Tactical Genius?

[Numero Uno]

If you point out 14 points after 9 games you can say he had a decent START. Since then the only way to make his record look decent is to cherry pick the Coventry, Middlesbrough and Southampton games (and aren’t the club doing that right now!!).

[W-S-M Seagull]

27 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

Sorry but Millwall H has to be a 10. Most boring game I have ever witnessed. 

I was trying to be balanced. 

You're probably right. I went to the game and I have zero recollection of it which is quite telling. 

[DaveInSA]

The speed of decline is startling. How we won against Swansea must have been a miracle

I might go to one more game to witness the slide in person before the end of the season.

 

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

19 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

If you point out 14 points after 9 games you can say he had a decent START. Since then the only way to make his record look decent is to cherry pick the Coventry, Middlesbrough and Southampton games (and aren’t the club doing that right now!!).

Watford game in January, thought performance was passable.

That's about the only other really.

Edited March 17 by Mr Popodopolous

[Fontaineofallknowledge]

28 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

Because it’s 14 games ago and we’ve picked up 12 points in that time. It’s not cherry picking when people point out you’ve been crap for nigh on three months or a third of a season. Many managers get fired for less. It also covers this year to date.

On the other hand if you want to use 26 points from 23 games to make a point what point are you making? As for injuries didn’t the previous regime with a better record this season have MORE injuries?

The previous regime that had 6 windows and 3 pre seasons to shape the squad? More pointless comparisons

[JP Hampton]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

We are bored aren’t we?

since Watford (a), the halcyon day (days???) of Manningball, we can see the decline in our attacking play.

If you look at Build-up (*) attacks, Direct (**) attacks as opposed to other open play attacks from shorter possession phases or set-pieces, we are more effective when we press!  Yet we don’t attempt that, preferring a block more often than not.  Maybe Krause should stop looking at our opponents and look at ourselves!

QPR is the only game where Manning’s approach resulted in more than 2 build-up attacks, 6 in total.  And total open play xg was 0.43!!!

The decline in quality of open play chances is also evident.

Just three times in 14 games have we achieved a match xg of 1.00 from open play in a match.  Some real lowlights in there too!

Then compare to what’s happening at the other end!

I don’t think any of us really need a set of numbers to confirm this, we are seeing it with our eyes.  But there is no hiding from the fact we are regressing.  Do we need more evidence?

sorry, was bored watching Man Utd v Liverpool, although not anymore!!!

+++++

* Build-up attacks - The number of open play sequences that contains 10 or more passes and either ends in a shot or has at least one touch in the box.

** Direct attacks - The number of open play sequences that starts just inside the team's own half and has at least 50% of movement towards the opposition's goal and ends in a shot or a touch in the opposition box.

Thanks for this Dave. Makes interesting albeit gloomy reading. 

[JP Hampton]

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

I was trying to be balanced. 

You're probably right. I went to the game and I have zero recollection of it which is quite telling. 

Yes. I’m actually finding it hard to distinguish one game from another tbh. 

[Numero Uno]

5 minutes ago, Fontaineofallknowledge said:

The previous regime that had 6 windows and 3 pre seasons to shape the squad? More pointless comparisons

And no real money. Manning took over a bang average squad and is turning it into a relegation standard squad. The fact you are happy to ignore 12 points out of the last 42 as just some kind of minor blip is crazy imo.

[Fontaineofallknowledge]

1 minute ago, Numero Uno said:

And no real money. Manning took over a bang average squad and is turning it into a relegation standard squad. The fact you are happy to ignore 12 points out of the last 42 as just some kind of minor blip is crazy imo.

Its poor but I understand the context and believe in giving a manager at least one pre season (which are huge with squad building)

[W-S-M Seagull]

7 minutes ago, JP Hampton said:

Yes. I’m actually finding it hard to distinguish one game from another tbh. 

Reminds me of the whole Keith Millen/SOD era which is all just a blur to me. 

[JP Hampton]

Just now, W-S-M Seagull said:

Reminds me of the whole Keith Millen/SOD era which is all just a blur to me. 

Yep! I’m afraid Holden for me too. 

[W-S-M Seagull]

Just now, Fontaineofallknowledge said:

Its poor but I understand the context and believe in giving a manager at least one pre season (which are huge with squad building)

The context here is that the squad building had already been done for him. We had a very good pre season. 

