Okay, not really slating that tonight

[Silvio Dante]

Imagine.

Imagine we’d not lost the last three and we’d gone to second in the league and matched them for most of the game. There wouldn’t be any real negativity. The negativity, quite understandably, is driven by wider factors. But tonight, in isolation, wasn’t horrific.

I think until we went ahead Manning got it spot on. The first half was boring as hell, but contained them. This led to frustration from Ipswich and we reacted well - we could have been two up easily. What was totally noticeable though is how much better we were when attacking at pace. Real lesson there.

I do go with that after we went ahead that McKenna managed the game better than Manning. Our second was great but a bit against the run, and not even making a disruptive sub when things were drifting last ten is a big no no.

I said pre match that what happened changed nothing. It really doesn’t. It was better, but similar concerns remain. If Liam was a 4 last three games he’s a 7 tonight. But the aspects that drive that grade down are still there.

Not hanging him in isolation and 2/3 good tonight. But it’s still not enough.

[petehinton]

I’m surprised at the amount of comments saying you can lay any blame on him tonight.
 

We were ahead twice and lost the game, and also conceded 2 goals & gave away a penalty in the space of 12 minutes. Made absolutely no changes or tweaks, two days after he says “if you aren’t going to win it, make sure you don’t lose it” about Cardiff. 
 

We were solid for large parts of today, but you certainly can’t say that’s 100% down to the players imo. 

[Andy082005]

3 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

Imagine.

Imagine we’d not lost the last three and we’d gone to second in the league and matched them for most of the game. There wouldn’t be any real negativity. The negativity, quite understandably, is driven by wider factors. But tonight, in isolation, wasn’t horrific.

I think until we went ahead Manning got it spot on. The first half was boring as hell, but contained them. This led to frustration from Ipswich and we reacted well - we could have been two up easily. What was totally noticeable though is how much better we were when attacking at pace. Real lesson there.

I do go with that after we went ahead that McKenna managed the game better than Manning. Our second was great but a bit against the run, and not even making a disruptive sub when things were drifting last ten is a big no no.

I said pre match that what happened changed nothing. It really doesn’t. It was better, but similar concerns remain. If Liam was a 4 last three games he’s a 7 tonight. But the aspects that drive that grade down are still there.

Not hanging him in isolation and 2/3 good tonight. But it’s still not enough.

Where as I agree to an extent - our absolute failure to manage the last 15 minutes is a result of a weak coach and a weak mindset that has been allowed to manifest 

2-1 you try to kill the game. Frustrate the home team and get the fans agitated. We just don’t have it in us - and under Manning we never will 

It reminds me so much of the Lee Johnson era. Weak with no personality - just like our head coach 

I can’t believe how wrong they have got it with this bloke 

[BCFC31]

I'm slating it as its the same old lack of quality crap we're shocking.

[Silvio Dante]

Just now, petehinton said:

I’m surprised at the amount of comments saying you can lay any blame on him tonight.
 

We were ahead twice and lost the game, and also conceded 2 goals & gave away a penalty in the space of 12 minutes. Made absolutely no changes or tweaks, two days after he says “if you aren’t going to win it, make sure you don’t lose it” about Cardiff. 
 

We were solid for large parts of today, but you certainly can’t say that’s 100% down to the players imo. 

I think that’s where I go with the 2/3 good Pete. I think the setup was good but the reaction wasn’t. I can understand the not doing anything post first equaliser but that momentum shift last ten was crying out for leadership and it wasn’t given.

Again, it’s far from the worst he’s been but it still isn’t anywhere near good enough. My broader point is that there isn’t enough credit in the bank for a 7/10 and it changes nothing in the bigger picture.

[GrahamC]

Tonight was far better than I expected.

Not for the first time this season (under him & Pearson) the paper thin squad cost us.

We only had 7 subs (again) & look at what we had left to come on, a 35 year old, some kids & our reserve left back.

Badly need a couple more available & a positive that Conway is back on the scoresheet.

[IAmNick]

Manning said pre-match that Pring wasn't 100%, and even the Sky commentators said Burns would come on before the end. We needed some kind of mitigation/plan there, and didn't really see it.

7/10 is probably fair I think though

[Packman]

Only being able to hold onto a lead twice for a matter of minutes is shocking and just shows what a weak bunch we are. And where was the urgency in the 8 minutes of injury time? Looked like we were happy to only lose by 1. Rubbish yet again.

