Liam Manning league stats

[Superjack]

2 hours ago, Gert Mare said:

So Liam is failing the requirements of him made by the Crayon Boy when appointed?

It's hardly surprising when you dismantle something that was actually beginning to improve and try to start again with someone who won't question the Ayatollah!

The way this season is heading we're gonna be left with the following certainties, NP should not have been sacked, the fans were lied to, Manning is not the right man to take this team to the top end of the Championship, the players aren't as good as Crayon Boy and Tins made out, Crayon Boy and Tins have talked utter bollocks and should be nowhere near the reigns come May and we'll be back to the absolute shit show of a club that Nige inherited.

I ******* knew this would happen. I was fuming when Nige got the bullet and I'm literally foaming at the mouth with anger now.

[W-S-M Seagull]

2 hours ago, Gert Mare said:

So Liam is failing the requirements of him made by the Crayon Boy when appointed?

It's hardly surprising when you dismantle something that was actually beginning to improve and try to start again with someone who won't question the Ayatollah!

The way this season is heading we're gonna be left with the following certainties, NP should not have been sacked, the fans were lied to, Manning is not the right man to take this team to the top end of the Championship, the players aren't as good as Crayon Boy and Tins made out, Crayon Boy and Tins have talked utter bollocks and should be nowhere near the reigns come May and we'll be back to the absolute shit show of a club that Nige inherited.

I ******* knew this would happen. I was fuming when Nige got the bullet and I'm literally foaming at the mouth with anger now.

Probably the best ever post made on here. 

You echo most of our thoughts. 

[Harry]

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

Exactly. And when the other team can make 5 subs and bring on 5 non academy players, that puts you at a disadvantage. 

Manning however has not had this problem of late and here we are losing to QPR and Sheffield Wed. 

Are you still part of my conversation. I thought you didn’t want to be involved with me any more.  I thought we were over. Were we just on a break? I hadn’t realised.

[Sir Geoff]

20 hours 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. 

You conveniently forget the games Tanner was out and TGH had to start his City career playing Right back.

[Galley is our king]

2 minutes ago, Harry said:

Are you still part of my conversation. I thought you didn’t want to be involved with me any more.  I thought we were over. Were we just on a break? I hadn’t realised.

Break or not, it's a good point still not replied to...

[W-S-M Seagull]

1 hour ago, Harry said:

Are you still part of my conversation. I thought you didn’t want to be involved with me any more.  I thought we were over. Were we just on a break? I hadn’t realised.

You also proclaimed to the nation relentlessly that we are now well coached

*you didn't start this thread. 

 

Edited February 26 by W-S-M Seagull

[fgrsimon]

11 hours ago, cidered abroad said:

Harry, I hope that your points estimate at end of season is what we'll end up on. But, having seen seven relegations in my time, I have a nasty feeling that the team spirit built by Pearson and his managerial colleagues, is no longer with us. That spirit over the last two seasons has kept us well away from the bottom five, but what will happen if I'm correct in my assessment? It only needs another two or three poor, losing, games to leave us facing a real problem. Those in the bottom five have been battling to get out of bottom three all season; most of our squad will not even see it coming!

The ingredients are there for a collapse, add to that complacency of a January transfer window 'for next season' and the danger is there. Plus all the sides below bar Rotherham are picking up wins here and there. However you also could equally say this is true for Watford and Middlesbrough and probably some of their supporters will be having similar discussions. 

[Harry]

2 hours ago, Sir Geoff said:

You conveniently forget the games Tanner was out and TGH had to start his City career playing Right back.

Well no. I didn’t conveniently forget that. You’ll note that I’ve mentioned TGH at RB a number of times. 

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

You also proclaimed to the nation relentlessly that we are now well coached

*you didn't start this thread. 

 

Am I off of ignore now then? 
 

In answer to this point, I explained this to you weeks ago. 
I didn’t “relentlessly proclaim” that we were well coached. 
I mentioned it once. Yes. Once. After Watford away. 
And I went on to explain exactly what I meant - which was to do with the way we pressed in the 2nd half, which I thought was highly organised and was probably the best I’ve seen a City team press in a long long time. 
 

So yes. I said it once. That in that one half away at Watford how I thought it was a very well coached press.  And as a result you put me on ignore, DM me to tell me not to reply to you, and then a couple of weeks later start quoting me again and make up bull about me “relentlessly” saying something that I mentioned once. 
 

I must admit, I find you a little bit odd. 

[W-S-M Seagull]

15 minutes ago, Harry said:

I must admit, I find you a little bit odd. 

I must admit, when a poster resorts to getting personal it shows they've lost all the arguments and therefore its pointless engaging with that poster. 

[Harry]

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

I must admit, when a poster resorts to getting personal it shows they've lost all the arguments and therefore it’s pointless engaging with that poster. 

