Liam Manning league stats

[Ziderarmy]

Hi

Am I correct in my sums ? League only 

Played = 19

Won = 6

Drew = 5

Lost = 8

Points per game = 1.21

Over a 46 game seasons that’s 55 points 

Win percentage = 31.58% 

Doesn’t make particularly good reading as he’s now played most clubs at least once so it’s a good sample size.

[ExiledAjax]

1 hour ago, Ziderarmy said:

Hi

Am I correct in my sums ? League only 

Played = 19

Won = 6

Drew = 5

Lost = 8

Points per game = 1.21

Over a 46 game seasons that’s 55 points 

Win percentage = 31.58% 

Doesn’t make particularly good reading as he’s now played most clubs at least once so it’s a good sample size.

Correct other than I would round 1.21 * 46 up to 56 rather than down to 55, but it wouldn't be the difference between 14th and 15th really.

It's a pretty mid-table performance. Hence we're 12th.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Had a quick look at the last 4 full seasons.

55 points is about 15th or 16th, perhaps 17th if unlucky..some of that is a bit below midtable IMO.

Edited February 25 by Mr Popodopolous

[ExiledAjax]

5 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Had a quick look at the last 4 full seasons.

55 points is about 15th or 16th, perhaps 17th if unlucky..some of that is a bit below midtable IMO.

I've always taken "mid" to imply that one is speaking about the top, middle, and bottom of the division. Assuming you want an equal split then in a 24 team division this means the "middle" is positions 9-16.

So taking your figures 55/56 is typically the lower end of mid table. 17th would be dipping into the bottom of the table.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Just now, ExiledAjax said:

I've always taken "mid" to imply that one is speaking about the top, middle, and bottom of the division. Assuming you want an equal split then in a 24 team division this means the "middle" is positions 9-16.

So taking your figures 55/56 is typically the lower end of mid table. 17th would be dipping into the bottom of the table.

Lower midtable then, that seems fair. Yes I suppose top end comments could stretch to as low as 8th.

Still it would constitute regression.

Edited February 25 by Mr Popodopolous

[Harry]

3 hours ago, Ziderarmy said:

Hi

Am I correct in my sums ? League only 

Played = 19

Won = 6

Drew = 5

Lost = 8

Points per game = 1.21

Over a 46 game seasons that’s 55 points 

Win percentage = 31.58% 

Doesn’t make particularly good reading as he’s now played most clubs at least once so it’s a good sample size.

Interesting. 
I would caveat this with the fact that LM has not yet faced all of the teams. 
There are 7 teams he’s yet to face as he’s had 2 games against 4 opponents (Southampton, Watford, Middlesbrough & QPR). 
 

it’s quite interesting to split these games up against Top 7, Bottom 7 and Middle 9.
 

Against the bottom 7 he’s
Played 6, Won 0, Drawn 3, Lost 3. Points 3  PPG 0.5

Against the top 7 he’s
Played 5, Won 2, Lost 3. Points 6. PPG 1.2
 

Against the middle 9 he’s
Played 8, Won 4, Drawn 2, Lost 2. Points 14.  PPG 1.75

 

Its very clear where our problems lie. 
Against the top 7 and middle 9 we’d be on course for approx 71 points a season (a playoff contender perhaps). 
Against the bottom 7 we’d be on course for 23 points in a season = relegation before Christmas!! 
 

Our remains fixtures are 4 vs the top 7, 3 vs the bottom 7 and 5 vs the middle 9. 
 

If we keep up the same PPG (I know, unscientific but hey ho), we’d finish on around 59 points. 
Funnily enough, when Nige left, we had 18 points from 14 games which would end us up on 59 points. 
 

So basically, at the moment there is no difference in the extrapolated final position/points. 
 

But as I say, it’s very clear where our problems lie. 

Edited February 25 by Harry

[W-S-M Seagull]

6 minutes ago, Harry said:

But as I say, it’s very clear where our problems lie. 

Yes its very clear that our problem is that we are not very well coached. 

[Harry]

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

Yes it’s very clear that our problem is that we are not very well coached. 

Why are you replying to me? 
You told me I wasn’t allowed to reply to you. 
Does this only work one way? 
 

[Davefevs]

34 minutes ago, Harry said:

Interesting. 
I would caveat this with the fact that LM has not yet faced all of the teams. 
There are 7 teams he’s yet to face as he’s had 2 games against 4 opponents (Southampton, Watford, Middlesbrough & QPR). 
 

it’s quite interesting to split these games up against Top 7, Bottom 7 and Middle 9.
 

