Tinnion on SotC

[Shauntaylor85]

47 minutes ago, exAtyeoMax said:

I do too. Most people I've spoken to have a level of respect for him, a wariness possibly coloured by his media profile but most recognise what he did at Leicester. I don't know anyone who dislikes him or talks about him negatively.

He showed an interest in taking over after Cotts left.

As did Warnock allegedly yet we went for LJ! 

[Superjack]

4 minutes ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

Well that's how I remember the radio interview! Can still hear it now, like it was yesterday.

He was cryptic in the extreme and, when pushed, merely said "it's a big city" - leaving the interviewer and listeners none the wiser. Which I found quite funny at the time.

I liked him then and I still like him now but, while there may have been interest from our side back then, I think it's true he had bigger and better options than basketcase Bristol City.

He was wise to be wary of Lansdown back then and, in hindsight, may regret having said yes to him all these years later.

I think he phoned Lansdown for the job.

 

He may regret that, but I doubt it as he has fallen in love with North Somerset.

[Merrick's Marvels]

2 minutes ago, Superjack said:

I think he phoned Lansdown for the job.

 

He may regret that, but I doubt it as he has fallen in love with North Somerset.

Yes he did but he didn't have to accept once the T&Cs were explained to him!

I'm glad he did mind.

[Shauntaylor85]

6 hours ago, Tim Monaghan said:

Right, I've just listened to this interview. 

So, lots of U18's training with the first team. Some not playing in the U21's because they want to keep the squad together. Reason some of them haven't travelled as bench fillers is due to timescales of games at the fatigue of the travelling to sit on the bench. Some are also stepping up to the U21's because a lot of them are out on loan gaining higher level experience. BT - "No problem with them being on the bench if they prove themselves". 

It sounds very much to me that they think the best of the U21's are out on loan, the rest aren't going to make it, so they want to keep the better batch together in the U18's to get ready for the U21's. Then there is a really good batch of U16's coming up. I really don't see what the issue is here?  We've got a chance of getting into a MAJOR youth final, so why wouldn't you focus on it?  Class of 92' for example, they all stayed together. David Beckham for example only made 9 U21's appearances. Other than that, it was at U18 level until he went out on loan to Preston when he was 19. So an argument could be made that these kids are being pushed and given more opportunities than most at this age. 

Look at recent history of winners! Do you not think it would be good for the academy to have this as an attraction piece? We moan enough (funny that) about not being able to attract the top young talent, then also moan when we're trying to give us the selling points in doing so. 
 

  

Some pretty decent teams there, eh.  But lets not focus on what an achievement it would be, but of course, lets hammer the club for not putting these kids on the bench with the first team even though they aren't even ready. They're training with the first team, and that's all that matters in terms of reaching those levels. We all know if we put a 17 year old on and he has a stinker, we'd all be saying "whats he doing, he clearly isn't ready, his confidence will be shoot now". 

Moaning for moaning's sake for me I'm afraid.

As for the rest of it, well, you can't sack Pearson with an injured squad and then blame injuries for the new coach not succeeding. That's insane.  McKenna stats is madness. If you're going to come out with a stat like that, you have to get it right .  Comparing us to Coventry is a joke too. Not sure if that was a slight shot at the owners for not spending, but maybe not.  

Agree that the signing of Dickie for £600k was a steal. Jason Knight, Hayden Roberts (free), Ross McCrorie signing. Not mentioned, but Max Bird, Josh Stokes and Adam Murphy (best young player in Ireland; BT's quote).  Cornick was a bit of a stinker though wasn't he. 

So, apart from the Coventry and McKenna gaff which was strange, I don't see much wrong with the interview.  He's clearly passionate about Bristol City, and MA was hated because of his corporate language. The club literally can't win, can it.  

I cannot believe how much attention the under 18 piece had, certainly over first team matters. We beat Swindon Town 1.0 for goodness sake. What is the big thing? Hardly Man City or Liverpool. 

