Jon talks...

[ExiledAjax]

9 hours ago, Davefevs said:

But placing an intent to press just 10 yards higher up the pitch has made a big difference.  We stop our opponent building patterns and getting into the middle third as easily as they did.

And after 7 games (Leicester being on Good Friday) we can say with some confidence that it's a change rather than a fluke.

The change in the press, and the effect on an opponent's ability to build is reflected in the stats. We've got shots against, shots on target against (both reduced by 1 per 90), and yes xGA all under control.

I've no issue if what @Harry says is true. Magnanimous, open leadership, where the manager listens to and acts on concerns from the players is, in my opinion, to be applauded. The club doesn't need to be a dictatorship both on and off the pitch. If we cry out for our owners to listen to feedback how can we chastise the manager when he does exactly that? 

When I said that I thought, sadly, that Manning needed to go, it was largely based on a stubborn failure to show an ability to flex his methods to our squad. He seems to have found that in the past few games.

Will it carry though to next season? I'm not sure. Whilst this run is an impressive indicator of potential, the easier nature of the games and complete lack of real pressure, remains relevant context. We've played 4 of the worst teams on the division, had Leicester in the midst of their crisis, Norwich was almost a dead-rubber. Add to that the fact that there has freedom of danger from relegation, largely achieved with the win v Swansea and secured wit 3 points v Leicester - that's conjecture though.

Edited April 30 by ExiledAjax

[cidered abroad]

51 minutes ago, ciderwithtommy said:

@Harry appreciate the insight and of course it makes sense not to throw someone under the bus to appease the forum! The one bit I am slightly unsure on, is if it was the players who suggested to LM we needed a change, and he listened, does that equate to poor leadership? Or does it lend itself to creating more accountability for the players? I.e. we have problems and if you have the answers, I’m happy to facilitate that. The other option from the player meeting would’ve been “do it my way or leave” - not sure that’s great leadership from someone so new to the group whilst they were struggling for form. 

I would hope that, in an modern era, there would be team talks where everyone can voice and opinion on tactics. Otherwise how does any business move forward?

We have a comparatively young Head Coach with not very much "managing" experience. He has never won promotion or a cup in his career, but we have in the playing staff several very experienced of winning Premier league, promotions and plenty of international caps.

Or should we stick with the "Do as I say you will do on the pitch" philosophy?

 

 

[redsquirrel]

12 minutes ago, cidered abroad said:

I would hope that, in an modern era, there would be team talks where everyone can voice and opinion on tactics. Otherwise how does any business move forward?

We have a comparatively young Head Coach with not very much "managing" experience. He has never won promotion or a cup in his career, but we have in the playing staff several very experienced of winning Premier league, promotions and plenty of international caps.

Or should we stick with the "Do as I say you will do on the pitch" philosophy?

 

 

exactly that, the only people in bcfc with any success on their cv are still playing. how do any of the others know anything about achieving it

[supercidered]

14 hours ago, Coombsy said:

 

 

 

 

 

Posted 15 hours ago

Been told by someone  in recruitment  we won't be doing much business  this summer. He's  got no reason  to lie ,so yeh don't get to excited another borefest season beckons.

14 hours ago, Coombsy said:

Who from the club recruitment told you this?

I would take anything that starts with 'Been told by someone in recruitment' or 'my mate knows someone that knows' etc, etc, with a huge pinch of salt Coombsy.

[redsquirrel]

6 minutes ago, supercidered said:

Posted 15 hours ago

Been told by someone  in recruitment  we won't be doing much business  this summer. He's  got no reason  to lie ,so yeh don't get to excited another borefest season beckons.

14 hours ago, Coombsy said:

Who from the club recruitment told you this?

I would take anything that starts with 'Been told by someone in recruitment' or 'my mate knows someone that knows' etc, etc, with a huge pinch of salt Coombsy.

i dont think you will actually hear much if anything on here from real people in the know. the trust and relationship between those people is not worth breaking for a bit of i know, i know, i know.  rumours that are in the public domain somewhere are different,nobody can get hung out to dry if disclosed

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, Silvio Dante said:

Didn’t stop him before!

Optimist in me says that was somewhat of a transitional phase, see what works what doesn't.

Hopefully now he knows that the pressing, intent perhaps set-up that he inherited is the best base and perhaps improve possession and control within that framework. As opposed to what we saw often between January and West Brom Away.

[mozo]

With the 'players told Manning to change' rumour, I think more context is needed before we can make a judgement.