Against the bottom 7 he’s
Played 6, Won 0, Drawn 3, Lost 3. Points 3  PPG 0.5

Against the top 7 he’s
Played 5, Won 2, Lost 3. Points 6. PPG 1.2
 

Against the middle 9 he’s
Played 8, Won 4, Drawn 2, Lost 2. Points 14.  PPG 1.75

 

Its very clear where our problems lie. 
Against the top 7 and middle 9 we’d be on course for approx 71 points a season (a playoff contender perhaps). 
Against the bottom 7 we’d be on course for 23 points in a season = relegation before Christmas!! 
 

Our remains fixtures are 4 vs the top 7, 3 vs the bottom 7 and 5 vs the middle 9. 
 

If we keep up the same PPG (I know, unscientific but hey ho), we’d finish on around 59 points. 
Funnily enough, when Nige left, we had 18 points from 14 games which would end us up on 59 points. 
 

So basically, at the moment there is no difference in the extrapolated final position/points. 
 

But as I say, it’s very clear where our problems lie. 

A couple of points:

1. LM has had better squad availability (but he’s also trying to embed a different style - I’m not gonna go into that)

2. 59 points wasn’t the aim for Nige or LM

[BasSavage88]

3 hours ago, Ziderarmy said:

Hi

Am I correct in my sums ? League only 

Played = 19

Won = 6

Drew = 5

Lost = 8

Points per game = 1.21

Over a 46 game seasons that’s 55 points 

Win percentage = 31.58% 

Doesn’t make particularly good reading as he’s now played most clubs at least once so it’s a good sample size.

That's pretty much the same as Pearson without it being his team or a full season isn't it? 

Edited February 25 by BasSavage88

[Loosey Boy]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

A couple of points:

1. LM has had better squad availability (but he’s also trying to embed a different style - I’m not gonna go into that)

2. 59 points wasn’t the aim for Nige or LM

I’m not convinced we even gonna get to 59 points as things stand. Expecting/hoping to get to 54-56 points.

What will JL and BT think of that, bearing in mind what they were “expecting” from this squad when LM was appointed?

[Davefevs]

7 minutes ago, Loosey Boy said:

I’m not convinced we even gonna get to 59 points as things stand. Expecting/hoping to get to 54-56 points.

What will JL and BT think of that, bearing in mind what they were “expecting” from this squad when LM was appointed?

I’ll just keep taking it one game at a time.  It’s boring, but I see no point in doing x points from y games predictions anyway, let alone currently when I’ve no idea what performance I’m gonna get!

[Harry]

41 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

A couple of points:

1. LM has had better squad availability (but he’s also trying to embed a different style - I’m not gonna go into that)

2. 59 points wasn’t the aim for Nige or LM

Re Point 2. I agree. We should be aiming higher this season. We finished on 59 last year and so we’d want improvement. So neither is good enough. 
 

Re point 1, I’m not having that. 
Nige was without Conway for 7 games. A period in which he got 11 points. 
Nige was without Wells for 3 games whilst Liam was without him for 7 games. 
Liam has had Pring missing at times.  Hasn’t had a single minute out of Naismith. Has had Twine out. Has had Sykes out. 
The only major change really is that Nige had Vyner out for 6 or 7 games I think. 
 

Ultimately though, none of that matters. End of the day, current trend would suggest 59 points. The same as it was trending for Nige. 
As I mentioned the other day, we are basically getting the same results overall but just in a slightly different way. 

Does that mean Liam should be under scrutiny. Yes. To an extent. But it certainly doesn’t mean “get rid” like many on here are ridiculously shouting for. 
It basically means we are where we are and neither manager was able to get any more out of it. We’re a 59 point team, whether Nige or Liam is in charge. 
 

And that is purely down to the players we have. 2 managers playing different ways are getting roughly the same results in different ways. We have a 12th place squad of players. That’s where we are. 

Edited February 25 by Harry

[Silvio Dante]

22 minutes ago, Harry said:

Re point 1, I’m not having that. 
Nige was without Conway for 7 games. A period in which he got 11 points. 
Nige was without Wells for 3 games whilst Liam was without him for 7 games. 
Liam has had Pring missing at times.  Hasn’t had a single minute out of Naismith. Has had Twine out. Has had Sykes out. 
The only major change really is that Nige had Vyner out for 6 or 7 games I think. 
 

