Okay, not really slating that tonight

[Davefevs]

2 hours 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! 

@Cowshed you say we aren’t attempting to play like Man City, you may be right.  But are we trying to play the CFG way? Over the last weeks we’ve seen several posts, quoting articles like coaches voice that come out of a style akin to CFG’s method, which may or may not be a more standard coaching methodology.

Ian Gay had the temerity to suggest McKenna was surprised to see how Manning set-up on the FBC pod today.  Yet McKenna had referenced exactly that in his pre-match press-conference.  They might’ve struggled to break it down first half, but they didn’t come the end.

Back to Pep, I’d suggest we have a superior coach who understands cause and effect, and understands it real-time, in-match, and is able to adapt from a well-honed toolkit.

Manning appears to just have “manual” (yes, I know it’s not a manual) and if it’s not on pg242, he’s stuffed!

[Capman]

1 hour ago, Cowshed said:

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. 

 

True, I’m just not convinced that pace and intensity are as expensive skills in a footballing sense as the skill of playing possession football. How many defenders can you think of who have the skill to do it constantly and effectively? Particularly as, when the defenders get it wrong the opposition are through on goal. 
But I am the first to admit, I have never played football at a reasonable level and have no coaching badges so I could  turn out to be wrong. I’m just happy to get the views of others. So do you feel there is no cost issue with the approach to style of play? Or could it be that collecting the right squad may be more expensive for different styles? 

[Cowshed]

9 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

@Cowshed you say we aren’t attempting to play like Man City, you may be right.  But are we trying to play the CFG way? Over the last weeks we’ve seen several posts, quoting articles like coaches voice that come out of a style akin to CFG’s method, which may or may not be a more standard coaching methodology.

Ian Gay had the temerity to suggest McKenna was surprised to see how Manning set-up on the FBC pod today.  Yet McKenna had referenced exactly that in his pre-match press-conference.  They might’ve struggled to break it down first half, but they didn’t come the end.

Back to Pep, I’d suggest we have a superior coach who understands cause and effect, and understands it real-time, in-match, and is able to adapt from a well-honed toolkit.

Manning appears to just have “manual” (yes, I know it’s not a manual) and if it’s not on pg242, he’s stuffed!

CFG has existed for ten years, There are 11/12/13 clubs in the group. Bolivar build up from the back, so do Man City so do New York and so do clubs who have been playing their variations of possession football longer than the CFG group existed. 

I recently posted the Liverpool decision making tree, those principles are used right across football. They apply to the teams in the CFG group. The principles were standard coaching methodology, but how those standards are applied widely differs. 

Bristol City may and do use similar principles to Liverpool, or Man City, or Brighton or any number of teams but the football clearly differs.  

Bristol City play very differently to Man City. The sub principles, that break down the approach to the football are very very different from the GK to the inverting FB's, rotating CB, the patterns, the lopsided formations .. That is unique.

27 minutes ago, Capman said:

True, I’m just not convinced that pace and intensity are as expensive skills in a footballing sense as the skill of playing possession football. How many defenders can you think of who have the skill to do it constantly and effectively? Particularly as, when the defenders get it wrong the opposition are through on goal. 
But I am the first to admit, I have never played football at a reasonable level and have no coaching badges so I could  turn out to be wrong. I’m just happy to get the views of others. So do you feel there is no cost issue with the approach to style of play? Or could it be that collecting the right squad may be more expensive for different styles? 

There is a cost issue with any approach to football.

Being able to run explosively and have a high recovery speed post explosive movement is a skill. Pressing a ball for intensely twenty seconds one player takes ten seconds to recover another takes two minutes. That is sometimes called defensive tactical intensity. Think Famara v Bobby Reid. High DTI is prized by some teams because they need intense runners. Add pace. These physical elements have costs.

Bristol City are not in the hes a great header of the ball, hes great one v one, hes positionally great, he is really strong, he is really quick, he can bring the ball out, he has range long, and all that market. Bristol City can prioritize elements of players abilities that most suit the football. Compromise can also be made where players don't have to be of a level across all their skills, Marlon Pack (yes midfield) distributed the ball efficiently, while many can run faster pushing a wheel barrow. That was synching aptitudes and that is what any progressing and successful team do. Improvement in key positions, better than average, good at key skills the team needs is not that elite market. 

 

 

[Clutton Caveman]

14 hours 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. 

Don't agree, when Wes was skinning Cam changes were needed and they didn't come

[marcofisher]

14 hours 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. 

Listening to some of the views on the podcasts today is insufferable. We conceded 3 goals and a penalty all down the flanks and we changed absolutely nothing to try and nullify this, even after leading twice!

I remember a number of times Pearson hooking a defender if he was getting exposed or putting another player there up support and to sure it up. Absolutely no risk of that happening last night. 
 