For example, there's a big difference between a group of fed up players demanding change and an open conversation in which change is discussed. 

Unless someone has heard it from a reliable person that was privy to the conversation there's a large amount of doubt there.

[redsquirrel]

4 minutes ago, mozo said:

With the 'players told Manning to change' rumour, I think more context is needed before we can make a judgement.

For example, there's a big difference between a group of fed up players demanding change and an open conversation in which change is discussed. 

Unless someone has heard it from a reliable person that was privy to the conversation there's a large amount of doubt there.

it probabably was a group discussion as you say, with manning admitting he had nothing to lose trying something different

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, ExiledAjax said:

And after 7 games (Leicester being on Good Friday) we can say with some confidence that it's a change rather than a fluke.

The change in the press, and the effect on an opponent's ability to build is reflected in the stats. We've got shots against, shots on target against (both reduced by 1 per 90), and yes xGA all under control.

I've no issue if what @Harry says is true. Magnanimous, open leadership, where the manager listens to and acts on concerns from the players is, in my opinion, to be applauded. The club doesn't need to be a dictatorship both on and off the pitch. If we cry out for our owners to listen to feedback how can we chastise the manager when he does exactly that? 

When I said that I thought, sadly, that Manning needed to go, it was largely based on a stubborn failure to show an ability to flex his methods to our squad. He seems to have found that in the past few games.

Will it carry though to next season? I'm not sure. Whilst this run is an impressive indicator of potential, the easier nature of the games and complete lack of real pressure, remains relevant context. We've played 4 of the worst teams on the division, had Leicester in the midst of their crisis, Norwich was almost a dead-rubber. Add to that the fact that there has freedom of danger from relegation, largely achieved with the win v Swansea and secured wit 3 points v Leicester - that's conjecture though.

Excellent post…and what I was gonna add was…

16 minutes ago, mozo said:

With the 'players told Manning to change' rumour, I think more context is needed before we can make a judgement.

For example, there's a big difference between a group of fed up players demanding change and an open conversation in which change is discussed. 

Unless someone has heard it from a reliable person that was privy to the conversation there's a large amount of doubt there.

…there is a big difference between “losing the dressing room” (I hate that phrase) and what happened here (all allegedly).  I never thought he’d lost the players, because I think the players like him / his methods.  What “can” happen is that you lose a bit of faith in the method / approach as it’s not working (poor performance and results), and a good bunch of pros (as that’s what we have) will feel comfortable to suggest ways to “problem solve”…but in the preparation, ie the approach / gameplan, not during the 90.

You don’t need context, you can just make your own judgement as to how far or not it came from one side or the other…or somewhere near the middle.

I think you’ll find one poster’s “reliable person” is another poster’s “bullshit”.  It’s down to you to decide who you think is worth believing or not.

There are a couple of posters on here who go quietly about their “work” on here, but they slip in the odd nugget from time to time.  They might slip into your DMs from time to time.  It’s probably a bit of a burden for them knowing stuff and not divulging it.

[Simon bristol]

2 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said:

How are you judging progression? 

Points?

League position?

:laugh:, neither of those apparently? For us to improve on both after selling our best young talent in decades is realistically as good as we could have hoped for, albeit with serious ups and downs in some of the performances.

[mozo]

10 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Excellent post…and what I was gonna add was…

…there is a big difference between “losing the dressing room” (I hate that phrase) and what happened here (all allegedly).  I never thought he’d lost the players, because I think the players like him / his methods.  What “can” happen is that you lose a bit of faith in the method / approach as it’s not working (poor performance and results), and a good bunch of pros (as that’s what we have) will feel comfortable to suggest ways to “problem solve”…but in the preparation, ie the approach / gameplan, not during the 90.

You don’t need context, you can just make your own judgement as to how far or not it came from one side or the other…or somewhere near the middle.

I think you’ll find one poster’s “reliable person” is another poster’s “bullshit”.  It’s down to you to decide who you think is worth believing or not.

There are a couple of posters on here who go quietly about their “work” on here, but they slip in the odd nugget from time to time.  They might slip into your DMs from time to time.  It’s probably a bit of a burden for them knowing stuff and not divulging it.

Yeah that's fair, and let's face it we like to receive as many insights as we like. It's just important that the insight doesn't snowball into a wild myth. It wont be long before its widely accepted that the players refused to play the Manning way and Jon L had to take training and pick the team which kickstarted our success!