 

Bit selective there mate.

You haven’t mentioned McCrorie who Pearson was without the whole tenure. He was also without Weimann (so Twine equivalent) for a sustained period. Liams been without Pring for three games (arguably should have been four) - one suspension, one injury. If you’re counting that you also have to count Dickie as a miss for Pearson as he was banned for a game! And if we’re on sole games, then you can even add in Scott…

Nige was also without Tanner for a period. And that’s just off the top of my head.

Edit: I’m also sure Joe Williams was missing from Cov onwards under Nige and Naismith was also out for a period so it’s even more pronounced!

it’s madness to suggest that he hasn’t had better squad availability. He has. And leaving out players as you have from one list and adding 1-2 game misses to another is a bit disingenuous- intentionally or otherwise 

 

Edited February 25 by Silvio Dante
Think Pring was three games - put two to start with

[wendyredredrobin]

This squad needs motivating and I don't get the impression that Manning is the motivational type TBH.  This squad needs someone like Colin to give it a kick up the backside ,but he is well past it now and not the type of yes man the current board would be remotely interested in.

The players seem to lack any conviction or belief at the moment

Tactically, he looks like a mid to lower end of the table type of manager, but probably needs to be judged after his proverbial first 3 transfer windows.

I think that despite the lack of any backing from the board and having his best players sold, without adequate replacements most of us believe that Nige still had us heading in the right direction but I'm not sure quite what direction we are going in at the moment and SL and JL will never admit that they were wrong even if things get a lot worse despite the majority of City fans saying "we told you so".

[1960maaan]

1 minute ago, Silvio Dante said:

Bit selective there mate.

You haven’t mentioned McCrorie who Pearson was without the whole tenure. He was also without Weimann (so Twine equivalent) for a sustained period. Liams been without Pring for two games (arguably should have been three) - one suspension, one injury. If you’re counting that you also have to count Dickie as a miss for Pearson as he was banned for a game! And if we’re on sole games, then you can even add in Scott…

Nige was also without Tanner for a period. And that’s just off the top of my head.

it’s madness to suggest that he hasn’t had better squad availability. He has. And leaving out players as you have from one list and adding one game misses to another is a bit disingenuous- intentionally or otherwise 

 

It would be interesting to see how many first team players were out for each game. The only one I remember the numbers was the Cardiff game as it's been mentioned so much . 12 first team squad members out . 

That back 4 of 

a RW at LB , a LWB at CB , one genuine CB , Academy CB at RB was a real hotchpotch 
 

 

19 minutes ago, Harry said:

Has had Twine out.

That's a bit of a stretch , seeing it was an additional player anyway 

[Silvio Dante]

1 minute ago, 1960maaan said:

It would be interesting to see how many first team players were out for each game. The only one I remember the numbers was the Cardiff game as it's been mentioned so much . 12 first team squad members out . 

That back 4 of 

a RW at LB , a LWB at CB , one genuine CB , Academy CB at RB was a real hotchpotch 
 

 

That's a bit of a stretch , seeing it was an additional player anyway 

To be fair if you view Twine as Weimanns replacement it’s not - but leaving Weimann out is a stretch!

Ive added Williams and Naismith to my initial post. I remember turning up to Cov and hearing JW had been injured in training.

Its way off and the list is just a bit nonsense.

[Davefevs]

31 minutes ago, Harry said:

Re Point 2. I agree. We should be aiming higher this season. We finished on 59 last year and so we’d want improvement. So neither is good enough. 
 

Re point 1, I’m not having that. 
Nige was without Conway for 7 games. A period in which he got 11 points. 
Nige was without Wells for 3 games whilst Liam was without him for 7 games. 
Liam has had Pring missing at times.  Hasn’t had a single minute out of Naismith. Has had Twine out. Has had Sykes out. 
The only major change really is that Nige had Vyner out for 6 or 7 games I think. 
 

Ultimately though, none of that matters. End of the day, current trend would suggest 59 points. The same as it was trending for Nige. 
As I mentioned the other day, we are basically getting the same results overall but just in a slightly different way. 

Does that mean Liam should be under scrutiny. Yes. To an extent. But it certainly doesn’t mean “get rid” like many on here are ridiculously shouting for. 
It basically means we are where we are and neither manager was able to get any more out of it. We’re a 59 point team, whether Nige or Liam is in charge. 
 