[harvey54]

From legend...........to bellend

Edited March 12 by harvey54

[Bat Fastard]

2 hours ago, Sir Geoff said:

So in that vain NP gets credit too for Dickie. This thread though is about Tins and you referred to his value signings. I was merely pointing out that you have to counter balance that with his poor signings. Why have you made it about NP and not the subject matter.

It is a team effort and Tins is part of the team.  Nige used to say that he did not negotiate transfers, so that must have been the remit of either Tins or one of the directors.  Of course the point of this thread is to pile onto Tins.

[2015]

20 hours ago, Harry said:

Yep. 
I had a conversation with Tinnion back in early September and he mentioned this. 

Basically for a number of years now we’ve been playing our kids ‘up a level’. 
The 16’s play in the 18’s, the 18’s play in the 21’s etc. 

It’s designed around a progressive pathway and affording the kids opportunity at higher age groups and thus higher quality levels. You could argue it’s been quite successful. 
It’s also allowed us to loan out players from our 21’s, because we’ll have the 18’s playing for the 21’s instead. 
 

In September, I asked about the reason there weren’t so many 21’s out on loan this year as yet. The answer was because the focus this year was on winning the 18’s Youth Cup. 
Further reasoning was that, and I quote “we’re really proud of the academy and what we’ve done, but we’ve got nothing to actually show for it, so we want some silverware”. 
 

So yes, Kid, we have purposely sabotaged our successful youth model (with knock on effect to the 21’s loan opportunities and 1st team experience opportunity) because we want to win the cup. 
Who was it said that at that level it’s not about winning it’s about the development of the players? We seem to have said “bollox to that this year, we want the cup”. 

Aw they want a little trophy to show at the 'HPC' isn't that cute

[The Coach]

29 minutes ago, Superjack said:

I think he phoned Lansdown for the job.

 

He may regret that, but I doubt it as he has fallen in love with North Somerset.

I thought SL rang NP directly on a Friday to offer him the job, and Pearson spent the weekend to think about it before accepting the role on a Sunday.

[Ian M]

Having heaped pressure on Manning with the top 6 stuff, are we saying Challis has to go if he doesn’t achieve the owner’s requirement of winning the Youth Cup?

[alexukhc]

5 minutes ago, Ian M said:

Having heaped pressure on Manning with the top 6 stuff, are we saying Challis has to go if he doesn’t achieve the owner’s requirement of winning the Youth Cup?

Mickey Bell ain’t it?

[Superjack]

22 minutes ago, The Coach said:

I thought SL rang NP directly on a Friday to offer him the job, and Pearson spent the weekend to think about it before accepting the role on a Sunday.

I think that's true, but the first contact came from Pearson.

[Sir Geoff]

34 minutes ago, Bat Fastard said:

It is a team effort and Tins is part of the team.  Nige used to say that he did not negotiate transfers, so that must have been the remit of either Tins or one of the directors.  Of course the point of this thread is to pile onto Tins.

No, the point of your original post was to highlight Tins making good financial transfer deals. I merely asked you to balance it with his poor ones. 

You keep making it about managers.

Are you a politician cos you still haven't answered the question ?

[Lew-T]

5 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said:

We're setting people up to fail, time and time again. 

This is so true. Simply through our incompetence…

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 hours ago, WeAreThePigs said:

Wasn’t there long enough or achieve enough to label it a success. 

I probably shouldn't but people can interpret the facts as they like. No he wasn't there any more than 20, League games but while he can build he also made quite the decent short term impact..

Just checked.

Took them until Matchday 12 to win their first game.

Pre NP

P16W1D6L9F9A30Pts9GD-21

Under NP

P20W7D4L9F25A27Pts25GD-2

Was clearly not sacked for footballing reasons, imagine him with Parachute Payments..how dominant could that be.

[ZiderMeUp]

23 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Dave - you just made my evening, thank you.

Two simple (not in a bad way) but brilliant posts. Ledge!

Surely in the past every club were playing 4-4-2 with one big and one little striker, they didn’t negate each other.

 

The main difference with modern football is every opponent is analysed in minute detail.  Everybody knows your strengths, weaknesses in great detail.  What every single players strengths, weaknesses are, where teams pass too, where players pass too etc.  That’s what has made the game boring rather than formations imo.