I just think it’s a little odd that you’d message me privately and tell me to stop responding to you and then a few weeks later you start engaging with my posts again. 
Nothing personal. I just think that is rather odd behaviour. 
So, have you not got me on ignore any more? Am I now allowed to respond to you if I wish? Or does this only work one way? 

[Sir Geoff]

8 hours ago, Harry said:

Well no. I didn’t conveniently forget that. You’ll note that I’ve mentioned TGH at RB a number of times. 

Am I off of ignore now then? 
 

In answer to this point, I explained this to you weeks ago. 
I didn’t “relentlessly proclaim” that we were well coached. 
I mentioned it once. Yes. Once. After Watford away. 
And I went on to explain exactly what I meant - which was to do with the way we pressed in the 2nd half, which I thought was highly organised and was probably the best I’ve seen a City team press in a long long time. 
 

So yes. I said it once. That in that one half away at Watford how I thought it was a very well coached press.  And as a result you put me on ignore, DM me to tell me not to reply to you, and then a couple of weeks later start quoting me again and make up bull about me “relentlessly” saying something that I mentioned once. 
 

I must admit, I find you a little bit odd. 

You did on your first post on this thread, then backtracked and mentioned it in later posts, after it had been pointed out to you how selective you'd been regarding the injury situation.

[Harry]

52 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

You did on your first post on this thread, then backtracked and mentioned it in later posts, after it had been pointed out to you how selective you'd been regarding the injury situation.

I think you need to re-read it all. 
I mentioned TGH was an option at RB a number of times and didn’t backtrack on it. 
It was an option that I felt NP could and should have used when Tanner was out. I still believe that. I’m not backtracking on it. 

[Galley is our king]

46 minutes ago, Harry said:

I think you need to re-read it all. 
I mentioned TGH was an option at RB a number of times and didn’t backtrack on it. 
It was an option that I felt NP could and should have used when Tanner was out. I still believe that. I’m not backtracking on it. 

So who would have played in midfield with Knight? Without King  James and Williams? ( Cardiff away) It wasn't just the defence that was devastated by injuries. 

Yes  so many injuries, but the ******** decided that was the time to sack and all the current negativity within the fan base is on them!!

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 hours ago, Galley is our king said:

So who would have played in midfield with Knight? Without King  James and Williams? ( Cardiff away) It wasn't just the defence that was devastated by injuries. 

Yes  so many injuries, but the ******** decided that was the time to sack and all the current negativity within the fan base is on them!!

James, Williams, Naismith, King wasn't it, injured for that one.

Bare Bones FC or what when we also factor no Tanner, McCrorie, Vyner, Atkinson, Roberts.

Even the relatively versatile players who could fill gaps, a lot were out and craziness like Pring CB, Sykes LB, Academy untried product RB etc.

[Galley is our king]

52 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

James, Williams, Naismith, King wasn't it, injured for that one.

Bare Bones FC or what when we also factor no Tanner, McCrorie, Vyner, Atkinson, Roberts.

Even the relatively versatile players who could fill gaps, a lot were out and craziness like Pring CB, Sykes LB, Academy untried product RB etc.

Yes, forgot about Naismith! So bloody many. Also players having to play out of positions.

Still no reply from @Harry

 

[Sir Geoff]

4 minutes ago, Galley is our king said:

Yes, forgot about Naismith! So bloody many. Also players having to play out of positions.

Still no reply from @Harry

 

Because he was 'all over' Manning when he was appointed, having scouted Oxford / MKD many times.

[Natchfever]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

James, Williams, Naismith, King wasn't it, injured for that one.

Bare Bones FC or what when we also factor no Tanner, McCrorie, Vyner, Atkinson, Roberts.

Even the relatively versatile players who could fill gaps, a lot were out and craziness like Pring CB, Sykes LB, Academy untried product RB etc.

This needs reposting every time a club apologist seeks to justify NPs removal based on results.

City had a good go that day, clearly playing for the shirt and their boss.

The dissssenter was slithering around the chairman at the time no doubt.

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, Natchfever said:

This needs reposting every time a club apologist seeks to justify NPs removal based on results.

City had a good go that day, clearly playing for the shirt and their boss.

The dissssenter was slithering around the chairman at the time no doubt.

Thanks and agreed.

Some of the arguments from those who either support or passively accept and think we should as fans move on are truly bizarre. Mental gymnastics, selective facts and outright inaccuracies..

The poster who said we won 9/23 under Manning another good example.

Amnesia, Selective Amnesia or just outright falsehoods Idk.

A slight on Manning no, more the hierarchy and those who come out with statements that at best misremeber the recent past and present.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Thanks and agreed.

