Sir Geoff]

4 hours ago, headhunter said:

I picked this from James Piercy's excellent piece on the game in Bristol Live and highlighted the part that sums up so many things in our normal day to day lives:

The narrative is being allowed to grow that this City team is defined by QPR, Sheffield Wednesday, Preston, Leeds and Millwall rather than Southampton, Middlesbrough, Watford, West Ham, Nottingham Forest and Hull City. In this binary world we live in, where you have to pick a side, and a point of conflict, it’s one or the other, not where it really sits, somewhere in the middle. That’s just boring.

Ian Gay's narrative is what it is and I invite anyone to come on the pod and challenge him and no doubt create a point of conflict. I will call him out whilst recognising that I myself flip flop with my views and in so doing rightly labelled for being a knee jerker! 

JP conveniently forgets, QPR, Blackburn, Huddersfield away.

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

JP conveniently forgets, QPR, Blackburn, Huddersfield away.

Blackburn away was egregiously bad. The other two were not great but not just based on results we looked a rabble for much if it, taking Sykes and Knight off when chasing the game was also ridiculous. 

[W-S-M Seagull]

Just now, TDarwall said:

No one is suggesting Maidstone are better than Ipswich. You said Piercey wasn't being impartial- there is zero evidence of that. He is just saying something you don't agree with, however it's a perfectly valid view that people are entitled to agree or disagree with. 

 

I've pointed out that he's included the cup games to progress his argument of "it sits somewhere in the middle" take the cup games out and that is then not a compelling argument. 

He's also picked a random set of games where the reality is we were also crap in games such as -

Norwich 

Huddersfield 

Blackburn

Birmingham. 

It seems he has ommited these because hes trying to make it look balanced when the reality is that it is not balanced, its not somewhere in the middle, we've underperformed. 

 

 

 

[W-S-M Seagull]

7 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

JP conveniently forgets, QPR, Blackburn, Huddersfield away.

Yep. Includes the cup games but then omits some terrible games from it. 

That's not being balanced. That's trying to spin a false narrative. 

[Silvio Dante]

I think what you have to remember is that on the side of any bias (and hes a damn good journo), Piercy will naturally show a touch of bias towards the club.
 

He has working relationships with these people, he wants to see them succeed - but more importantly they’re how he makes his living. Earlier this season the Rovers Bristol Live correspondent was banned by Barton.

With how tender the club seem to be to any criticism I can’t blame him for walking the tightrope and although he errs a touch too much towards the glass half full side overall I think he does it pretty well.

[blockbrowt1]

"Can't fart his way out of a paper bag" This comment alone makes OTIB worth every penny

[Davefevs]

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

I like Piercy but to include the cup games shows he's not being impartial. 

He's clearly trying to spin a narrative of 'it's not as bad as people are making out' and trying to frame it as some sort of battle is just bizarre. I guess the intention is an attempt to take the heat off. 

I think it’s worth reading the whole article.

of course there’s a balanced view to it, that’s kinda what he’s trying to get across.

I don’t think he lets me write last week’s article prefaced by himself if he’s “in bed with the club”.

[REDOXO]

5 hours ago, headhunter said:

I picked this from James Piercy's excellent piece on the game in Bristol Live and highlighted the part that sums up so many things in our normal day to day lives:

The narrative is being allowed to grow that this City team is defined by QPR, Sheffield Wednesday, Preston, Leeds and Millwall rather than Southampton, Middlesbrough, Watford, West Ham, Nottingham Forest and Hull City. In this binary world we live in, where you have to pick a side, and a point of conflict, it’s one or the other, not where it really sits, somewhere in the middle. That’s just boring.

Ian Gay's narrative is what it is and I invite anyone to come on the pod and challenge him and no doubt create a point of conflict. I will call him out whilst recognising that I myself flip flop with my views and in so doing rightly labelled for being a knee jerker! 

This team is defined by performances that lurch to extremes! The performances against the first five were not just poor, they were awful. The players appeared clueless and the manager was clueless as what to do.
 