And that is purely down to the players we have. 2 managers playing different ways are getting roughly the same results in different ways. We have a 12th place squad of players. That’s where we are. 

The point is that with better availability Nige had us top half.

That period where he dropped from 8th (after Cov) to 12th then 15th then sacked was without Naismith, Tanner, Vyner…then Roberts, from our defence.  Let alone Williams.  Wells wasn’t an issue because we had other options.

But we’d pretty much established ourselves in the top-half through that opening dozen games.

Of course Manning has had to deal with injuries, but not as impactful as the ones Nige did that took him to a convenient sacking point.

[1960maaan]

3 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

To be fair if you view Twine as Weimanns replacement it’s not - but leaving Weimann out is a stretch!

Ive added Williams and Naismith to my initial post. I remember turning up to Cov and hearing JW had been injured in training.

Its way off and the list is just a bit nonsense.

Weimann was out for a fair time with his heel injury , so there's that.

Ignoring who was fit for who, we've had a long spell with only one fit RB and one fit LB , 2 fit CB's . I think we had a spell where Wells was the only genuine striker available. By Cardiff I believe we had 2 walking CMF's . 
The last few seasons, despite who was in charge of the medical side (any one of 3 set ups ? ) , has been a car crash in terms of availability.

[Harry]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

The point is that with better availability Nige had us top half.

That period where he dropped from 8th (after Cov) to 12th then 15th then sacked was without Naismith, Tanner, Vyner…then Roberts, from our defence.  Let alone Williams.  Wells wasn’t an issue because we had other options.

But we’d pretty much established ourselves in the top-half through that opening dozen games.

Of course Manning has had to deal with injuries, but not as impactful as the ones Nige did that took him to a convenient sacking point.

So if we take NP’s 14 games and then LM’s first 14 games to make an even representation. NP had players unavailable 53 counts. LM had players unavailable 55 counts. 
So. More unavailability for LM. 
The only biggies during NP’s 14 games was Conway (during which we actually gained good results without him) and Vyner. 
The only game that injuries seriously hampered us was Cardiff. Thats the only one in which there were no defensive options. 
 

Ultimately I’m not having ‘squad availability’ as an excuse. It’s not a factor, apart from 1 game v Cardiff. They’ve both had injuries to players that have hampered them. 

Edited February 26 by Harry

[Mr Popodopolous]

We had no adequate right back for at least 4 successive games under NP.

McCrorie and his issues, Tanner missed a month or so iirc. Indeed just checked, 7..Leicester away to Cardiff away- that can unbalance a side. 7 games in succession.

Sorry no ignore, I misread. 5 though- Rotherham Away to Cardiff Away, a month pretty much.

That aside, 18/14 53 injuries, 17/14, 55..

..Factors such as penalties, penalties in 3 Home Games such as 4 should be factored.

Cardiff away who am I missing? I distinctly recall 11 outfield players missing there yet the graph unless I misread shows 9?

Ah I see we discount e.g. Atkinson and Benarous as they've been out all season and beyond?

Edited February 26 by Mr Popodopolous

[Harry]

7 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

We had no adequate right back for at least 4 successive games under NP.

McCrorie and his issues, Tanner missed a month or so iirc. Indeed just checked, 7..Leicester away to Cardiff away- that can unbalance a side. 7 games in succession.

That aside, 18/14 53 injuries, 17/14, 55..

..Factors such as penalties, penalties in 3 Home Games such as 4 should be factored.

Cardiff away who am I missing? I distinctly recall 11 outfield players missing there yet the graph unless I misread shows 9?

Ah I see we discount e.g. Atkinson and Benarous as they've been out all season and beyond?

TGH was available for all those games to play right back but he chose not to. 
Even though he’d played him at right back 3 times before and he’d had experience at right back for West Brom. 
Please don’t tell me we “didn’t have a right back for 4 games” when we clearly did. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Just now, Harry said:

TGH was available for all those games to play right back but he chose not to. 
Even though he’d played him at right back 3 times before and he’d had experience at right back for West Brom. 
Please don’t tell me we “didn’t have a right back for 4 games” when we clearly did. 

Well Tanner/McCrorie, don't think TGH was signed as such was he. Perhaps better than nothing and I meant 5 not 7 btw having re-read but how would he have fared at RB?

