Performance or results

[Dastardly and Muttley]

For me, we’re safe. Preseason begins here. This should be Manning making his mark on how he wants to play going into next season and showing that in performances on the field.

But Manning doesn’t know how he wants to play and is coaching scared, so we’ll see poor performances and a few more draws.

[Davefevs]

49 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

I want to see that we can impose ourselves on teams and not be passive and wait for the opposition to let us play. 
If we get performances, they would likely lead to results, but I want to see signs that next year will be worth the effort of going. 
Yesterday was an awful watch , Dickie missing was massive and so many having off days couldn't be expected. But after good early positive subs Vs Plymouth , we were back to waiting for 60 minutes and changing players and not plans. 
We could have put TC on for Twine and play 2 up top or 1 & 1 , anything to give them more problems. We were better in the 2nd half, but it felt like hanging on to what we had , rather than trying to win the game. With nothing really hanging on the result, that is disappointing . 

Not sure if Mehmeti got a knock , but swapping him for Cornick was odd . AM had supplied a few of the more interesting moments , if he had to come off we could have had another look at the other loanee . If Mebude isn't going to play from the bench and isn't going to play for U21s , I'm not sure why he hasn't been sent back. 

Assume you mean McCrorie.

It facilitated the switch to a back-3.  FWIW if it was based on first half performance, then it should’ve been Sykes who came off.  I thought Mehmeti was bright (low bar).

48 minutes ago, FNQ said:

Not so sure SG.. they scored 5 away at Sunderland last week and 0-0 vs Southampton yesterday was a good result, John Eustace has them playing well. They'll be looking to win this one and Szmodic will be looking to add to his seasons tally for sure, and we can’t keep hoping for Max to save our sorry arses..

The “hammered” (exaggerated) Ipswich the game before too, losing 1-0 to a keeper error.  Their trend is

A good test, a good one to observe.

42 minutes ago, Kibs said:

My interpretation of his comment was that they send the team out with the attacking intent, but the Championship is so tight that sometimes how the opposition play doesn’t allow it. 

I was actually quite pleased to hear that, and accept it to a degree, but my concern is that they rarely seem to be able to figure out a way to change it. 

I’d like to see them be much bolder and braver in their approach (pre-game and in game), but I’m just not sure they have it in them! 

Maybe it’s just me, but the modern game/coaches seem to massively over analyse, overthink and try to be too clever. 

Im not really sure what sort of team we are now, or what we are trying to be. 

Its a massive summer for him, and I think even some of the more patient fans will lose patience pretty quickly next season if there isn’t early signs of improvement in performances. 

 

Yes, I don’t think the reply was as black and white as I portrayed, but unlike you who was pleased with it, I wasn’t.  But your concern matches mine.

The rest of your post really resonates with me, especially the second bold bit.

21 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Always performances, regardless of what stage of the season we're at.

Look after the performances and the results will look after themselves.

and performances can come in very different ways too.

essentially, play better than your opponent will serve you well by and large.

[pongo88]

I don’t care about the rest of the season as I’ve lost interest. It’s next season that I’m worried about. Currently we have a team that usually scores either 0 or 1 goal per match with the league position boosted by a good defence (only 3 teams in the Championship have conceded less goals). That’s a very imbalanced team / style of play. It doesn’t matter if City sign a new striker in the close season as the style of play doesn’t create many clear chances. I’m sure Tommy Conway would score more playing in a different team. If he feels the same he’ll be gone in the summer. 
 

Look at the teams near the bottom of the league. You can ignore Rotherham as they are the perennial yo-yo team, and Plymouth as they’ve just been promoted. For me, City now are no better than any of the other clubs near the bottom and, unfortunately, that’s where I expect the team to be next season 

[1960maaan]

5 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Assume you mean McCrorie.

It facilitated the switch to a back-3.  FWIW if it was based on first half performance, then it should’ve been Sykes who came off.  I thought Mehmeti was bright (low bar).

Yes , though the change maybe should have been Twine. Sykes wasn't great but he tries, Twine was a passenger for the most part. Sykes has played 10 as well and even poor I'd keep him on. 

Agree totally about Mehmeti .