Remember the Massengo to Chelsea thing 

Ultimately, it doesn't really matter how we get there under Manning, it's just important that we get there, and I reckon you and I will have pretty similar expectations next season.

Edit: no one slides into my DMs BTW! 

Edited April 30 by mozo

[Boston Red]

12 hours ago, Redrascal2 said:

Let's turn it around and ask what has Jon Lansdown  done that he deserves to be congratulated for. I can think of nothing.

Ear lobes the size of the Taj Mahal?

[Numero Uno]

1 hour ago, cidered abroad said:

I would hope that, in an modern era, there would be team talks where everyone can voice and opinion on tactics. Otherwise how does any business move forward?

We have a comparatively young Head Coach with not very much "managing" experience. He has never won promotion or a cup in his career, but we have in the playing staff several very experienced of winning Premier league, promotions and plenty of international caps.

Or should we stick with the "Do as I say you will do on the pitch" philosophy?

 

 

I'm sure that's a given these days and it would appear particularly so if what people are saying is correct here. That said I did like the answer from Brian Clough when asked what happened when a player disagreed with him - "I take him to my office, pour us a cup of tea, have a twenty minute discussion about it and then agree I was right all along"........ 

[ExiledAjax]

53 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Excellent post

Bar the typos.

I think as well that Manning/the team will have pretty comfortably met what I personally stated to be my measures of success over these last few games. The one's in @Numero Uno's thread from a while back.

[Harry]

3 hours ago, ciderwithtommy said:

@Harry appreciate the insight and of course it makes sense not to throw someone under the bus to appease the forum! The one bit I am slightly unsure on, is if it was the players who suggested to LM we needed a change, and he listened, does that equate to poor leadership? Or does it lend itself to creating more accountability for the players? I.e. we have problems and if you have the answers, I’m happy to facilitate that. The other option from the player meeting would’ve been “do it my way or leave” - not sure that’s great leadership from someone so new to the group whilst they were struggling for form. 

I’m certainly not against collaborative thinking and empowerment of the playing staff. 
I certainly wouldn’t advocate a “my way or the highway” type of leadership. 
So I don’t see a problem per sé in what occurred, nor do I see a problem per sé that Manning accepted the feedback from the players and took action. 
 

The problem for me, and the reason that this incident gave me the full 180 (remember, I was backing him before this), was that it demonstrated to me that Liam didn’t have the nous nor the leadership to have recognised this problem for himself. 
It was pretty clear to every single fan that the players were not able to play the style that Liam wanted. It should have been obvious to Liam and his staff too. 
If should have been something that came from Liam to the group to say “ok lads, I see things aren’t working the way we want. Let’s revert to our collective strengths, get some form and results and we can continue to work on my new philosophy in training and seek to progress”. 
 

The fact he didn’t recognise this himself and the change only occurred after the players intimated this, is why I lost all confidence in him. 
 

As I said, I was very vocally behind him on this forum up until that point. And I’m still actually generally happy with how his term has progressed so far. But this incident showed me he doesn’t have the kahunaberries to lead this team to the top end. 
I hope he does, and I’m not calling for his head - would be pointless anyway as he’s going nowhere. But I do now lack confidence in him 

Edited April 30 by Harry

[chinapig]

24 minutes ago, Harry said:

I’m certainly not against collaborative thinking and empowerment of the playing staff. 
I certainly wouldn’t advocate a “my way or the highway” type of leadership. 
So I don’t see a problem per sé in what occurred, nor do I see a problem per sé that Manning accepted the feedback from the players and took action. 
 

The problem for me, and the reason that this incident gave me the full 180 (remember, I was backing him before this), was that it demonstrated to me that Liam didn’t have the nous nor the leadership to have recognised this problem for himself. 
It was pretty clear to every single fan that the players were not able to play the style that Liam wanted. It should have been obvious to Liam and his staff too. 
If should have been something that came from Liam to the group to say “ok lads, I see things aren’t working the way we want. Let’s revert to our collective strengths, get some form and results and we can continue to work on my new philosophy in training and seek to progress”. 
 

The fact he didn’t recognise this himself and the change only occurred after the players intimated this, is why I lost all confidence in him. 
 

As I said, I was very vocally behind him on this forum up until that point. And I’m still actually generally happy with how his term has progressed so far. But this incident showed me he doesn’t have the kahunaberries to lead this team to the top end. 
I hope he does, and I’m not calling for his head - would be pointless anyway as he’s going nowhere. But I do now lack confidence in him 

You make a very good point that hadn't occurred to me.