[Numero Uno]

Just now, Fontaineofallknowledge said:

Its poor but I understand the context and believe in giving a manager at least one pre season (which are huge with squad building)

I would be happy to give him a pre-season if he actually shows something consistently over the next 8 matches that indicates three months of “relegation certainty” form is actually a blip. Context wise he did not take over a poor or troubled squad but now seems to have one.

I’m certainly not seeing it yet and if it carries on why would the club trust him with £5-10m of investment in the summer? In fact, if it carries on for two or three more games I’ll bet my bottom dollar that Steve intervenes and someone else will get pre-season.

[Dastardly and Muttley]

4 minutes ago, Fontaineofallknowledge said:

Its poor but I understand the context and believe in giving a manager at least one pre season (which are huge with squad building)

There’s only one thing which annoys me more about this club than Manning, and that’s the fools who say “give him a preseason”.

Why?! What has he done on the grass or in the transfer market to prove he’s worthy of anything!

[Rob k]

4 minutes ago, Dastardly and Muttley said:

There’s only one thing which annoys me more about this club than Manning, and that’s the fools who say “give him a preseason”.

Why?! What has he done on the grass or in the transfer market to prove he’s worthy of anything!

No different to the other ‘fools’ that think the people above Manning would get it right next time!!!

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Fontaineofallknowledge said:

Why start after Watford-rather arbitrary just to prove your point imo. Also no mention of injuries?

Because that is arbitrarily the game most people thought we saw the “purest” form of Manningball since he was appointed.  You’ll see that I included every game so people can take from it what they like.  Hardly being selective am I?  Please feel free to perform your own analysis on it and respond back, so we can have a discussion.

Personally I prefer 6 game for form.

Personally I see longer than 6 games as a trend.

Why not mention injuries?

Because until such point that Manning is unable to field a defence or a midfield or an attack in a fixture or has no senior subs to effect a game tactically or introduce fresh legs, I don’t think it’s hugely relevant in terms of evaluating performance.  Especially when he had a window to effect.

25 minutes ago, Fontaineofallknowledge said:

The previous regime that had 6 windows and 3 pre seasons to shape the squad? More pointless comparisons

5 windows.

+++++

How come you never (rarely?) add anything to support your backing of Manning, resorting to just dismissing others opinions.

Talk us through it.

Over to you.

Edited March 17 by Davefevs

[Barrs Court Red]

3 minutes ago, Rob k said:

No different to the other ‘fools’ that think the people above Manning would get it right next time!!!

Be careful what you wish for though. /s 

[1960maaan]

27 minutes ago, Fontaineofallknowledge said:

The previous regime that had 6 windows and 3 pre seasons to shape the squad? More pointless comparisons

Didn't we have 14 OOC that first pre season summer ? 
FFP meaning money was tight , rebuilding coaching & medical while not being allowed to replace senior Pros .
Even selling a prize asset he was given about the same as we spent in the Jan after Pearson left . 

Manning was supposed to improve what we had , so the windows are inconsequential , yes pre season might make a difference but are you sure it would make that much of a difference ?

[Simon bristol]

Im not sure if this includes the cup games, where im sure we can all agree, we gave everything we reasonably could have done, and the place was rocking.

the way we are set up is abysmal now though. Losing twine has been a massive blow, if he comes back and we start to look better i will have some sympathy for manning, we knew we were missing that creative player and he tried to get the best we realistically could have gone for,,, a physical striker that should have come in January, or even better last summer but wasnt signed, The striker should have taken precedence over anything else, i can only assume the lansdowns werent looking to spend what was needed.

[Sir Geoff]

21 minutes ago, Simon bristol said:

Im not sure if this includes the cup games, where im sure we can all agree, we gave everything we reasonably could have done, and the place was rocking.

the way we are set up is abysmal now though. Losing twine has been a massive blow, if he comes back and we start to look better i will have some sympathy for manning, we knew we were missing that creative player and he tried to get the best we realistically could have gone for,,, a physical striker that should have come in January, or even better last summer but wasnt signed, The striker should have taken precedence over anything else, i can only assume the lansdowns werent looking to spend what was needed.

Why is losing Twine a massive blow. We have no idea what his impact would or would not be. Played one full game. Hardly enough to suggest that it is a massive blow.

Perhaps if Manning played Knight in his natural position with Conway as a 10 we may not have needed Twine in the first place.

I accept long term we need more creativity, but why not try and use the players we already have (mehmeti has played 10, so has Sykes, i think) and coaching them to be better.

