Time for Manning to go

[sh1t_ref_again]

Just now, Davefevs said:

That assumes that Holden was next best.

Or more likely, next best that we can appoint as quickly as possible, without having to go back to any that were ahead of him, yes?

I think we could have been in a position where we rejected others as had a commitment from A N Other manager, then left with an option of starting process again or appointing Holden who was hoping to stay as an assistant. With the season about to start, left with little option. 

[Jose]

1 minute ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

I think we could have been in a position where we rejected others as had a commitment from A N Other manager, then left with an option of starting process again or appointing Holden who was hoping to stay as an assistant. With the season about to start, left with little option. 

The decision is indefensible. Always will be. You don’t just appoint someone because someone has let you down last minute. It’s crazy. 

[Numero Uno]

7 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Seeing a game out sure, in that sense agreed.

In-game management though, responses to tweaks or a turning tide..LM absolutely isn't proactive enough, substitutions or positional tweaks or whatever.

You’re talking about changing or maintaining the flow of the game about 25 minutes out not holding onto a lead in the last five or so. Once you get to about 88 minutes it’s about the players on the pitch disrupting the flow of the game if it’s tight unless you can put 55 passes together which we can’t under pressure. They should all know how to disrupt. What happened in injury time the other day was down to players not getting the job done imo.

Edited January 3 by Numero Uno

[NDW4CITY]

3 hours ago, Open End Numb Legs said:

You guys are a lot more knowledgeable than me on these matters but for what it's worth:-

Pearson is a very strong character, knew what he wanted and expected. With such a clear vision it gave an impression of progress and direction.

Manning by comparison seems more passive on the touchline and driven by data.

Inevitably, those comparisons will be picked up on when results don't go our way and the frailties of late points dropped make the differences clearer.

For me, as a leader I liked Nige. If Manning could adopt just a bit of his edge he could be a more complete and very good head coach.

I don't really do the stats/ppg thing, a bit misleading and it ignores other factors at the time a manager is in charge.

Just my thoughts as an average fan.

...and also out of a job under the thin-skinned Lansdowns. Someone described them as manbabies....so apt.

[sh1t_ref_again]

2 minutes ago, Jose said:

The decision is indefensible. Always will be. You don’t just appoint someone because someone has let you down last minute. It’s crazy. 

I am not saying it was the correct thing to do, as it was proven not to be so.

Maybe Holden was considered a strong candidate anyway, maybe as Dave asked 2nd choice, so faced with starting again and a season starting, what do you do? It would be gamble not apointing as it was giving him the job.

No way it took 5 weeks to do that, without other factors 

 

[mozo]

4 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

Indeed, context is everything.

Listening to five live on the way back from Plymouth they were making the point that WBA was a great job to go into because of their position and normally managers go into a club in trouble. I’d argue that scenario equally applied (albeit at a lower scale here) - stable mid table squad, producing academy and money to spend.

Thats the context under which Liam is being judged. Not that he’s not Pearson, but in the reasonable circumstance of taking over a stable club and having money to spend should he have improved us (and again, more than stylistically to some). I say again, if you were in the real world and sacked a manager on the basis of not getting enough out of his staff, if the next applicant said “well give me £10m and I’ll produce exactly the same results and kill your production line” - you wouldn’t employ him, you’d run an absolute mile.

And that’s all he’s being judged on.

That all sounds pretty reasonable, until you get to the bit where you say "And that’s all he’s being judged on."

By you maybe, but you can't speak for everyone. A lot of crazy judgement takes place on OTIB, and you can't confidently assume your methodology and perspective for other Manning critics. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

You’re talking about changing or maintaining the flow of the game about 25 minutes out not holding onto a lead in the last five or so. Once you get to about 88 minutes it’s about the players on the pitch disrupting the flow of the game if it’s tight unless you can put 55 passes together which we can’t under pressure. They should all know how to disrupt. What happened in injury time the other day was down to players not getting the job done imo.

Earlier if need be but yes agreed.

I sadly cannot find it now but there was a piece years ago on Zonalmarking. Ranieri and Mourinho title clash, changed or tweaked shapes mirroring and trying to outmanouvre each other late 2000s...kept switching or tweaking to match and get the better of each other. One article I found when looking for it said Ranieri tweaked shape 4 or 5 times during the game.

Manning is a bit passive.

[Gert Mare]

The wider footballing world sat up and took notice when we appointed Nigel Pearson.

The wider footballing world shook their heads in total disbelief when Nigel Pearson was sacked.

Nobody sat up and took notice when Liam Manning was appointed.

Personally, I look closely at the reactions of the wider footballing world. Those with real experience of the game. I'll take that every day over Jon, Brian and some general supporters, some of which have never played the game or been involved in the game at any level.

£10 Million later and we're pretty much where we were at the same point in the season when Pearson was sacked, with greater squad depth and availability.

No progress in my opinion. It's a results based business. We're also now losing more money and the academy pathway tap has been turned off.

If people cannot understand progress from a holistic perspective then we'll continue to be mediocre at best and can expect League One to be a more realistic future prospect than the Premier League.

The problem isn't even Liam Manning, it's Jon Lansdown and his sidekick. If SL has serious concerns over the way his money is spent then he wouldn't leave it in the hands of his boy. He'd get proper experienced Business / Football people to manage his assets.

 

 

Edited January 3 by Gert Mare

[Numero Uno]

5 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Earlier if need be but yes agreed.