Some of the arguments from those who either support or passively accept and think we should as fans move on are truly bizarre. Mental gymnastics, selective facts and outright inaccuracies..

The poster who said we won 9/23 under Manning another good example.

Amnesia, Selective Amnesia or just outright falsehoods Idk.

A slight on Manning no, more the hierarchy and those who come out with statements that at best misremeber the recent past and present.

It’s amazing how “second worst win percentage of all managers” became FACT also.  It might well’ve been fact at the end of 21/22, that last 3rd of the season.  But it was miles away from being a FACT at the end of his tenure.

[Harry]

7 hours ago, Galley is our king said:

So who would have played in midfield with Knight? Without King  James and Williams? ( Cardiff away) It wasn't just the defence that was devastated by injuries. 

Yes  so many injuries, but the ******** decided that was the time to sack and all the current negativity within the fan base is on them!!

 

4 hours ago, Galley is our king said:

Yes, forgot about Naismith! So bloody many. Also players having to play out of positions.

Still no reply from @Harry

 

Steady on now boss. I’ve had a busy day at work so only just came back to here! 
I’ve acknowledged many times that the Cardiff game was a totally impossible situation. 
When I mention TGH at RB it’s in the previous 2 matches when Knight & James were both available to play in midfield. With Tanner out, TGH should really have been the next logical option.

And Pearson has already played him there 3 times so I don’t see why he wouldn’t have done so on those 2 occasions?  

4 hours ago, Sir Geoff said:

Because he was 'all over' Manning when he was appointed, having scouted Oxford / MKD many times.

100% incorrect. 
I was watching MK that season as I was keen on Twine (and O’Reilly).  Nothing to do with Manning. 
And I think you’ll find that on the lengthy Manning thread which started a few days before he arrived, on the early pages I was the first person on this forum to raise the concern over the appointment because I didn’t feel his style would suit our squad. 
 

I have no particular love for Manning. I was the first to raise concerns over his appointment (as clearly evidenced in that first thread in November). I’m just of the opinion that it’s only fair to give him a fair crack of the whip, rather than want him out after 2 weeks (which some posters on here wanted and have never given him a chance). 

To be absolutely clear - I was never “Manning In” but I’m now “Just give the bloke an effing chance ffs”. 

[Galley is our king]

1 hour ago, Harry said:

 

Steady on now boss. I’ve had a busy day at work so only just came back to here! 
I’ve acknowledged many times that the Cardiff game was a totally impossible situation. 
When I mention TGH at RB it’s in the previous 2 matches when Knight & James were both available to play in midfield. With Tanner out, TGH should really have been the next logical option.

And Pearson has already played him there 3 times so I don’t see why he wouldn’t have done so on those 2 occasions?  

100% incorrect. 
I was watching MK that season as I was keen on Twine (and O’Reilly).  Nothing to do with Manning. 
And I think you’ll find that on the lengthy Manning thread which started a few days before he arrived, on the early pages I was the first person on this forum to raise the concern over the appointment because I didn’t feel his style would suit our squad. 
 

I have no particular love for Manning. I was the first to raise concerns over his appointment (as clearly evidenced in that first thread in November). I’m just of the opinion that it’s only fair to give him a fair crack of the whip, rather than want him out after 2 weeks (which some posters on here wanted and have never given him a chance). 

To be absolutely clear - I was never “Manning In” but I’m now “Just give the bloke an effing chance ffs”. 

So it's just the 2 games before Cardiff you are critical of....

The game before was Ipswich. Lost 1-0. I thought at the time Max could have done better with their goal to be honest. From memory, the ball came from the middle of the park and "rolled" in to Max's left. So on the opposite side to any right sided defender.

Second half we played really well and were unlucky not to take a point. Our midfield played really well.

The game before that was Coventry. We won that game......

So this is why you criticise Pearson?

I think some context needs to be applied to your posts.

[Graham76]

2 hours ago, Harry said:

 

Steady on now boss. I’ve had a busy day at work so only just came back to here! 
I’ve acknowledged many times that the Cardiff game was a totally impossible situation. 
When I mention TGH at RB it’s in the previous 2 matches when Knight & James were both available to play in midfield. With Tanner out, TGH should really have been the next logical option.

And Pearson has already played him there 3 times so I don’t see why he wouldn’t have done so on those 2 occasions?  

100% incorrect. 
I was watching MK that season as I was keen on Twine (and O’Reilly).  Nothing to do with Manning. 
And I think you’ll find that on the lengthy Manning thread which started a few days before he arrived, on the early pages I was the first person on this forum to raise the concern over the appointment because I didn’t feel his style would suit our squad. 
 

I have no particular love for Manning. I was the first to raise concerns over his appointment (as clearly evidenced in that first thread in November). I’m just of the opinion that it’s only fair to give him a fair crack of the whip, rather than want him out after 2 weeks (which some posters on here wanted and have never given him a chance). 