[Lrrr]

1 hour ago, alexukhc said:

Mickey Bell ain’t it?

Bell is assistant

[Davefevs]

2 minutes ago, ZiderMeUp said:

Surely in the past every club were playing 4-4-2 with one big and one little striker, they didn’t negate each other.

 

The main difference with modern football is every opponent is analysed in minute detail.  Everybody knows your strengths, weaknesses in great detail.  What every single players strengths, weaknesses are, where teams pass too, where players pass too etc.  That’s what has made the game boring rather than formations imo.

Totally.  You’re preaching to the converted…formations are overrated…and not the be all and end all that many make out.  For me I’m more about players and then pairings / partnerships.

[Mr Popodopolous]

3 minutes ago, ZiderMeUp said:

Surely in the past every club were playing 4-4-2 with one big and one little striker, they didn’t negate each other.

 

The main difference with modern football is every opponent is analysed in minute detail.  Everybody knows your strengths, weaknesses in great detail.  What every single players strengths, weaknesses are, where teams pass too, where players pass too etc.  That’s what has made the game boring rather than formations imo.

In 2007-08 first half of the season and some selected games after Christmas, we had a bit of a tactical edge in tbis regard.

A lot of the Championship was 4-4-2..2..when we had Noble behind the striker this gave us a bit more control and numerical advantage, at home more so.

Able to slot between midfield and supporting attack in the 2 phases.

[Mr Popodopolous]

5 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Totally.  You’re preaching to the converted…formations are overrated…and not the be all and end all that many make out.  For me I’m more about players and then pairings / partnerships.

Are they though? Extreme example but.

If you played Xavi and Iniesta in a 4-4-2 and hit long balls up to Messi, had Pedro in a wide position I rather suspect Barcelona would be less effective.

Mourinho strongly pointed out that Makelele and that 3rd man gave Chelsea a big edge over the much more 4-4-2 oriented PL at that time, albeit he had a huge budget. Unlike..

...Big Sam at Bolton too a big advocate of 4-3-3/4-5-1 in those times. More physical and counter attacking sure.

Edited March 12 by Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

If you played Xavi and Iniesta in a 4-4-2 and hit long balls up to Messi, had Pedro in a wide position I rather suspect Barcelona would be less effective.

Why would 442 imply you hit long balls to Messi.  Formation doesn’t imply that at all.

[petehinton]

1 hour ago, alexukhc said:

Mickey Bell ain’t it?

Joint lead coach role (aka both are head coach, like the Cowley brothers at Lincoln etc). Mickey was in charge of the 16s but moved up to 18s. 
 

Have heard from a few people that they are moving up to take over the 21s next season though.  

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

Why would 442 imply you hit long balls to Messi.  Formation doesn’t imply that at all.

Maybe not long balls...but if you dropped Busquets out and put another striker in not sure they're so effective.

Messi as a winger or?

Could always do a 4-2-2-2.

The interesting Mourinho quote was in this article.

https://statsbomb.com/articles/soccer/meat-potatoes-4-4-bleeping-2/

[38MC]

14 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Why would 442 imply you hit long balls to Messi.  Formation doesn’t imply that at all.

I’d go even further and question why is ‘long ball’ a problem. We aren’t talking Joe Kinnear at Wimbledon; even Man City’s pep play ‘long ball’ with Ederson’s distribution at times, but the coaching manual tells you that you must recycle the ball between defence and midfield until the opposition are drawn out of position incessantly. I say bollox, try the diagonal in behind for the pacy winger to do their magic (cut inside our take on the outside) and hey, if it goes out, let’s hope they’re as crap at throw ins as we are! 
that can be done with a 4-3-3 easily (Liverpool do). So I agree with you formations overrated, but playing direct is sniffed at, stupidly, when many top teams play a very mixed style. Too many teams try to emulate a sole style whereas the top teams who are capable of drawing out opposition even themselves play pretty direct at times. 

