Charlie BCFC Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 (edited) 1 minute ago, Andy082005 said: It was absolutely the right time to move Pearson on They just got his replacement absolutely wrong Fair I’m still behind Manning personally but that’s your opinion Edited March 5 by Charlie BCFC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy082005 Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 Just now, Charlie BCFC said: Fair I’m still behind Manning personally but that’s your opinion Played 21 won 6, drew 5, lost 10 relegation form with no sign of improvement Just let that sink in pal 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 6 minutes ago, Andy082005 said: It was absolutely the right time to move Pearson on They just got his replacement absolutely wrong Disagree. Agree. () 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomo Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 (edited) 57 minutes ago, 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 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. Fantastic Pressing I'm not convinced Mark but I could be miles off. We appear to back off much more than we ever have previously? although that's one for @Davefevs to confirm. Dave? Edited March 5 by Tomo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REDOXO Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 (edited) 54 minutes ago, 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 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. What are you smoking? The team give a performance that is not total rubbish and showed a little more than the last three games and that’s the shoots of a revival We are bottom of the form table for a reason. Liam Manning and our acceptance of mediocrity after a bullshit decision would be it! Edited March 5 by REDOXO 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curr Avon Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 Just now, REDOXO said: What are you smoking? My brain by the feel of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 9 minutes ago, Charlie BCFC said: Fair I’m still behind Manning personally but that’s your opinion 1.1 PPG, 28% win ratio. Alarming no? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ProfitInMyPocket Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 He's halfway to the record setting streak! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy082005 Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Davefevs said: Disagree. Agree. () I am swinging towards the “perhaps I don’t know what I had until it’s gone” position when I comes to Pearson Edited March 5 by Andy082005 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supersonic Robin Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 16 minutes ago, Andy082005 said: It was absolutely the right time to move Pearson on They just got his replacement absolutely wrong For me, the frustrating thing about moving Pearson on when we did is that it will always be a "what if?" Had we given him funds in the summer and this season to do something with it, then by now we might have a clearer idea of whether Pearson could have taken us on further, or whether we'd reached our ceiling under him. Alas, we'll never know. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudski Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 56 minutes ago, 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 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. No we won't improve...because we don't have a squad that can play that way, continually every game, over a whole season, with that intensity, without getting injuries ( we've had loads, another tonight). We put in performances like that once in a blue moon. Our coach reacted to Subs again, instead of being pro active and subbing first when we went 2-1 up. He cocked up again...regardless of a better performance. He would of known the likes of Burns would be brought on in the second half. And he kept Pring on with an injury. Roberts should have been on way before Burns came on. And Mehmetti should have been hooked as well. And put King on. He's reactionary rather than pro active. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fgrsimon Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 A loss is a loss. We lose to the poor teams, we lose to the good teams and now we're only 6 points off 2nd bottom. Struggling to see anything positive. Lose to Swansea and I think it'll be the end for Manning as we'll get nothing from WBA or Leicester. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Original OTIB Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 4 minutes ago, spudski said: No we won't improve...because we don't have a squad that can play that way, continually every game, over a whole season, with that intensity, without getting injuries ( we've had loads, another tonight). We put in performances like that once in a blue moon. Our coach reacted to Subs again, instead of being pro active and subbing first when we went 2-1 up. He cocked up again...regardless of a better performance. He would of known the likes of Burns would be brought on in the second half. And he kept Pring on with an injury. Roberts should have been on way before Burns came on. And Mehmetti should have been hooked as well. And put King on. He's reactionary rather than pro active. REACTIVE! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted March 5 Report Share Posted March 5 18 minutes ago, Tomo said: Fantastic Pressing I'm not convinced Mark but I could be miles off. We appear to back off much more than we ever have previously? although that's one for @Davefevs to confirm. Dave? We changed tonight from a predominant 424 block (with pressing triggered when appropriate) to something more like a 442 block (with less triggers). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivorguy Posted March 6 Report Share Posted March 6 5 hours ago, transfer reader said: Just like you wanted. Oh please try and understand what I was saying, rather than continuing to snipe. Not a good look 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capman Posted March 6 Report Share Posted March 6 Position is pretty simple. We bought in a manager who we were told would coach the top 6 squad up the league as it was underperforming under the previous regime. We were 4 points off the playoffs at the time and many, myself included, thought we stood a reasonable chance of pushing on and finishing well into the top ten with an outside chance of the playoffs. We are now 13 points off the playoffs which are out of reach for this season. We are 6 points from the relegation zone and dropping closer to it all the time. The board lied to us about the squad, they lied about the old manager and lied about his replacement. They have taken the supporters for mugs, treated us with absolute contempt. They have taken the money for tickets and the rest and then lied to us in return. Steve needs to step up and Jon and Brian need to be gone. You simply cannot run an organisation where its management has nothing but contempt for its loyal customers. Manning is a symptom of the problems at Ashton Gate, he is not the cause. I am sure Manning will go, and probably soon, but until the wider issues are addressed, nothing will really change. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted March 6 Report Share Posted March 6 7 hours ago, transfer reader said: Just like you wanted. I very much doubt that Simple fact, Manning is out of his depth, the results tell us that This is like tinnions reign all over again Install a proper ceo dof get rid of tinnion and JL so there is no nepotism and job for the boys, Bring in more voices in the board room, ita the only way to sort this mess out now 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RollsRoyce Posted March 6 Report Share Posted March 6 I rather thought that Ipswich, with their squad, and results this season demonstrated that the way Manning wants to play is not the only way to play and be successful. Indeed, you can add Luton last season too. Both non-parachute payment clubs, both being fast in transition and creating disruption. We did that too, to Luton last season, if anyone recalls. So why did someone think that playing like Man City with our mid-table budget was the way forward? Even when you have PP, get promoted and get battered like Burnley, because when you have a £50M advantage at our level, you can maybe do it, but when you are promoted, you are then a small fish. Reality, pragmatism and not idealistic dreams are needed. McKenna is proving to be all of that and a very talented coach. 5 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silvio Dante Posted March 6 Author Report Share Posted March 6 2 minutes ago, RollsRoyce said: I rather thought that Ipswich, with their squad, and results this season demonstrated that the way Manning wants to play is not the only way to play and be successful. Indeed, you can add Luton last season too. Both non-parachute payment clubs, both being fast in transition and creating disruption. We did that too, to Luton last season, if anyone recalls. So why did someone think that playing like Man City with our mid-table budget was the way forward? Even when you have PP, get promoted and get battered like Burnley, because when you have a £50M advantage at our level, you can maybe do it, but when you are promoted, you are then a small fish. Reality, pragmatism and not idealistic dreams are needed. McKenna is proving to be all of that and a very talented coach. The thing I really liked about them was the way they stretched the game - it was almost a counter to our wanting to come inside all the time. They weren’t scared to get the ball forward early to wide areas - whether at feet or trying to play a ball in behind the fullback as a percentage chance. They weren’t at their best but they were trying to stretch the game and create spaces (overloads) elsewhere. The pace of it was much different to our more “considered” build up and dare I say a bit more “instinctive”. Id say McKenna ball is a lot different to Manning ball from the intent shown there 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted March 6 Report Share Posted March 6 1 hour ago, RollsRoyce said: I rather thought that Ipswich, with their squad, and results this season demonstrated that the way Manning wants to play is not the only way to play and be successful. Indeed, you can add Luton last season too. Both non-parachute payment clubs, both being fast