Mind-blowing the amount of comments saying “that’s on the players” or “can’t blame the manager for that” or even “Ipswich were too good”. Anyone with half a brain could see where we were getting exposed following their subs and Manning did nothing about it tactically or by making changes for circa 35 minutes until the end of the game.

Saw a comment saying James has fallen out with Manning. It is likely hot air, but I wouldn’t be surprised. The players were absolutely hung out to dry last night by Manning’s tactics after putting themselves in a great position to win the game. 

[Davefevs]

18 minutes ago, marcofisher said:

Listening to some of the views on the podcasts today is insufferable. We conceded 3 goals and a penalty all down the flanks and we changed absolutely nothing to try and nullify this, even after leading twice!

I remember a number of times Pearson hooking a defender if he was getting exposed or putting another player there up support and to sure it up. Absolutely no risk of that happening last night. 
 

Mind-blowing the amount of comments saying “that’s on the players” or “can’t blame the manager for that” or even “Ipswich were too good”. Anyone with half a brain could see where we were getting exposed following their subs and Manning did nothing about it tactically or by making changes for circa 35 minutes until the end of the game.

Saw a comment saying James has fallen out with Manning. It is likely hot air, but I wouldn’t be surprised. The players were absolutely hung out to dry last night by Manning’s tactics after putting themselves in a great position to win the game. 

Which podcast?

[marcofisher]

46 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Which podcast?

3 peeps contributors seemed optimistic to me with the performance in their pod and I couldn’t understand why.

Haven't listened to FBC in full yet bar a snippet live, but judging by the comments on here about a certain contributor’s comments, and the title of the pod, I’m expecting similar views from some.

Edited March 6 by marcofisher

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, marcofisher said:

3 peeps contributors seemed optimistic to me with the performance in their pod and I couldn’t understand why.

Haven't listened to FBC in full yet bar a snippet live, but judging by the comments on here about a certain contributor’s comments, and the title of the pod, I’m expecting similar views from some.

Ta, this morning’s FBC pod was interesting, but not as lively as it might’ve been.  We spent 50+ mins discussing the game, so the topic of Manning and his future didn’t get the time it possibly deserved, as we finished at 10

[marcofisher]

12 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Ta, this morning’s FBC pod was interesting, but not as lively as it might’ve been.  We spent 50+ mins discussing the game, so the topic of Manning and his future didn’t get the time it possibly deserved, as we finished at 10

Funny, FBC spent a large part of the pod each week discussing NP’s future when he was manager.

Used to be that each of the pods were polar opposite in their views, which wasn’t so bad when listening to both after the game. Now it seems FBC in general have U-turned on criticising the board or management, guest dependent. 

[Davefevs]

29 minutes ago, marcofisher said:

Funny, FBC spent a large part of the pod each week discussing NP’s future when he was manager.

Used to be that each of the pods were polar opposite in their views, which wasn’t so bad when listening to both after the game. Now it seems FBC in general have U-turned on criticising the board or management, guest dependent. 

Worth listening to last 10-15 mins of FBC today if you can’t stomach all of it.

[TheJudge07]

6 hours ago, Davefevs said:

@Cowshed you say we aren’t attempting to play like Man City, you may be right.  But are we trying to play the CFG way? Over the last weeks we’ve seen several posts, quoting articles like coaches voice that come out of a style akin to CFG’s method, which may or may not be a more standard coaching methodology.

Ian Gay had the temerity to suggest McKenna was surprised to see how Manning set-up on the FBC pod today.  Yet McKenna had referenced exactly that in his pre-match press-conference.  They might’ve struggled to break it down first half, but they didn’t come the end.

Back to Pep, I’d suggest we have a superior coach who understands cause and effect, and understands it real-time, in-match, and is able to adapt from a well-honed toolkit.

Manning appears to just have “manual” (yes, I know it’s not a manual) and if it’s not on pg242, he’s stuffed!

And Pep has the luxury of managing at Barcelona, Bayern and Man City. He has technically superb players. AND in his first season he couldnt get City going and had to change it with £££££.  He aint done it with a low ranked team like us. Vincent Kompany did at Burnley and they were miles the best team in the Championship but this was because they had the players to do it at that level. Take it in to the PL and they are one of the worst.  Manning clearly does not have the versatility to play different ways and he certainly does not have the players to play it with us. From an attacking perspective we are worse under him than Pearson. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

I am not a fan of Manning's tactics often to put it mildly although I would point out that Leeds under Bielsa, Brentford under Frank played possession dominant yet high octane football.

Nor Parachute clubs. Brentford did adapt, Leeds had injuries bad ones and took some hammering plus should've tweaked it 

Neither have done a Burnley though so I think it is a bit all or nothing in "Manning is trying to play Pep ball and we should be counterattacking".

Plenty of in-between categories.