[Curr Avon]

5 minutes ago, Andy082005 said:

Where as I agree to an extent - our absolute failure to manage the last 15 minutes is a result of a weak coach and a weak mindset that has been allowed to manifest 

2-1 you try to kill the game. Frustrate the home team and get the fans agitated. We just don’t have it in us - and under Manning we never will 

It reminds me so much of the Lee Johnson era. Weak with no personality - just like our head coach 

I can’t believe how wrong they have got it with this bloke 

Ipswich are second for a reason and all credit to them for responding from behind. Weak manager? We played aggressively for the majority of the game but visibly tired and were beaten due to Ipswich's subs. We couldn't match their pace and power. The players gave everything tonight for Manning. Lost the dressing room? No chance. We'll improve if we keep playing with that drive and fantastic pressing.

 

Edited March 5 by Curr Avon

[Eco]

Just now, GrahamC said:

Tonight was far better than I expected.

Not for the first time this season (under him & Pearson) the paper thin squad cost us.

We only had 7 subs (again) & look at what we had left to come on, a 35 year old, some kids & our reserve left back.

Badly need a couple more available & a positive that Conway is back on the scoresheet.

Yep great header from TC. Slightly bizarre 'celebration'

[Ivorguy]

11 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

Imagine.

Imagine we’d not lost the last three and we’d gone to second in the league and matched them for most of the game. There wouldn’t be any real negativity. The negativity, quite understandably, is driven by wider factors. But tonight, in isolation, wasn’t horrific.

I think until we went ahead Manning got it spot on. The first half was boring as hell, but contained them. This led to frustration from Ipswich and we reacted well - we could have been two up easily. What was totally noticeable though is how much better we were when attacking at pace. Real lesson there.

I do go with that after we went ahead that McKenna managed the game better than Manning. Our second was great but a bit against the run, and not even making a disruptive sub when things were drifting last ten is a big no no.

I said pre match that what happened changed nothing. It really doesn’t. It was better, but similar concerns remain. If Liam was a 4 last three games he’s a 7 tonight. But the aspects that drive that grade down are still there.

Not hanging him in isolation and 2/3 good tonight. But it’s still not enough.

Yes but in the real world we did lose the last three.  Now number risen to four

[Andy082005]

Just now, Curr Avon said:

Ipswich are second for a reason and all credit to them for responding from behind. Weak manager? We played aggressively for the majority of the game but visibly tired and we're beaten due to Ipswich's subs. We couldn't match their pace and power. The players gave everything tonight for Manning. Lost the dressing room? No chance. We'll improve if we keep playing with that drive and fantastic pressing.

 

Great to meet you Mrs Manning 

[Banjo Red]

Game management very questionable.

[Curr Avon]

1 minute ago, Andy082005 said:

Great to meet you Mrs Manning 

You too, negative boy.

[Red Exile]

I can't see what Manning is bringing. The players have raised their game in a handful of high profile matches. Which is understandable. Beyond these our record is beginning to look pitiful. The chap seems weak as water. Unless he's a completely different personality in the dressing room he's got zero presence, zero charisma. If his talents are subtle they are well disguised.

What the club needed when NP left was experience of how to achieve what we're always told is our objective, play-offs and a promotion push. We lack that from top to bottom with the exception of NP's remaining hires. Instead we again we have a chap on work experience, failing.

Let's not have this drag on for months.

[Harry]

I thought the ‘game plan’ worked well in the first 60 minutes or so. 
We basically played Wells & Knight as a front 2 and they blocked any passing lanes into Morsy & Luongo. Ipswich couldn’t play anything through midfield and were forced to play wide and long. 
This was fine by us, as Mehmeti and Cornick were very quickly getting across to the wide players. Cornick in particular gave Davis no space at all down their right. 
 

But then; the substitutions happened! 
 

Cornick hadn’t given Davis an inch. Within 10 seconds of Sykes coming on, Davis had 30 yards of space to score the first. 
Then Conway came on. 
Ok, Sykes attoned for his error on their goal with a great assist for Tommy. 
But the ‘block’ that Wells & Knight were doing so well, suddenly disappeared when Tommy came on. 
I highly doubt this was instruction. As it had basically nullified Ipswich all day. 
Their 3rd goal arose due to Tommy allowing Morsy to receive the ball on half way (hadn’t happened all game when Wells was on), and he then was able to afford Wolfenden some space to ping the ball to Davis. Where Sykes was off of Davis again!! 
 

And don’t talk to me about TGH in the 8th minute of injury time taking 4 touches in his own half and getting mugged. Awful 2nd half from Hickman. 
 

From Manning’s perspective, I’ll give him credit tonight. His game plan was actually very good and very well executed for 60 minutes. But the substitutions basically ballsed up the game plan by players switching off from their roles 

Edited March 5 by Harry

[W-S-M Seagull]

Considering how well Manning knows McKenna and how well know it is that Ipswich are very strong in the final stages of the game then its actually criminal that we were not prepared for Ipwichs changes. 