I wonder whether Liam didn't recognise the problem or whether he did but stubbornly stuck to his approach until the players persuaded him otherwise. Neither is a good sign.

On the other hand his willingness to listen and be flexible is to his credit. We were after all told he is learning on the job! I just hope he doesn't revert to type next season.

[Cowshed]

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Optimist in me says that was somewhat of a transitional phase, see what works what doesn't.

Hopefully now he knows that the pressing, intent perhaps set-up that he inherited is the best base and perhaps improve possession and control within that framework. As opposed to what we saw often between January and West Brom Away.

 How is the pressing inherited? 

[mozo]

32 minutes ago, Harry said:

I’m certainly not against collaborative thinking and empowerment of the playing staff. 
I certainly wouldn’t advocate a “my way or the highway” type of leadership. 
So I don’t see a problem per sé in what occurred, nor do I see a problem per sé that Manning accepted the feedback from the players and took action. 
 

The problem for me, and the reason that this incident gave me the full 180 (remember, I was backing him before this), was that it demonstrated to me that Liam didn’t have the nous nor the leadership to have recognised this problem for himself. 
It was pretty clear to every single fan that the players were not able to play the style that Liam wanted. It should have been obvious to Liam and his staff too. 
If should have been something that came from Liam to the group to say “ok lads, I see things aren’t working the way we want. Let’s revert to our collective strengths, get some form and results and we can continue to work on my new philosophy in training and seek to progress”. 
 

The fact he didn’t recognise this himself and the change only occurred after the players intimated this, is why I lost all confidence in him. 
 

As I said, I was very vocally behind him on this forum up until that point. And I’m still actually generally happy with how his term has progressed so far. But this incident showed me he doesn’t have the kahunaberries to lead this team to the top end. 
I hope he does, and I’m not calling for his head - would be pointless anyway as he’s going nowhere. But I do now lack confidence in him 

Well we do know that LM is a student of the game, and avid analyser, so I'd be stunned if he were just ignorant to the possibility of tweaking things until the players knocked on his door. I would imagine there's more to it than that.

[Tomo]

13 hours ago, Harry said:

In answer to the question about Phil Alexander leaving and there being no single figurehead, this is the sort of wafflly nonsense I referred to earlier. It’s a collection of words that mean absolutely nothing : 
 

“yes absolutely. I mean we’re set up slightly differently here in the fact that the chief executive as it was isn’t really running the commercial operation of the club which it would be most places. Look, the operation part that Tom is fulfilling here is the necessary part and we obviously need leadership in terms of the people, the teams and the building, but then in terms of your figurehead, for me you need different voices. Obviously we’re all talking we should be giving similar messaging, but you’ve got your people giving messaging externally, but internally it’s how it works and operates, so there’s not really any void there in that sense and you’ve got to get used to a team”. 
 

I mean - is anyone any the wiser after that?? 

Waffle

[W-S-M Seagull]

3 hours ago, cidered abroad said:

I would hope that, in an modern era, there would be team talks where everyone can voice and opinion on tactics. Otherwise how does any business move forward?

We have a comparatively young Head Coach with not very much "managing" experience. He has never won promotion or a cup in his career, but we have in the playing staff several very experienced of winning Premier league, promotions and plenty of international caps.

Or should we stick with the "Do as I say you will do on the pitch" philosophy?

 

 

Yes because all the successful teams in the world are successful because the players are telling the manager how they want to play. 

We have a chairman who admits he doesnt lead. We have a manager who doesn't lead. It's just all rather incredible. 

[Davefevs]

14 minutes ago, mozo said:

Well we do know that LM is a student of the game, and avid analyser, so I'd be stunned if he were just ignorant to the possibility of tweaking things until the players knocked on his door. I would imagine there's more to it than that.

At the end of the day trying to get someone to break ranks and tell you exactly what they were told and by whom isn’t gonna happen, and will still probably be met with cynicism.

And ultimately, so what, my view is “something” happened to change things, and it’s played out well.

Taking all “stories” aside…

On the back of a losing run, LM’s approach vs Swansea was to go ultra-cautious.  He said it himself.

We won the game with a different “intent” in the final 25 mins.  Had Placheta’s chance gone in, or Ronald not had his McDonald shoes on, it would’ve been Swansea taking the lead.  That’s football though.