[mozo]

6 minutes ago, pongo88 said:

I don’t care about the rest of the season as I’ve lost interest. It’s next season that I’m worried about. Currently we have a team that usually scores either 0 or 1 goal per match with the league position boosted by a good defence (only 3 teams in the Championship have conceded less goals). That’s a very imbalanced team / style of play. It doesn’t matter if City sign a new striker in the close season as the style of play doesn’t create many clear chances. I’m sure Tommy Conway would score more playing in a different team. If he feels the same he’ll be gone in the summer. 
 

Look at the teams near the bottom of the league. You can ignore Rotherham as they are the perennial yo-yo team, and Plymouth as they’ve just been promoted. For me, City now are no better than any of the other clubs near the bottom and, unfortunately, that’s where I expect the team to be next season 

2021-22: 15 wins, 62 goals, -15 gd

2022-23: 15 wins, 55 goals, -1 gd

2023-24: 15 wins, 46 goals, -1 gd

So we can improve on wins and gd this season, but goals continue to decline. 

[1960maaan]

9 minutes ago, pongo88 said:

I don’t care about the rest of the season as I’ve lost interest. It’s next season that I’m worried about. Currently we have a team that usually scores either 0 or 1 goal per match with the league position boosted by a good defence (only 3 teams in the Championship have conceded less goals). That’s a very imbalanced team / style of play. It doesn’t matter if City sign a new striker in the close season as the style of play doesn’t create many clear chances. I’m sure Tommy Conway would score more playing in a different team. If he feels the same he’ll be gone in the summer. 
 

Look at the teams near the bottom of the league. You can ignore Rotherham as they are the perennial yo-yo team, and Plymouth as they’ve just been promoted. For me, City now are no better than any of the other clubs near the bottom and, unfortunately, that’s where I expect the team to be next season 

Sadly I agree.

What I will say, I want performances now. I need to see improvement this season as we won't have loads to spend and a large chunk will have to go on filling holes. 
We could lose a ball winner ( Williams ) , playmaker & leader ( James ) , A decent striker ( Conway ) apart from any surprises . Coming in we have 2 kids and Bird , who is a bit of an unknown (to me at least) .  Conway isn't of massive value ATM , so if we get £3m , add whatever "warchest"  that is released and we might have maybe £10m . That's optimistic and thinking that Jon & Dad feel they have to back their judgement  . That will probably have to buy 2 MFs , 2 strikers and a  CB before we start to bolster the squad numbers. That's going to be tough and I think we will have to risk some lower League hopefuls for sure. 
As it stands I am not confident.

[BrizzleRed]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Apparently attacking intent only comes if the opposition allow that.  It’s not about “us”, according to Hoggy (who sings from the same hymn sheet as Manning).

That’s a slightly facetious comment, but with a large element of truth about it.

That’s what we have, a team / game-plan based on what the opposition allow us, rather than us imposing our style / identity.

I can’t wait!  

That’s certainly what we’ve witnessed so far and I’d hoped that was just while we transition to Manning’s proposed style.  

Unless I’m misinterpreting Hogg’s comment, having our attacking style dictated by the opposition is an awful indictment of our passive tactics and lack of ability to impose ourselves on the opposition.

Can’t see it ending well if that’s an indication of the extent of Manning’s ultimate ambition and tactical prowess.

[Davefevs]

3 minutes ago, mozo said:

2021-22: 15 wins, 62 goals, -15 gd

2022-23: 15 wins, 55 goals, -1 gd

2023-24: 15 wins, 46 goals, -1 gd

So we can improve on wins and gd this season, but goals continue to decline. 

Is improving on wins a marker, if you have less draws and more defeats this season (rhetorical question)?  I guess if you improve on 59 points in the process you can argue so.

As you’ll know I wanted a “winning season”, that was MY expectation last August.  Because I thought a winning season would bring an uplift in points to what I saw as an acceptable improvement.

But you can skin that many ways.

I’d take 23 wins 23 defeats / 69 points for example!

Itll be interesting to see what we end up with.  I don’t really do “how many points from the next x games”, so i will have to wait to see what actually manifests!

[BrizzleRed]

11 minutes ago, mozo said:

2021-22: 15 wins, 62 goals, -15 gd

2022-23: 15 wins, 55 goals, -1 gd

2023-24: 15 wins, 46 goals, -1 gd

So we can improve on wins and gd this season, but goals continue to decline. 

…… well, we’re certainly consistent, but unfortunately, it’s just consistently dull.