[Davefevs]

32 minutes ago, Harry said:

So if we take NP’s 14 games and then LM’s first 14 games to make an even representation. NP had players unavailable 53 counts. LM had players unavailable 55 counts. 
So. More unavailability for LM. 
The only biggies during NP’s 14 games was Conway (during which we actually gained good results without him) and Vyner. 
The only game that injuries seriously hampered us was Cardiff. Thats the only one in which there were no defensive options. 
 

Ultimately I’m not having ‘squad availability’ as an excuse. It’s not a factor, apart from 1 game v Cardiff. They’ve both had injuries to players that have hampered them. 

Manning has in no way had the injury issues that Nige had in the 3 games leading to his dismissal?  He’s always been able to field each of the 3 units with senior players throughout his time here.

 

 

it’s not about numbers, it’s about when those hit, and the impact when they did.

[W-S-M Seagull]

34 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Manning has in no way had the injury issues that Nige had in the 3 games leading to his dismissal?  He’s always been able to field each of the 3 units with senior players throughout his time here.

 

 

it’s not about numbers, it’s about when those hit, and the impact when they did.

Pearsons last 3 games we had 3,3 and 1 (with J.James starting) first team players on the bench. 

Mannings last 3 we have had 7,8 and 6. 

 

[FNQ]

5 hours ago, Harry said:

Re Point 2. I agree. We should be aiming higher this season. We finished on 59 last year and so we’d want improvement. So neither is good enough. 
 

Re point 1, I’m not having that. 
Nige was without Conway for 7 games. A period in which he got 11 points. 
Nige was without Wells for 3 games whilst Liam was without him for 7 games. 
Liam has had Pring missing at times.  Hasn’t had a single minute out of Naismith. Has had Twine out. Has had Sykes out. 
The only major change really is that Nige had Vyner out for 6 or 7 games I think. 
 

Ultimately though, none of that matters. End of the day, current trend would suggest 59 points. The same as it was trending for Nige. 
As I mentioned the other day, we are basically getting the same results overall but just in a slightly different way. 

Does that mean Liam should be under scrutiny. Yes. To an extent. But it certainly doesn’t mean “get rid” like many on here are ridiculously shouting for. 
It basically means we are where we are and neither manager was able to get any more out of it. We’re a 59 point team, whether Nige or Liam is in charge. 
 

And that is purely down to the players we have. 2 managers playing different ways are getting roughly the same results in different ways. We have a 12th place squad of players. That’s where we are. 

Lots of well thought through points there Harry based on what’s happened so far this season and past performance predictions. But honestly based on our last couple of actual performances where do you see us picking up another 15 points? Five of our remaining 12 games are against teams above us who will have too much to play for, if we lose those games and pick up dour draws against the two Welsh sides we’ll need to win the remaining 5 to reach the heady heights of 59 points. 

[Eddie Hitler]

Can we not please learn to love and embrace mediocrity in all its forms instead of continually striving to be decent?

What is actually wrong with finishing in 16th position every year? It saves you the rollercoaster of emotions that each new season would otherwise call forth.

[David Brent]

Why are people still comparing to Nigel’s record? I thought we had moved on.

If you look at Liam’s record then it’s clear he’s underperforming with the squad available. I’d guess that JL and BT are expecting a lot more given their quotes when Liam was appointed. 

[1960maaan]

6 hours ago, Harry said:

TGH was available for all those games to play right back but he chose not to. 
Even though he’d played him at right back 3 times before and he’d had experience at right back for West Brom. 
Please don’t tell me we “didn’t have a right back for 4 games” when we clearly did. 

Not 100% sure, but during those 4 games I think there was only one that we had a senior option for MF on the bench, so playing TGH at RB would mean an academy player in CMF.  King playing one game at CB.

 

[Harry]

8 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Manning has in no way had the injury issues that Nige had in the 3 games leading to his dismissal?  He’s always been able to field each of the 3 units with senior players throughout his time here.

 

 

it’s not about numbers, it’s about when those hit, and the impact when they did.

It was only the Cardiff game in which he had to play a kid. 
The other 2 games listed above he had 3 first teamers on the bench plus Yeboah who he’d already used a number of times. 
In the Cov & Ipswich games, yes we had a shortage of CB’s. But as said earlier, he then weakened us at RB as well. He should have played TGH there (who he’d already played there 3 times before). Knight & James in CM. 
Yes we were a bit short at CB but it was only the Cardiff game in which we had a ‘crisis’.