What If We beat Ipswich Convincingly? Forum Confusion?

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, ExiledAjax said:

So we didn't win Silvio. Did we see enough of a difference in approach? I am not sure we did. 

Maybe we were a bit more direct, a little bit less "tappy tappy" round the back? But ten I look at our passes and still 2/3rds were in our half, and only 17 long balls...so I'm not sure that stacks up.

@Davefevs any thoughts on style and whether it changed?

Or was the good stuff we saw just an example of our fixed methods working against a team that plays like Ipswich?

@Silvio Dante answered in his reply.  No, not really.  I haven’t seen much change throughout his whole reign, apart from structured pressing triggers and making the game more sterile.  Any patterns I thought I saw early games have disappeared.

Busted flush for me.

So, he’d really have to make marked change over a reasonable period to make me thing that sacking him would be a mistake.

I’ll continue to monitor / observe, because I don’t think he will be sacked.

1 hour ago, ExiledAjax said:

Thanks. I'm minded to agree and I'd actually add, by way of moving the conversation along a little, that in addition to the persistent failure to react, we're also not seeing proactive changes.

We're not seeing Manning/Hogg taking the initiative and make changes that force the opposition to react to us. 

Why must we always be the ones to react? Why can we not anticipate that, for example, Burns might come on last night, and proactively strengthen the left side in anticipation. Or make a change elsewhere that asks Ipswich a different question. Perhaps doing either could even changes McKenna's thoughts and he doesn't bring Burns on.

I don't think chances should be limited to reactions. That was always my biggest criticism of Johnson, and at times Pearson. I'd love to see Bristol City being the team that takes initiative, acts proactively, and forces the opposition to react to us. 

It's not a silver bullet for success, but it would be something that we've not tried consistently for quite a while.

Manning and Hogg are too similar in their thoughts.  You need your no2 to challenge you, not agree with you and be telepathic.

[Sheltons Army]

2 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

I’m not sure we did either - it wasn’t really a marked change in style, it was more containment (and don’t get me wrong, it worked well). I’ve put on another post the “biggest bit” was again the lack of game management and adaptability has been my biggest concern since day one (one day I’ll pull all my post match comments under Liam - there’s a theme!) - we set up pretty well and contained them, the issue was that when Ipswich changed tack - mainly the added pace - we didn’t react.
 

And to be clear, that’s on Liam - a blind man with a bag over his head would have known a not fully fit Pring would either need changing or additional support against Burns (harsh on Mehmeti to take him off maybe but Roberts being brought on post Conway goal if not earlier would have made sense)

Better performance - expected, we had less of the ball. Fatal flaw of game management remained.

Very much in line with your thoughts and posts SD , as normal

As each game passes it becomes more striking that not only is he a process coach - ‘keep doing these things and it will come together’

 

But he’s a planner planner , a pre match planner,  as I’ve highlighted by his immediate acquisition of Krause in a pretty unusual dual role (Of which I can see some sense tbf)

His (LM) influence or impact appears diminish or dissapears at that point 

In game tweaks , reactions , absent

’Trust the process’ 

Its almost akin setting your side up pre match in a computer game , scheduling & pre planning substitutions , pressing play and then just watching what happens

Not only would I suggest his pre planning successes are ‘mixed’ but in honesty his in game management looks woeful right now.

I'm sure he can deliver good ‘technical’ sessions on the grass  , putting together a winning formula on a Sat afternoon , being smart and adaptable ‘on the hoof’ , and getting the best out of players and man management are all vital assets and skills if you want to be a HC and certainly at this level or above.

Being brutal , I can’t see where he’s demonstrated any great ability atm in these key areas and I’d be interested for any who believes he has to explain where.

 

 

The signs are not good and comes back to the question of whether you back him and whether he justifies , and actually deserves , the nest egg and a squad rebuild

 

 

 

 

Edited March 6 by Sheltons Army

[ExiledAjax]

18 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Manning and Hogg are too similar in their thoughts.  You need your no2 to challenge you, not agree with you and be telepathic.

Um..this is Bristol City Fevs. No one is allowed to challenge the thoughts of those above them. 

[Davefevs]

50 minutes ago, Sheltons Army said:

Very much in line with your thoughts and posts SD , as normal

As each game passes it becomes more striking that not only is he a process coach - ‘keep doing these things and it will come together’

 

But he’s a planner planner , a pre match planner,  as I’ve highlighted by his immediate acquisition of Krause in a pretty unusual dual role (Of which I can see some sense tbf)

His (LM) influence or impact appears diminish or dissapears at that point 

In game tweaks , reactions , absent

’Trust the process’ 

Its almost akin setting your side up pre match in a computer game , scheduling & pre planning substitutions , pressing play and then just watching what happens

Not only would I suggest his pre planning successes are ‘mixed’ but in honesty his in game management looks woeful right now.

I'm sure he can deliver good ‘technical’ sessions on the grass  , putting together a winning formula on a Sat afternoon , being smart and adaptable ‘on the hoof’ , and getting the best out of players and man management are all vital assets and skills if you want to be a HC and certainly at this level or above.

Being brutal , I can’t see where he’s demonstrated any great ability atm in these key areas and I’d be interested for any who believes he has to explain where.

 

 

The signs are not good and comes back to the question of whether you back him and whether he justifies , and actually deserves , the nest egg and a squad rebuild

 

 

 

 

As I’ve said in different words - “it’s much easier to trust the process when you have the best players”.

We don’t, we won’t either.

I’ll back-track a tad.  If we signed 5 stellar loans alongside a few “better than what we have” players, maybe that gives us a chance.  But risk v reward?

[Roger Red Hat]

55 minutes ago, Sheltons Army said:

his immediate acquisition of Krause in a pretty unusual dual role

What is his role?

[Davefevs]

17 minutes ago, Roger Red Hat said:

What is his role?

First Team Coach / Analyst.  I believe mainly focussed on opposition analysis.

Edited March 6 by Davefevs

[chinapig]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Manning and Hogg are too similar in their thoughts.  You need your no2 to challenge you, not agree with you and be telepathic.

Which is what Nigel did with his coaches and Dave Rennie. The best leaders are open to disagreement and prepared to change their mind.

[Sheltons Army]

32 minutes ago, Roger Red Hat said:

What is his role?

 

15 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

First Team Coach / Analyst.  I believe mainly focussed on opposition analysis.

And as we understand it , Analyst wise heavily prepared in the game plan , and then goes out onto the grass to go through it with players