[1960maaan]

15 minutes ago, mozo said:

2021-22: 15 wins, 62 goals, -15 gd

2022-23: 15 wins, 55 goals, -1 gd

2023-24: 15 wins, 46 goals, -1 gd

So we can improve on wins and gd this season, but goals continue to decline. 

The one thing we have improved since 21/22 is goals against.

21/22 - 77
22/23 - 56
23/24 - 45 ( to date ) 
If we don't go silly that should be a year on year improvement . It's a start that, if we can start to create more ,could lead to real improvement . 

Less goals against means a chance of more draws and 1-0 wins , we can but hope.

Edited April 7 by 1960maaan

[ExiledAjax]

33 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

and performances can come in very different ways too.

essentially, play better than your opponent will serve you well by and large.

Yes absolutely. A "good performance" doesn't necessarily mean you play "front foot football", or that you get a clean sheet, or that you dominate a team. I'd say it just means you play the best you can within the circumstances and context of the match. 

Do you effectively deliver and execute a plan, and is that plan the right one for that game?

[The Fat Controller]

39 minutes ago, Back of the Dolman said:

I’d suggest they are probably one of the most inappropriate teams to actually try it against in the division 

Absolutely agree. 

All of our forwards would be better off played in a genuine two. Including Weimann. 

[Sleepy1968]

35 minutes ago, mozo said:

2021-22: 15 wins, 62 goals, -15 gd

2022-23: 15 wins, 55 goals, -1 gd

2023-24: 15 wins, 46 goals, -1 gd

So we can improve on wins and gd this season, but goals continue to decline. 

You're looking at Cardiff's goals for I think. We've got 44 so far this season. I guess we'll get another 5 or 6 and end up with about 50. Total Football. Don't worry though, Brain will be securing the services of a top forward or two in the Summer, because luckily, no other teams are after any.

[Red-Robbo]

44 minutes ago, mozo said:

2021-22: 15 wins, 62 goals, -15 gd

2022-23: 15 wins, 55 goals, -1 gd

2023-24: 15 wins, 46 goals, -1 gd

So we can improve on wins and gd this season, but goals continue to decline. 

 

Tighter defence is what that shows. The Dickie effect. 

[lenred]

10 minutes ago, Sleepy1968 said:

You're looking at Cardiff's goals for I think. We've got 44 so far this season. I guess we'll get another 5 or 6 and end up with about 50. Total Football. Don't worry though, Brain will be securing the services of a top forward or two in the Summer, because luckily, no other teams are after any.

The most un-Freudian slip, if ever there was one (completely agree with the sentiment as well!) ! 

[downendcity]

Playing devil's advocate, for some on here it will be whatever we don't have.

Good performance then it's the result that's important.

Good result then it's the performance that's most important.

That's assuming, of course, that we don't have both together!

[Barrs Court Red]

Just now, downendcity said:

Playing devil's advocate, for some on here it will be whatever we don't have.

Good performance then it's the result that's important.

Good result then it's the performance that's most important.

That's assuming, of course, that we don't have both together!

That argument works for both camps I would suggest. 
 

For me, I’d take results over performance everyday of the week - however there’s come caveats with that

1) Not the odd win every so often, but over a long spell 

2) success breeds confidence, and I think this produces better performances over time. 

[TonyTonyTony]

Surely you have to try and get as many points as possible? 
 

Id like to see us take apart a team at home. That’ll do me and we have 3 opportunities to do so.

[marmite]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Apparently attacking intent only comes if the opposition allow that.  It’s not about “us”, according to Hoggy (who sings from the same hymn sheet as Manning).

That’s a slightly facetious comment, but with a large element of truth about it.

That’s what we have, a team / game-plan based on what the opposition allow us, rather than us imposing our style / identity.

I can’t wait!  

I can't think of a recent manager, except Cotts, who has had us playing proactive rather than reactivate . I get fed up of hearing us say things like "they play with wide men so we have to counter that". All games start 11 v 11 so if they stick 2 out wide, we have 2 extra in the middle.

I know it's not quite that simple but what do opposing managers tell their players when they play us? 

We should play our own game and see where it takes us. I want teams to worry about us. Let's lose the negative approach and see some excitement ffs. So for me it's performance over results for the run in. Next season won't matter to me as I won't be back unless things and personnel change.

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Apparently attacking intent only comes if the opposition allow that.  It’s not about “us”, according to Hoggy (who sings from the same hymn sheet as Manning).