Southampton we got a good result but could have been two down comfortably before we scored. Watford we did well playing on the break, both games against Boro we got results despite ourselves. Against WHU away we found a through ball to Conway that we can’t find now. We were unlucky to go out to Forest having missed some sitters that is true. I don’t agree with Mr Piercy this is not about supporters being binary it’s about a manager who is binary and intent on installing a one way to play ethic that the players are not doing.
 

Thus we know Mr Manning will be bringing in players spending the money we have in implementing his binary style and blocking player path ways that got us out of the LJ/Holden era mess. The cycle continues in the same way since Tinnions utter failure as a manager and that cycle is overseen by exactly the same people now that’s binary!
 

As far as Ian goes the change is breathtaking and everyone has noticed. 

Edited February 25 by REDOXO

[Alessandro]

1 hour ago, luke_bristol said:

The right wing didn’t start the culture war, but absolutely agree. This is a global issue that goes well beyond football.

I’m no scholar on the history of the culture wars so bow to your better judgement - but I’d certainly argue it’s the right’s favourite political tool…

[JP Hampton]

3 minutes ago, Alessandro said:

I’m no scholar on the history of the culture wars so bow to your better judgement - but I’d certainly argue it’s the right’s favourite political tool…

Now that’s a completely different statement. 

[Wivs7]

2 hours ago, luke_bristol said:

What does Matt Withers think of LM now?

Hi Luke, I still back him but think he has got things wrong in the last two games in the way he got things right against Southampton. What do you think? 

[Davefevs]

31 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

This team is defined by performances that lurch to extremes! The performances against the first five were not just poor, they were awful. The players appeared clueless and the manager was clueless as what to do.
 

Southampton we got a good result but could have been two down comfortably before we scored. Watford we did well playing on the break, both games against Boro we got results despite ourselves. Against WHU away we found a through ball to Conway that we can’t find now. We were unlucky to go out to Forest having missed some sitters that is true. I don’t agree with Mr Piercy this is not about supporters being binary it’s about a manager who is binary and intent on installing a one way to play ethic that the players are not doing.
 

Thus we know Mr Manning will be bringing in players spending the money we have in implementing his binary style and blocking player path ways that got us out of the LJ/Holden era mess. The cycle continues in the same way since Tinnions utter failure as a manager and that cycle is overseen by exactly the same people now that’s binary!
 

As far as Ian goes the change is breathtaking and everyone has noticed. 

FWIW I see a manager installing a binary but different binary way to play each week at the mo’.

Yesterday, to admit to planning to hit channels, is a complete deviation from his principles…right? 

[REDOXO]

30 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

FWIW I see a manager installing a binary but different binary way to play each week at the mo’.

Yesterday, to admit to planning to hit channels, is a complete deviation from his principles…right? 

Yes I noticed a few long “out” balls for Tom to chase vainly. 

[W-S-M Seagull]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

FWIW I see a manager installing a binary but different binary way to play each week at the mo’.

Yesterday, to admit to planning to hit channels, is a complete deviation from his principles…right? 

This approach is very LJ. 

If you keep throwing darts at a dart board then eventually you'll hit a bull and thats what this whole approach seems like.

[Mr Popodopolous]

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

This approach is very LJ. 

If you keep throwing darts at a dart board then eventually you'll hit a bull and thats what this whole approach seems like.

I thought so last week, well not just last week but after the substitutions we had on the pitch...

Sykes, Cornick Dire, Conway, Wells.

Throw a lot of mud and some might stick...being wide open on the break in the last half-hour a better indicator however.

Edited February 25 by Mr Popodopolous

[W-S-M Seagull]

Surprisingly the 3 peaps podcast was far more critical of Manning. 

Although the general theme of blaming the players continued. 

[Engvall’s Splinter]

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

Surprisingly the 3 peaps podcast was far more critical of Manning. 

Although the general theme of blaming the players continued. 

That will tell you how bad we have been in the last two fixtures as a minimum.