in transition and creating disruption. We did that too, to Luton last season, if anyone recalls. So why did someone think that playing like Man City with our mid-table budget was the way forward? Even when you have PP, get promoted and get battered like Burnley, because when you have a £50M advantage at our level, you can maybe do it, but when you are promoted, you are then a small fish. Reality, pragmatism and not idealistic dreams are needed. McKenna is proving to be all of that and a very talented coach. Nutshell 1 hour ago, Silvio Dante said: The thing I really liked about them was the way they stretched the game - it was almost a counter to our wanting to come inside all the time. They weren’t scared to get the ball forward early to wide areas - whether at feet or trying to play a ball in behind the fullback as a percentage chance. They weren’t at their best but they were trying to stretch the game and create spaces (overloads) elsewhere. The pace of it was much different to our more “considered” build up and dare I say a bit more “instinctive”. Id say McKenna ball is a lot different to Manning ball from the intent shown there High press (and counter press), attack minded football. The opposite of mid-block, passive, patient football. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capman Posted March 6 Report Share Posted March 6 1 hour ago, RollsRoyce said: I rather thought that Ipswich, with their squad, and results this season demonstrated that the way Manning wants to play is not the only way to play and be successful. Indeed, you can add Luton last season too. Both non-parachute payment clubs, both being fast in transition and creating disruption. We did that too, to Luton last season, if anyone recalls. So why did someone think that playing like Man City with our mid-table budget was the way forward? Even when you have PP, get promoted and get battered like Burnley, because when you have a £50M advantage at our level, you can maybe do it, but when you are promoted, you are then a small fish. Reality, pragmatism and not idealistic dreams are needed. McKenna is proving to be all of that and a very talented coach. I have been wondering about this. Playing the Man City way requires players of the highest levels of technical skill. They are players who are going to cost considerably sums of money, something we have repeatedly failed to spend. Within a world of FFP and parachute payments I am remain unconvinced that as a strategy it is likely to be successful. How can City attract the players with the highest levels of technical ability to play the ‘beautiful’ game? Surely a high intensity, counterattack strategy which is about pace is much more likely to be practical for a club seeking to reach the premier league for the first time? It’s almost as if the previous manager understood football! 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBristolian Posted March 6 Report Share Posted March 6 I totally agree with the original post. I said this yesterday but, under Lee Johnson, I fell into the trap of letting the occasional decent performance convince me against my instincts that it was going to work out eventually and it never did. Ultimately, for all the positives yesterday, we turned a potential win into a loss late on and the three defeats that preceded it have put Manning massively in debit. IF we can take the positives last night and turn it into a win against Swansea and another win in our next two after that against West Brom or Leicester, maybe I’ll start to buy into the idea that Manning might get things on course. But, as it stands, we are four defeats in a row and, shortly before that, we went six without a win. Last night showed glimpses of promise but Manning doesn’t have anywhere near enough credit in the bank for those glimpses to be enough. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transfer reader Posted March 6 Report Share Posted March 6 4 hours ago, Ivorguy said: Oh please try and understand what I was saying, rather than continuing to snipe. Not a good look "Not a good look" but actively wanting the team you 'support' (grossly false description, but seems to be what you'd claim is the case) to lose is a good look is it? On 02/03/2024 at 22:15, Ivorguy said: Yes, of course, we need to lose and then move forward again, hopefully.A draw, even a win, would simply delay what is now inevitable. Manning is far more likely to take us down to Division 1 than up into The Prem When asked if you still want us to lose... On 04/03/2024 at 19:32, Ivorguy said: Yes if it means we can avoid relegation, for a victory will be largely meaningless in the grand scheme of Manning’s lack of ability to coach/manage. Sometimes one needs to take a step backwards in order to go forward. Imo we are in serious trouble with Manning in charge. Do you really want to take a real risk of relegation if a one-off victory keeps Manning in control until last match of season? If so, I disagree So, presumably celebration drinks were at yours after the Ipswich winner, after all. We lost so we must be a less risk of relegation now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transfer reader Posted March 6 Report Share Posted March 6 3 hours ago, Monkeh said: I very much doubt that Simple fact, Manning is out of his depth, the results tell us that This is like tinnions reign all over again Install a proper ceo dof get rid of tinnion and JL so there is no nepotism and job for the boys, Bring in more voices in the board room, ita the only way to sort this mess out now Literally their words that they wanted us to lose. When someone else asked them again later, they doubled down on that stance. So why are you doubting their words when I point them out? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted March 6 Report Share Posted March 6 11 hours ago, Silvio Dante said: What was totally noticeable though is how much better we were when attacking at pace. Real lesson there. Neither we, nor most other teams in this tier of English football to be fair, are good enough to score many from slow, 80-pass build-ups. Football like fencing - probing for an opening. When it's slow, you are up against 10 bodies behind the ball - 11 if your opponents are defending the lead or playing for a draw. Inevitably in the ultra-slow approach someone will eventually under- or over-hit a pass, we'll concede possession and with the team in a forward attacking posture, there will then be a desperate scramble to get back to defend our box. Pace - and having the confidence to run at your opponents - is our friend. You cause panic. You catch folk out of position. Even if you don't get a shooting chance, they may need to foul you to stop the break. Agree with you 100%. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowshed Posted March 6 Report Share Posted March 6 1 hour ago, Capman said: I have been wondering about this. Playing the Man City way requires players of the highest levels of technical skill. They are players who are going to cost considerably sums of money, something we have repeatedly failed to spend. Within a world of FFP and parachute payments I am remain unconvinced that as a strategy it is likely to be successful. How can City attract the players with the highest levels of technical ability to play the ‘beautiful’ game? Surely a high intensity, counterattack strategy which is about pace is much more likely to be practical for a club seeking to reach the premier league for the first time? It’s almost as if the previous manager understood football! Bristol City don't play like Man City and are not attempting to. In regards to your point about high intensity, pace and counter attack would this not also require players that are highly skilled? Intensity and pace are skills. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silvio Dante Posted March 6 Author Report Share Posted March 6 26 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said: Neither we, nor most other teams in this tier of English football to be fair, are good enough to score many from slow, 80-pass build-ups. Football like fencing - probing for an opening. When it's slow, you are up against 10 bodies behind the ball - 11 if your opponents are defending the lead or playing for a draw. Inevitably in the ultra-slow approach someone will eventually under- or over-hit a pass, we'll concede possession and with the team in a forward attacking posture, there will then be a desperate scramble to get back to defend our box. Pace - and having the confidence to run at your opponents - is our friend. You cause panic. You catch folk out of position. Even if you don't get a shooting chance, they may need to foul you to stop the break. Agree with you 100%. I remember saying to one of the kids I coached when we played seven a side “how many players do you need to beat to score a goal” (This is at age 10, and the kid was quality - now in academy system) He said seven. We sat down and chatted. And I explained that if he beat player one, great. Maybe beat player two, great. But by the time he’s got to player three, if player one had anything about him, he’s back challenging. So now you’re up to 8. And it keeps coming - there will always be someone else working back. And he got it. Came back on the pitch, beat the first man and played an early ball. Goal. Happened several times. Same theory. You move quickly and exploit the opening. Always. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted March 6 Report Share Posted March 6 (edited) 11 hours ago, Charlie BCFC said: Fair I’m still behind Manning personally but that’s your opinion Interested in what gives you hope. The performance last night was an improvement but is it enough 1.1 PPG, 28-29% win ratio. Think the League table since Manning took over ie from Day 1 we are bottom 3rd, bottom 10 something like. Edited March 6 by Mr Popodopolous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abraham Romanovich Posted March 6 Report Share Posted March 6 11 hours ago, Davefevs said: We changed tonight from a predominant 424 block (with pressing triggered when appropriate) to something more like a 442 block (with less triggers). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fuber Posted March 6 Report Share Posted March 6 12 hours 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. I mean. If it wasn't for Max, it finishes 4-2. That comes from not taking Pring off or adjusting shape by Manning due to Ipswich's changes. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.