To be absolutely clear - I was never “Manning In” but I’m now “Just give the bloke an effing chance ffs”. 

If we weren’t promised top six I think Manning would have been given an easier ride. 

[Natchfever]

5 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Thanks and agreed.

Some of the arguments from those who either support or passively accept and think we should as fans move on are truly bizarre. Mental gymnastics, selective facts and outright inaccuracies..

The poster who said we won 9/23 under Manning another good example.

Amnesia, Selective Amnesia or just outright falsehoods Idk.

A slight on Manning no, more the hierarchy and those who come out with statements that at best misremeber the recent past and present.

Spot on Mr P.

I think Manning gets the full contract term unless relegation looms, as I dont think the Lansdowns would acknowledge another project not panning out as per their masterplan.

That being said, the previous manager is long gone and the current HC is fair game for criticism or praise, depending upon his performance.

So far im not impressed with him but very happy for him to turn things round.

In the meantime, the Pravda media team can **** off so far as im concerned. Opinions can differ but untruths are grating to say the least.

[Natchfever]

22 minutes ago, Graham76 said:

If we weren’t promised top six I think Manning would have been given an easier ride. 

Hes hardly being burned at the stake Graham

[Harry]

1 hour ago, Galley is our king said:

So it's just the 2 games before Cardiff you are critical of....

The game before was Ipswich. Lost 1-0. I thought at the time Max could have done better with their goal to be honest. From memory, the ball came from the middle of the park and "rolled" in to Max's left. So on the opposite side to any right sided defender.

Second half we played really well and were unlucky not to take a point. Our midfield played really well.

The game before that was Coventry. We won that game......

So this is why you criticise Pearson?

I think some context needs to be applied to your posts.

I’m not criticising Nige. You’ve clearly mis-read the whole thread. 
I’ve basically just been saying that the player availability was only a huge issue for the Cardiff game. For all the other games there were options. 
It’s the narrative that LM has had better availability than NP that I am challenging, not Nige himself. 
 

Another one that needs to re-read the context of the thread. 
Only Cardiff game was a big problem. The 2 games before Cardiff were limited in options but he did still have a RB option. 
 

But again, just to make it absolutely clear - I have not criticised Nige in this thread. Just challenging the ‘injuries’ narrative. It was bad for 1 game and limited for 2 games. 
Those 3 games aside, LM has had equal challenges with availability. 

Edited February 27 by Harry

[Merrick's Marvels]

26 minutes ago, Graham76 said:

If we weren’t promised top six I think Manning would have been given an easier ride. 

Everything comes back to how the change of manager was handled, doesn’t it?

Incompetently.

By incompetent people.

None of whom would be in position at a serious, competent, successful football club.

[Natchfever]

1 minute ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

Everything comes back to how the change of manager was handled, doesn’t it?

Incompetently.

By incompetent people.

None of whom would be in position at a serious, competent, successful football club.

This.

Precisely.

[Merrick's Marvels]

2 minutes ago, Natchfever said:

This.

Precisely.

Lions led by donkeys, mate.

Always has been. Jesus wept what a sorry state of affairs.

We'd be frightening if only someone competent was in charge.

[Mr Popodopolous]

17 minutes ago, Natchfever said:

Spot on Mr P.

I think Manning gets the full contract term unless relegation looms, as I dont think the Lansdowns would acknowledge another project not panning out as per their masterplan.

That being said, the previous manager is long gone and the current HC is fair game for criticism or praise, depending upon his performance.

So far im not impressed with him but very happy for him to turn things round.

In the meantime, the Pravda media team can **** off so far as im concerned. Opinions can differ but untruths are grating to say the least.

Certainly agree, Natch.

Had it been done differently and if we had a close to 40% win rate under Manning and a more consistent baseline of performance..which in recent months has varied sharply the discontent would be largely quelled.

The poster who got it wildly wrong about 9/23, that ratio combined with a different set of reasons in November, reasonable.

Putting aside the fact the change shouldn't have been made, the idea that had it been thank you then a young manager to continue the good work, to build on the foundations...there would be less heat and noise.

2027...good grief could be a long 3 and a half years.

[W-S-M Seagull]

49 minutes ago, Graham76 said:

If we weren’t promised top six I think Manning would have been given an easier ride. 

I don't agree. 

My pre season expectations would have remained and that was top 10 with a chance of the play offs in April. 

Those expectations were the same for Nige and Manning. 

With what the club said those expectations did become more heightened if they wanted to be vindicated on their decisions. 

If Nige was still manager and we had just gone 2 wins in 10, 9 points from 10 then he would be under the exact same pressure too. 

Edited February 27 by W-S-M Seagull