Plan a worked against Ipswichs plan a. Plan a didn't work against Ipswichs plan b. We had no plan other than plan a. 

 

[Silvio Dante]

3 minutes ago, Harry said:

I thought the ‘game plan’ worked well in the first 60 minutes or so. 
We basically played Wells & Knight as a front 2 and they blocked any passing lanes into Morsy & Luongo. Ipswich couldn’t play anything through midfield and were forced to play wide and long. 
This was done by us, as Mehmeti and Cornick were very quickly getting across to the wide players. Cornick in particular gave Davis no space at all down their right. 
 

But then; the substitutions happened! 
 

Cornick hadn’t given Davis an inch. Within 10 seconds of Sykes coming on, Davis had 30 yards of space to score the first. 
Then Conway came on. 
Ok, Sykes attoned for his error on their goal with a great assist for Tommy. 
But the ‘block’ that Wells & Knight were doing so well, suddenly disappeared when Tommy came on. 
I highly doubt this was instruction. As it had basically nullified Ipswich all day. 
Their 3rd goal arose due to Tommy allowing Morsy to receive the ball on half way (hadn’t happened all game when Wells was on), and he then was able to afford Wolfenden some space to ping the ball to Davis. Where Sykes was off of Davis again!! 
 

And don’t talk to me about TGH in the 8th minute of injury time taking 4 touches in his own half and getting mugged. Awful 2nd half from Hickman. 
 

From Manning’s perspective, I’ll give him credit tonight. His game plan was actually very good and very well executed for 60 minutes. But the substitutions basically ballsed up the game plan by players switching off from their roles 

I think we’re saying broadly the same thing here - great setup, well executed then a turning point post subs (both ours and theirs). The bit I think you haven’t mentioned is that Burns coming on with a half fit Pring should have let Roberts coming in instead. That potentially avoids the penalty and the opening up of that attacking front as Burns had him on toast (that doesn’t happen to a fit Cam). Other than that I agree.

[Harry]

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

Considering how well Manning knows McKenna and how well know it is that Ipswich are very strong in the final stages of the game then its actually criminal that we were not prepared for Ipwichs changes. 

Plan a worked against Ipswichs plan a. Plan a didn't work against Ipswichs plan b. We had no plan other than plan a. 

 

Plan A wasn’t executed by the substitutes. 

1 minute ago, Silvio Dante said:

I think we’re saying broadly the same thing here - great setup, well executed then a turning point post subs (both ours and theirs). The bit I think you haven’t mentioned is that Burns coming on with a half fit Pring should have let Roberts coming in instead. That potentially avoids the penalty and the opening up of that attacking front as Burns had him on toast (that doesn’t happen to a fit Cam). Other than that I agree.

Agree. Roberts perhaps could / should have come on for Pring 

Although Pring is quicker than Roberts. So Burns would have had Roberts on toast too 

Edited March 5 by Harry

[Davefevs]

17 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

Tonight was far better than I expected.

Not for the first time this season (under him & Pearson) the paper thin squad cost us.

We only had 7 subs (again) & look at what we had left to come on, a 35 year old, some kids & our reserve left back.

Badly need a couple more available & a positive that Conway is back on the scoresheet.

We have a good group of pros, they have pride.  They will always try, they’ll always work hard.

The stupid thing is having gone 2-1 up with 13 mins to go, we looked like we wanted another.  Burns was giving Pring a tough time.  Mehmeti who’d had a good game was struggling.  Just back him up with Roberts, close that side down.

@Harry I’m gonna be harsh here, you or I could come up with that game plan.  I’ve said this week that we should block not press.  I’ve said you need to be aware of Davis playing high.  I think it’s generous to give his credit for the set up.  There was nothing fantastic about it.

[Silvio Dante]

3 minutes ago, Harry said:

Plan A wasn’t executed by the substitutes. 

Agree. Roberts perhaps could / should have come on for Pring 

Although Pring is quicker than Roberts. So Burns would have had Roberts on toast too 

True - but I’d wager a wager that a fit Roberts is probably quicker than an unfit Pring that’s played for 80 minutes. The “momentum disruption” may have also helped.

As I say, broadly improved but probably not enough

[Harry]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

We have a good group of pros, they have pride.  They will always try, they’ll always work hard.

The stupid thing is having gone 2-1 up with 13 mins to go, we looked like we wanted another.  Burns was giving Pring a tough time.  Mehmeti who’d had a good game was struggling.  Just back him up with Roberts, close that side down.

@Harry I’m gonna be harsh here, you or I could come up with that game plan.  I’ve said this week that we should block not press.  I’ve said you need to be aware of Davis playing high.  I think it’s generous to give his credit for the set up.  There was nothing fantastic about it.