That’s a slightly facetious comment, but with a large element of truth about it.

That’s what we have, a team / game-plan based on what the opposition allow us, rather than us imposing our style / identity.

I can’t wait!  

I can't think of a recent manager, except Cotts, who has had us playing proactive rather than reactivate . I get fed up of hearing us say things like "they play with wide men so we have to counter that". All games start 11 v 11 so if they stick 2 out wide, we have 2 extra in the middle.

I know it's not quite that simple but what do opposing managers tell their players when they play us? 

We should play our own game and see where it takes us. I want teams to worry about us. Let's lose the negative approach and see some excitement ffs. So for me it's performance over results for the run in. Next season won't matter to me as I won't be back unless things and personnel change.

[mozo]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Is improving on wins a marker, if you have less draws and more defeats this season (rhetorical question)?  I guess if you improve on 59 points in the process you can argue so.

As you’ll know I wanted a “winning season”, that was MY expectation last August.  Because I thought a winning season would bring an uplift in points to what I saw as an acceptable improvement.

But you can skin that many ways.

I’d take 23 wins 23 defeats / 69 points for example!

Itll be interesting to see what we end up with.  I don’t really do “how many points from the next x games”, so i will have to wait to see what actually manifests!

Yeah, all it really shows is how deeply frustrating watching City has been!

38 minutes ago, Sleepy1968 said:

You're looking at Cardiff's goals for I think. We've got 44 so far this season. I guess we'll get another 5 or 6 and end up with about 50. Total Football. Don't worry though, Brain will be securing the services of a top forward or two in the Summer, because luckily, no other teams are after any.

Sorry! Flipping between screens on my phone. I knew I'd get something wrong

[BrizzleRed]

16 minutes ago, TonyTonyTony said:

Surely you have to try and get as many points as possible? 
 

Id like to see us take apart a team at home. That’ll do me and we have 3 opportunities to do so.

But without the performance, that’s much less likely to happen.

Scraping a few more points to finish the season is all very well.  I think it’s even more important to be putting in some decent performances over the final matches.  

Surely that will give far more reasons for optimism for a more sustained improvement next season, than just points alone?

[Supersonic Robin]

Results will always ultimately be what's most important - football is a results driven industry.

However, performances are the best indicator of results to follow. As @ExiledAjax excellently put it - "Look after the performances and the results will look after themselves." Good results generated through poor performances are generally unsustainable.

 

So the question really becomes - What's more important right now? Current results, or an indication that we can consistently generate good results next season (i.e. performances)?

As a team with nothing to play for right now, I think the answer is definitely the latter.

[TonyTonyTony]

8 minutes ago, BrizzleRed said:

But without the performance, that’s much less likely to happen.

Scraping a few more points to finish the season is all very well.  I think it’s even more important to be putting in some decent performances over the final matches.  

Surely that will give far more reasons for optimism for a more sustained improvement next season, than just points alone?

To be honest mate this season has been hard to keep up much optimism with all the BS we have been through, as fans. I will always support my team but sometimes i dislike the club if that makes sense. There is a sense we are drifting with nothing to play for. Its all a bit Meh.

Go and stuff Rotherham 5-0 will do me

[BrizzleRed]

4 minutes ago, TonyTonyTony said:

To be honest mate this season has been hard to keep up much optimism with all the BS we have been through, as fans. I will always support my team but sometimes i dislike the club if that makes sense. There is a sense we are drifting with nothing to play for. Its all a bit Meh.

Go and stuff Rotherham 5-0 will do me

Oh, I’m right with you on everything you’ve said there.

We’ve clearly got Manning for the forseeable, so although he’s saved himself with a couple of ugly wins lately, I’d like to see some performances that would at least hint at something better next season.

As you say, giving someone a stuffing would be great but equally, if we aren’t up for it, I can see Rotherham nicking a win as a passing shot to the Championship, to just cap a really shit season!

[MarcusX]

2 hours ago, ExiledAjax said:

The attitude this season of some Leicester fans gives you an inkling here. Lots of success, but there's a hardcore who are pretty vocal about unentertaining football. It gets louder when they lose, but it's been bubbling under all season.

So i'd expect that there would be a few "people" saying stuff like "we're in a great position but I'm bored..." or "all this success has come at the price of entertainment". Stuff like that.