Following game v West Brom, despite a win the previous game, and an opportunity to not be ultra-cautious, he went the same way.  Denied West Brom for 30 minutes and we had a 1on1 from a clearance, until Furlong inverted and then it was only a matter of time.  It doesn’t matter if it was their first shot on target, it was coming.  2-0 early in second half, and not until last 15-20 (with subs) did we give it a go.

So my reading into LM is that his under-pressure MO is to go cautious.  He likes structure, he doesn’t like chaos.  When opponents create chaos, he appears not to be able to process it.

Leicester it changed.  And so on since, in the main.

According to Hoggy, they didn’t change anything.  Hogs fly!

[myol'man]

13 hours ago, Lew-T said:

You only have to listen to him. He has no personality, no leadership qualities and no bottle.

He is a quivering moron.

Who are we talking about here? Jon boy, Manning or Tinnion?

[Silvio Dante]

43 minutes ago, mozo said:

Well we do know that LM is a student of the game, and avid analyser, so I'd be stunned if he were just ignorant to the possibility of tweaking things until the players knocked on his door. I would imagine there's more to it than that.

The contra to that (obviously) is if he’s such an avid analyser (and I agree he is), why it took him so long if it was under his own steam? I go back to the xG thread yesterday - there were signs even before the post Watford slump that things weren’t trending right. 
 

Either it’s a case of there was a trigger event “external” to him and Hogg (be that Jon, Tinnion or senior players) or it took him that number of months to figure it out. I’ve probably got less of a problem with scenario A as it shows ability to accept change and feedback. If it’s scenario B then it’s an argument of whether a coach should take 5 months to figure out his sides strengths (and the answer to that is pretty much no)

The agreement I think everyone has is that there is a different approach post Easter. Call it bravery, call it intent, call it whatever. And as I’ve said a few times, I don’t care how he got here as long as we’re now at somewhere near the right place.

The fear (which I think is valid) in that as Liam was cautious and pretty intransigent prior (and there are signs that he does believe he’s right if you watch the pressers), that he will revert to prior as he does believe it’s the right way.

The first 10-12 games of next season are massive. If the “intent” changes to pre Easter it’ll tell us a lot.

[Mr Popodopolous]

56 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

 How is the pressing inherited? 

Maybe I haven't worded it that well.

The recent run feels like it has more in common with our tactics under NP than a lot of Millwall at Home to West Brom Away.

[Kibs]

I mean, some of what has been said on this thread leads me to question why we even need a head coach/manager at all when the Players, JL and BT have seemingly cracked it all by themselves!!!

I don’t remember too many runs like this over the last few years so maybe all the managers had it wrong and were just holding them back!!!!??? 

Edited April 30 by Kibs

[Cowshed]

4 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Maybe I haven't worded it that well.

The recent run feels like it has more in common with our tactics under NP than a lot of Millwall at Home to West Brom Away.

I am watching Bristol City intermittently. What I see changing is spaces front to back shortening (differing shape), GK higher behind a higher backline and units pressing. This is an attempt to control space higher up the pitch.

This is different to Nigel Pearson's football. 

[Gert Mare]

4 hours ago, Crimson Crayola said:

This again. Do you honestly think this was ever likely? (even under Pearson). If you've ever felt that "top 6" was an over ambitious (or idiotic) comment from Jon, you can't really use failing to get into the playoffs as a stick to beat Manning with.

By all means critique the playing style, interviews, pathway blocking etc, but the top 6 argument is tiresome and weak.

Why not? He’s failed the board directive. It was very clear at the time, very clear, from both Jon and Tinnion.

Pearson apparently failed the directive (although it appears he was never actually told this - can’t wait for him to properly spill after the next 12 months) and was sacked.

4 hours ago, mozo said:

Yeah if NickJ is judging us on points behind 6th, then the logical thing to do is to use ppg to extrapolate where we would be based on the pre-Manning total. 

We're still in with a chance of finishing 7 points off the playoffs, which would be positive no matter how you look at it.

The obsession that some people have with the top 6 comments kind of needs to be put to bed now that Jon L yesterday tried to row back in a rambly from those comments.

The “Top end” as it was actually stated with inference to a promotion challenge, so by default that would imply automatic promotion or via the playoffs and it should not be put to bed (brushed under the carpet).

There is a serious question of integrity with the hierarchy at BCFC. If they can actively lie to the supporters and staff then this club is truly in deep trouble ethically and we won’t be going up anytime soon.

Without trust there is no progress. You need all elements to be pulling in the right direction. 