[1960maaan]

19 minutes ago, Simon bristol said:

Im not sure if this includes the cup games, where im sure we can all agree, we gave everything we reasonably could have done, and the place was rocking.

the way we are set up is abysmal now though. Losing twine has been a massive blow, if he comes back and we start to look better i will have some sympathy for manning, we knew we were missing that creative player and he tried to get the best we realistically could have gone for,,, a physical striker that should have come in January, or even better last summer but wasnt signed, The striker should have taken precedence over anything else, i can only assume the lansdowns werent looking to spend what was needed.

Twine has only played once , not sure what we are missing yet until he has a run. I also think it was a pointless signing , giving that I doubt we will sign him permanently .

I believe the Club (this time) when they say this (mythical?) striker wasn't available in January . I doubt he will be in the summer, seeing as how we want a big, strong, quick goalscorer ready for Championship football and within our budget. No doubt there are 23 other sides want the same .

Of course , there is another thing, we don't make chances , at least not lots.  There is no reason just having another striker would change our team for the better. We need the rest of the side to start creating first , then when TC and NW are missing lots , then I will think we need a new striker. 

I think we will have to take a chance on a foreign striker in the end , it's that or a L1/L2  punt

[George Rs]

15 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

I believe the Club (this time) when they say this (mythical?) striker wasn't available in January . I doubt he will be in the summer, seeing as how we want a big, strong, quick goalscorer ready for Championship football and within our budget. No doubt there are 23 other sides want the same .

Exactly this, to me it just screams inexperience from Tins & co. 

From the profile they are suggesting, they want a Mitrovic/Gyokeres. Would be like West ham saying they want Haaland. Well yes obviously everyone would want them but we have neither the money, the pull nor the scouting prowess (or haven’t shown it up to this point) to find one on the cheap. 

Edited March 17 by George Rs

[GrumpyGit]

Number of post match interviews where he described a different game to what the fans watched?

[sh1t_ref_again]

3 hours ago, Davefevs said:

We are bored aren’t we?

since Watford (a), the halcyon day (days???) of Manningball, we can see the decline in our attacking play.

If you look at Build-up (*) attacks, Direct (**) attacks as opposed to other open play attacks from shorter possession phases or set-pieces, we are more effective when we press!  Yet we don’t attempt that, preferring a block more often than not.  Maybe Krause should stop looking at our opponents and look at ourselves!

QPR is the only game where Manning’s approach resulted in more than 2 build-up attacks, 6 in total.  And total open play xg was 0.43!!!

The decline in quality of open play chances is also evident.

Just three times in 14 games have we achieved a match xg of 1.00 from open play in a match.  Some real lowlights in there too!

Then compare to what’s happening at the other end!

I don’t think any of us really need a set of numbers to confirm this, we are seeing it with our eyes.  But there is no hiding from the fact we are regressing.  Do we need more evidence?

sorry, was bored watching Man Utd v Liverpool, although not anymore!!!

+++++

* Build-up attacks - The number of open play sequences that contains 10 or more passes and either ends in a shot or has at least one touch in the box.

** Direct attacks - The number of open play sequences that starts just inside the team's own half and has at least 50% of movement towards the opposition's goal and ends in a shot or a touch in the opposition box.

Some interesting stats, after a few games under LM I thought we started to change style and seen some good signs without maybe the results.

Over the recent group of games we have regressed and at times gone away from trying to keep the ball and gone back more to how we played under nige of hitting hopeful balls in behind teams into the channels and trying to catch them, but in reality give the ball away quickly. The difference under Nige we pressed very well and won the ball back alot high up the pitch.

I never wanted NP sacked nor did i want LM, but equally do not pretend the football was always that great either under NP.

It's understanding why LM has gone away from Manningball he was trying to introduce to something that sits between the 2 styles and so ineffective. Comments have been made about stubborn to not change, but I think he has and for the worse.

Maybe trying to be to clever and altering our game plan each time we play depending the opponents?

lack of consistency of starting line up?

Maybe down to player confidence, we seemed to be moving the ball slow and with a lack of movement, players lacking bravery to take a player on when it's easier to play backwards.

Have we been missing James much more than we realise?

LM needs to start showing very quickly he can get results and has ideas on how the team will be set up and play next season otherwise the rest of the fans will follow those who want him out and maybe the people who make the decisions will also loose faith

 

 

[Leabrook]

4 hours ago, Davefevs said:

We are bored aren’t we?

since Watford (a), the halcyon day (days???) of Manningball, we can see the decline in our attacking play.