That’s with added context that they’ve been relegated after several years in the Prem (and winning it). 

It would be like us going down and being dead awful to watch even if we had success. Promotion is the bare minimum expectation for them. If we scraped promotion from this league being boring it would be completely different.

[MarcusX]

I’d usually say results over performances. I want us to win, I don’t care how and if get lots of 1-0s and 0-0s and get promoted that’s enough for me.

Lets not forget, as fans we’ll celebrate a win however it comes - the main argument would be if you’re playing sh*t then eventually it’s going to catch up with you and bad performances don’t often lead to lots of good results.

There is very little to be gained from scraping a couple of swansea style wins and yesterdays draws.

This is Mannings chance to impose a style and many would forgo results to see more of what we’ve seen shades of.

Im still of the belief that we’ve won the games we have inspite of him not because of him - Leicester aside though as he did impact that game with subs and changes to style.

we still haven’t gone and dominated against a team around or below us either.

[Supersonic Robin]

A couple of the more common lies presented (perhaps accidentally) by many football fans in terms of performances appear present on this thread:

 

1) "I don't really care about results or where we finish in the table. I just want to be entertained and watch us play attacking football."

No you don't. You'd be jubilent if we were 1st in the league and winning 1-0 every week. You'd be livid if we were 24th and losing 4-3 every week.

 

2) "We need to play fast, exciting, attacking football because that's our club's true identity!"

No it isn't. The identity of any team is dictated by how the manager chooses to set that team up.

Besides, every single fanbase in world football seems to think that this is their team's identity. I'm yet to meet a fanbase who describe their club's true identity as "slow, defensive, long ball football". If every club claims to have the same identity, it's not really an identity, is it?

 

2 hours ago, ExiledAjax said:

Yes absolutely. A "good performance" doesn't necessarily mean you play "front foot football", or that you get a clean sheet, or that you dominate a team. I'd say it just means you play the best you can within the circumstances and context of the match. 

Do you effectively deliver and execute a plan, and is that plan the right one for that game?

Exactly this. Good performances aren't about how many players you throw forward or how dramatic the match is.

It's about executing a plan to influence the match, such that you increase your chance of generating a positive result.

[Davefevs]

58 minutes ago, MarcusX said:

I’d usually say results over performances. I want us to win, I don’t care how and if get lots of 1-0s and 0-0s and get promoted that’s enough for me.

Lets not forget, as fans we’ll celebrate a win however it comes - the main argument would be if you’re playing sh*t then eventually it’s going to catch up with you and bad performances don’t often lead to lots of good results.

There is very little to be gained from scraping a couple of swansea style wins and yesterdays draws.

This is Mannings chance to impose a style and many would forgo results to see more of what we’ve seen shades of.

Im still of the belief that we’ve won the games we have inspite of him not because of him - Leicester aside though as he did impact that game with subs and changes to style.

we still haven’t gone and dominated against a team around or below us either.

To add to your excellent post, I think if I can see method too, I can get behind it.  At the mo’ it feels like it’s “let’s see what happens this game”, and appears to be driven by opponent style.  I’m not a fan if that.  We can be competitive (just as, if not more) imposing our way, whatever that is.

[Davefevs]

3 minutes ago, Supersonic Robin said:

A couple of the more common lies presented (perhaps accidentally) by many football fans in terms of performances appear present on this thread:

 

1) "I don't really care about results or where we finish in the table. I just want to be entertained and watch us play attacking football."

No you don't. You'd be jubilent if we were 1st in the league and winning 1-0 every week. You'd be livid if we were 24th and losing 4-3 every week.

 

2) "We need to play fast, exciting, attacking football because that's our club's true identity!"

No it isn't. The identity of any team is dictated by how the manager chooses to set that team up.

Besides, every single fanbase in world football seems to think that this is their team's identity. I'm yet to meet a fanbase who describe their club's true identity as "slow, defensive, long ball football". If every club claims to have the same identity, it's not really an identity, is it?

 

[GrahamC]

2 hours ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

Tighter defence is what that shows. The Dickie effect. 

Yep, also pretty much the same players around him all season.

Keeper who has played every single game, Tanner, Pring & Vyner have all had decent seasons availability wise too.

None of these players is younger than 24, none is over 28, a perfect balance.

Blindingly obvious we are short of creativity & another finisher but something to build on.

Next bit is the hardest part though.