Even on this forum we are arguing amongst ourselves and this comes down to a lack of honest communication and lack of trust from the top.

This culture of ‘those in the know’ and ‘not revealing sources’ is a symptom of poor decisions, mismanagement, paranoia, mistrust and incoherent communication which stems back to the cause that sits squarely with the Lansdowns.

Simply forgetting about it isn’t a long term solution. As long as this continues expect nothing more than what we have come to expect to date, 2 steps forward, 3 steps back.

I’m going to listen to Jon now, but having read these comments I’m expecting nothing but waffling, backtracking, an unclear strategy, goals and any sort of process to achieve the clubs vision.

[W-S-M Seagull]

6 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

The contra to that (obviously) is if he’s such an avid analyser (and I agree he is), why it took him so long if it was under his own steam? I go back to the xG thread yesterday - there were signs even before the post Watford slump that things weren’t trending right. 
 

Either it’s a case of there was a trigger event “external” to him and Hogg (be that Jon, Tinnion or senior players) or it took him that number of months to figure it out. I’ve probably got less of a problem with scenario A as it shows ability to accept change and feedback. If it’s scenario B then it’s an argument of whether a coach should take 5 months to figure out his sides strengths (and the answer to that is pretty much no)

The agreement I think everyone has is that there is a different approach post Easter. Call it bravery, call it intent, call it whatever. And as I’ve said a few times, I don’t care how he got here as long as we’re now at somewhere near the right place.

The fear (which I think is valid) in that as Liam was cautious and pretty intransigent prior (and there are signs that he does believe he’s right if you watch the pressers), that he will revert to prior as he does believe it’s the right way.

The first 10-12 games of next season are massive. If the “intent” changes to pre Easter it’ll tell us a lot.

He played us twice this season whilst Oxford manager so should have had a pretty good idea about us before joining. 

He then had a two week international break not long after joining.

He knew our strengths. He knew what the expected style was yet he tried to do it the Liam Manning way for some bizarre reason. Our season was sacrificed for this and it didn't work because it was never likely to work.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that you play to the strengths of your team. 

The change occurred due to pressure from above, pressure from players and fans and because he was very close to being sacked. It should not have taken 5 months to understand it wasn't working. 

My worry is that the recent style was a means to an end and that Liam may believe that with a full pre season and some of his own players, his style will work. 

If we spend a whole pre season working on the Liam Manning way and it doesn't work, we may well find ourselves in trouble. 

 

[Silvio Dante]

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

 

He knew our strengths. He knew what the expected style was yet he tried to do it the Liam Manning way for some bizarre reason. Our season was sacrificed for this and it didn't work because it was never likely to work.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that you play to the strengths of your team. 

 

 

Second game in:

 

 

[W-S-M Seagull]

4 minutes ago, Gert Mare said:

Why not? He’s failed the board directive. It was very clear at the time, very clear, from both Jon and Tinnion.

Pearson apparently failed the directive (although it appears he was never actually told this - can’t wait for him to properly spill after the next 12 months) and was sacked.

The “Top end” as it was actually stated with inference to a promotion challenge, so by default that would imply automatic promotion or via the playoffs and it should not be put to bed (brushed under the carpet).

There is a serious question of integrity with the hierarchy at BCFC. If they can actively lie to the supporters and staff then this club is truly in deep trouble ethically and we won’t be going up anytime soon.

Without trust there is no progress. You need all elements to be pulling in the right direction. 

Even on this forum we are arguing amongst ourselves and this comes down to a lack of honest communication and lack of trust from the top.

This culture of ‘those in the know’ and ‘not revealing sources’ is a symptom of poor decisions, mismanagement, paranoia, mistrust and incoherent communication which stems back to the cause that sits squarely with the Lansdowns.

Simply forgetting about it isn’t a long term solution. As long as this continues expect nothing more than what we have come to expect to date, 2 steps forward, 3 steps back.

I’m going to listen to Jon now, but having read these comments I’m expecting nothing but waffling, backtracking, an unclear strategy, goals and any sort of process to achieve the clubs vision.

In one of the interviews at the time Jon said "ultimately we made the decision because we think the squad is good enough and I believe in it, if we didn't then why make the change, you'd just see things through as they are, but the ultimate reason is I think we have a really good squad here and we've got a good chance of competing at the right end of the table this season" 

In last night's interview, despite us not competing at the right end of the table and Manning not getting the best out of this really good squad, Jon described this season as "broadly positive" 

He's all over the place with his opinions.