Maybe. But it was still the correct plan. And it was what he put out there. 
We’d knock him if he hadn’t played that way so we surely have to credit when he did actually do the right thing. 

[Jeez]

It wasn’t terrific

[transfer reader]

31 minutes ago, Ivorguy said:

Yes but in the real world we did lose the last three.  Now number risen to four

Just like you wanted.

[GrahamC]

19 minutes ago, Harry said:

I thought the ‘game plan’ worked well in the first 60 minutes or so. 
We basically played Wells & Knight as a front 2 and they blocked any passing lanes into Morsy & Luongo. Ipswich couldn’t play anything through midfield and were forced to play wide and long. 
This was fine by us, as Mehmeti and Cornick were very quickly getting across to the wide players. Cornick in particular gave Davis no space at all down their right. 
 

But then; the substitutions happened! 
 

Cornick hadn’t given Davis an inch. Within 10 seconds of Sykes coming on, Davis had 30 yards of space to score the first. 
Then Conway came on. 
Ok, Sykes attoned for his error on their goal with a great assist for Tommy. 
But the ‘block’ that Wells & Knight were doing so well, suddenly disappeared when Tommy came on. 
I highly doubt this was instruction. As it had basically nullified Ipswich all day. 
Their 3rd goal arose due to Tommy allowing Morsy to receive the ball on half way (hadn’t happened all game when Wells was on), and he then was able to afford Wolfenden some space to ping the ball to Davis. Where Sykes was off of Davis again!! 
 

And don’t talk to me about TGH in the 8th minute of injury time taking 4 touches in his own half and getting mugged. Awful 2nd half from Hickman. 
 

From Manning’s perspective, I’ll give him credit tonight. His game plan was actually very good and very well executed for 60 minutes. But the substitutions basically ballsed up the game plan by players switching off from their roles 

Re TGH again he faded badly & I’d have taken him off for King at 2-2 & hoped his experience could help see us hold on for a point.

Maybe it would have been seen as negative but I’d have taken off Mehmeti too who was tiring by then & put Roberts in front of Pring to support.

Wouldn’t have minded a few strong challenges well up the pitch to slow their flow.

[Harry]

1 minute ago, GrahamC said:

Re TGH again he faded badly & I’d have taken him off for King at 2-2 & hoped his experience could help see us hold on for a point.

Maybe it would have been seen as negative but I’d have taken off Mehmeti too who was tiring by then & put Roberts in front of Pring to support.

Wouldn’t have minded a few strong challenges well up the pitch to slow their flow.

Yep. Agree on both. 
 

[Charlie BCFC]

41 minutes ago, petehinton said:

I’m surprised at the amount of comments saying you can lay any blame on him tonight.
 

We were ahead twice and lost the game, and also conceded 2 goals & gave away a penalty in the space of 12 minutes. Made absolutely no changes or tweaks, two days after he says “if you aren’t going to win it, make sure you don’t lose it” about Cardiff. 
 

We were solid for large parts of today, but you certainly can’t say that’s 100% down to the players imo. 

The team was the same team that got in front, the players shat themselves on Sky. That’s how I see it, I don’t see how that’s on Manning unless you think he told them to start making terrible decisions

 

41 minutes ago, Andy082005 said:

Where as I agree to an extent - our absolute failure to manage the last 15 minutes is a result of a weak coach and a weak mindset that has been allowed to manifest 

2-1 you try to kill the game. Frustrate the home team and get the fans agitated. We just don’t have it in us - and under Manning we never will 

It reminds me so much of the Lee Johnson era. Weak with no personality - just like our head coach 

I can’t believe how wrong they have got it with this bloke 

Our failure to manage the last 15 happened numerous times under Pearson even this season. Why haven’t you mentioned him in this when you have slated both Johnson and Manning for going that?

[Andy082005]

4 minutes ago, Charlie BCFC said:

The team was the same team that got in front, the players shat themselves on Sky. That’s how I see it, I don’t see how that’s on Manning unless you think he told them to start making terrible decisions

 

Our failure to manage the last 15 happened numerous times under Pearson even this season. Why haven’t you mentioned him in this when you have slated both Johnson and Manning for going that?

Are you seriously suggesting I didn’t criticise Pearson?

You clearly don’t know me 

Edited March 5 by Andy082005

[Charlie BCFC]

1 minute ago, Andy082005 said:

Are you seriously suggesting I didn’t criticise Pearson?

Not that I can see no?

[Andy082005]

1 minute ago, Charlie BCFC said:

Not that I can see no?

It was absolutely the right time to move Pearson on 

They just got his replacement absolutely wrong