If you look at Build-up (*) attacks, Direct (**) attacks as opposed to other open play attacks from shorter possession phases or set-pieces, we are more effective when we press!  Yet we don’t attempt that, preferring a block more often than not.  Maybe Krause should stop looking at our opponents and look at ourselves!

QPR is the only game where Manning’s approach resulted in more than 2 build-up attacks, 6 in total.  And total open play xg was 0.43!!!

The decline in quality of open play chances is also evident.

Just three times in 14 games have we achieved a match xg of 1.00 from open play in a match.  Some real lowlights in there too!

Then compare to what’s happening at the other end!

I don’t think any of us really need a set of numbers to confirm this, we are seeing it with our eyes.  But there is no hiding from the fact we are regressing.  Do we need more evidence?

sorry, was bored watching Man Utd v Liverpool, although not anymore!!!

+++++

* Build-up attacks - The number of open play sequences that contains 10 or more passes and either ends in a shot or has at least one touch in the box.

** Direct attacks - The number of open play sequences that starts just inside the team's own half and has at least 50% of movement towards the opposition's goal and ends in a shot or a touch in the opposition box.

Are you calling yourself a tactical genius?!

[Davefevs]

16 minutes ago, Leabrook said:

Are you calling yourself a tactical genius?!

Hell, no!

[The Journalist]

47 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

Some interesting stats, after a few games under LM I thought we started to change style and seen some good signs without maybe the results.

Over the recent group of games we have regressed and at times gone away from trying to keep the ball and gone back more to how we played under nige of hitting hopeful balls in behind teams into the channels and trying to catch them, but in reality give the ball away quickly. The difference under Nige we pressed very well and won the ball back alot high up the pitch.

I never wanted NP sacked nor did i want LM, but equally do not pretend the football was always that great either under NP.

It's understanding why LM has gone away from Manningball he was trying to introduce to something that sits between the 2 styles and so ineffective. Comments have been made about stubborn to not change, but I think he has and for the worse.

Maybe trying to be to clever and altering our game plan each time we play depending the opponents?

lack of consistency of starting line up?

Maybe down to player confidence, we seemed to be moving the ball slow and with a lack of movement, players lacking bravery to take a player on when it's easier to play backwards.

Have we been missing James much more than we realise?

LM needs to start showing very quickly he can get results and has ideas on how the team will be set up and play next season otherwise the rest of the fans will follow those who want him out and maybe the people who make the decisions will also loose faith

 

 

I always qualify this sort of thing by saying many of you watch way more of us than I do, but this is one thing that's definitely stood out to me too.

It was pretty obvious when he first came in he wanted us to be more patient/less aggressive both in and out of possession, but we've gone from picking our moments to press to actually just letting the other team have the ball and sitting in a lower block.

I wasn't really convinced what he was trying to do from the outset really suited us, in all honesty, but what we've been for the past dozen games or so is so far away from the team he inherited. It's been a complete car crash.

Has the squad surprised him? Is it not what he expected? Has he lost trust in the players? Or is the message just not getting across?

Whatever it is, it's pretty major alarm bells for me when a manager goes down that sort of road - especially within 4/5 months!

[REDOXO]

24 minutes ago, The Journalist said:

I always qualify this sort of thing by saying many of you watch way more of us than I do, but this is one thing that's definitely stood out to me too.

It was pretty obvious when he first came in he wanted us to be more patient/less aggressive both in and out of possession, but we've gone from picking our moments to press to actually just letting the other team have the ball and sitting in a lower block.

I wasn't really convinced what he was trying to do from the outset really suited us, in all honesty, but what we've been for the past dozen games or so is so far away from the team he inherited. It's been a complete car crash.

Has the squad surprised him? Is it not what he expected? Has he lost trust in the players? Or is the message just not getting across?

Whatever it is, it's pretty major alarm bells for me when a manager goes down that sort of road - especially within 4/5 months!

The ball so often goes backwards in an attempt to maintain possession. However the ball will often end back with Max who will end up being forced to larrrup it. 
 

This will result in a battle for the ball or a throw in. In turn conceding the ball. The net result of playing this way is the inevitability of giving the ball away with little sensible service to the forwards. 
 

It is agony to watch a team with some very decent players being turned into rubbish, while simultaneously hearing that it’s the players fault or the latest one coming from club sources the players are not good enough ….If that is the case Pearson was a way better manager than given credit for, as he was playing U18 and U21s…Seven in the match day squad for Cardiff because our injuries were so bad  

The whole thing is just effing nonsense! And I am bloody sick of it!