Edited March 12 by 38MC

[Davefevs]

2 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Maybe not long balls...but if you dropped Busquets out and put another striker in not sure they're so effective.

Messi as a winger or?

Could always do a 4-2-2-2.

The interesting Mourinho quote was in this article.

https://statsbomb.com/articles/soccer/meat-potatoes-4-4-bleeping-2/

Sorry, Mr P, you can throw all kinds of “if” scenarios at me, you won’t change my mind.  Formations have a part to play but nowhere near as important as players and how they play for each other.  It’s my foundation.  You can’t  change that, you will not break me!

[Davefevs]

3 minutes ago, 38MC said:

I’d go even further and question why is ‘long ball’ a problem. We aren’t talking Joe Kinnear at Wimbledon; even Man City’s pep play ‘long ball’ with Ederson’s distribution at times, but the coaching manual tells you that you must recycle the ball between defence and midfield until the opposition are drawn out of possession incessantly. I say bollox, try the diagonal in behind for the pacy winger to do their magic (cut inside our take on the outside) and hey, if it goes out, let’s hope they’re as crap at throw ins as we are! 
that can be done with a 4-3-3 easily (Liverpool do). So I agree with you formations overrated, but playing direct is sniffed at, stupidly, when many top teams play a very mixed style. Too many teams try to emulate a sole style whereas the top teams who are capable of drawing out opposition even themselves play pretty direct at times. 

Quite.  Football snobbery.

Why did we win on Sunday, because we changed the way we played and disrupted the way Swansea played.  No change in formation, all about players and change of intent and positioning.

[YorkshireSection]

On 11/03/2024 at 20:30, Superjack said:

Manning is an atrocious appointment. But I don't have anything against the bloke personally. He's far too boring to extract any such reaction. 

But he needs to go. Tinnion needs to go. 

But above and beyond all else, the Lansdowns need to go.

This.

 

Sums up exactly what needs to happen ASAP, we will NEVER achieve ANYTHING with the current ownership and if you doubt that, then please look back over the last 20 something years and count our achievements (not the embarrassing JPT wins), its laughable to expect anything other than further failure, its almost as if they are happy to just rinse & repeat, continuing to bounce between this league & the one below, where we are a bigger fish and can compete without having to place a hairline crack in their nest egg.

 

I honestly believe "THEIR" expectations do not match the majority of ours "The Fans".

 

People may say: "be careful what you wish for we could be Gas", but were not and its their abject failure that maybe makes our situation and the atmosphere generally apathetic rather than down right toxic. (For now).

 

Lansdown OUT

[Mr Popodopolous]

6 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Sorry, Mr P, you can throw all kinds of “if” scenarios at me, you won’t change my mind.  Formations have a part to play but nowhere near as important as players and how they play for each other.  It’s my foundation.  You can’t  change that, you will not break me!

That's fair Dave, yeah players and cohesion are very important.

Not totally against 4-4-2 myself but it depends on setup..Cavani and Suarez as a pair in WC 2018 was one.

[alexukhc]

13 minutes ago, petehinton said:

Joint lead coach role (aka both are head coach, like the Cowley brothers at Lincoln etc). Mickey was in charge of the 16s but moved up to 18s. 
 

Have heard from a few people that they are moving up to take over the 21s next season though.  

Done alright since leaving Clevedon ain’t he? good coach or another job for the boys?  

[38MC]

Just now, Davefevs said:

Quite.  Football snobbery.

Why did we win on Sunday, because we changed the way we played and disrupted the way Swansea played.  No change in formation, all about players and change of intent and positioning.

That’s why I take issue with a lot of ‘new wave’ managers. They’re too rigid. They think recycle, prod, go again is the only way and want to play that way, but the really top managers, their sides mix it up far more than any of these wannabes want to allow their sides the freedom to do so. 
 

 

[petehinton]

3 minutes ago, alexukhc said:

Done alright since leaving Clevedon ain’t he? good coach or another job for the boys?  

No really good coach.
 

Quality of coaching within the academy was very poor after Luke Williams left for MK until he came in, let’s put it that way!