I sadly cannot find it now but there was a piece years ago on Zonalmarking. Ranieri and Mourinho title clash, changed or tweaked shapes mirroring and trying to outmanouvre each other late 2000s...kept switching or tweaking to match and get the better of each other. One article I found when looking for it said Ranieri tweaked shape 4 or 5 times during the game.

Manning is a bit passive.

Yes, what you describe takes coaching. Disrupting a game when ahead approaching injury time is something every fan knows how to do let alone the players (slow everything down, get the ball into the corners, tactical fouls, don’t play short at the back when you’re being pressed, pass the ball around if you aren’t being pressed, no need for a killer pass or a flick etc. etc.). We just didn’t execute it well enough.

[Davefevs]

27 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

The decisions required in seeing a game out should be as ingrained in a footballer as knowing the law is to a solicitor. The difference is you have another team on the pitch trying to prevent you doing it and sometimes producing the quality to prevent you doing it.

If a player takes a quick free kick in injury time at 1-0, you lose possession and the other team moves the ball up the pitch and equalises that’s on the player.

Once these lads are pro’s it certainly isn’t something they should need teaching……unless you have a whole team of 18-19 year olds!!

I’ve been analysing every corner since Watford (a).  Until NYD we’d had 2 corners in the 90th minute plus…both taken by Eathy, both taken short, one blatantly time wasting keeping it in the corner, the other a possession phase where we kept it for a period.

On NYD we didn’t.  Earthy went short as an option but was ignored as Bird gave the “two arms raised” signal.  Although it was 89th minute, not 90th plus….if that makes a difference.

A question for LM at the pre match press conference, if there is one.

[Mr Popodopolous]

17 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

Yes, what you describe takes coaching. Disrupting a game when ahead approaching injury time is something every fan knows how to do let alone the players (slow everything down, get the ball into the corners, tactical fouls, don’t play short at the back when you’re being pressed, pass the ball around if you aren’t being pressed, no need for a killer pass or a flick etc. etc.). We just didn’t execute it well enough.

Agreed on both counts. That example I gave was an extreme one in fairness..Sheffield United was an excellent example of what you meant- yeah they were putting us under some pressure but it wasn't sustained and a barrage like at Sunderland..to bot get one point there at worst was criminal.

*Max doesn't claim when he should have. Score from corner.

*If you can't win, don't lose..still a decent point all things considered and yet.. 

*...Dickie tries to beat 3-4 players to get us up the pitch, not least when he has been out for nearly 2 months. Crazy what was he thinking.. red card.

*Really up against it now, lose.

Edited January 3 by Mr Popodopolous

[Numero Uno]

7 minutes ago, Gert Mare said:

No progress in my opinion. It's a results based business. We're also now losing more money and the academy pathway tap has been turned off.

I understand the point on the Pathway, particularly that Liam wouldn't use young lads anyway based on past experience. However, who has shown that their pathway is being blocked with the obvious exception of Morrison (who I might argue should have got more minutes by now imo)? JKL is out on loan and should come back as a squad player next season, Palmer Houlden still looks a bit wet behind the ears to me based on yesterday but, again, might well develop into a squad player next season. After those three, who do we have that should be looking to break into first team football and isn't being given a chance? I would argue there are a couple who should go out on loan but nobody ready for first team action....yet.

[Gert Mare]

3 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

I understand the point on the Pathway, particularly that Liam wouldn't use young lads anyway based on past experience. However, who has shown that their pathway is being blocked with the obvious exception of Morrison (who I might argue should have got more minutes by now imo)? JKL is out on loan and should come back as a squad player next season, Palmer Houlden still looks a bit wet behind the ears to me based on yesterday but, again, might well develop into a squad player next season. After those three, who do we have that should be looking to break into first team football and isn't being given a chance? I would argue there are a couple who should go out on loan but nobody ready for first team action....yet.

Maybe it's down to perception?

Mine is that regardless of league position I felt that Nigel Pearson gave the academy players opportunities. I seem to recall Yeboah getting quite a few 15 minute cameos? He brought in Pring, Bell, Conway, Knight-Lebel, Towler, James and Scott.

So it's my perception that the pathway is now blocked in pursuit of results (as most managers do - Pearson was an exception to the general rule in my opinion)

[Mr Popodopolous]

10 minutes ago, Gert Mare said:

Maybe it's down to perception?

Mine is that regardless of league position I felt that Nigel Pearson gave the academy players opportunities. I seem to recall Yeboah getting quite a few 15 minute cameos? He brought in Pring, Bell, Conway, Knight-Lebel, Towler, James and Scott.

So it's my perception that the pathway is now blocked in pursuit of results (as most managers do - Pearson was an exception to the general rule in my opinion)

I'd say NP was exception to a rule in that sense and in the sense of not putting a club at jeopardy or wanting to in pursuit of results. Yeah he was undercut in Summer 2023 but he wouldn't pushed for us to be reckless at all IMO even with license.

This isn't picking on individual managers but he frequently said he didn't wish to sign better than we had. Turning down Ayala albeit low lost, was a strong principle.

He was careful with the Clubs Money in a way that a lot of Managers in the game seem not to be..

Edited January 3 by Mr Popodopolous

[Numero Uno]

9 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I’ve been analysing every corner since Watford (a).  Until NYD we’d had 2 corners in the 90th minute plus…both taken by Eathy, both taken short, one blatantly time wasting keeping it in the corner, the other a possession phase where we kept it for a period.

On NYD we didn’t.  Earthy went short as an option but was ignored as Bird gave the “two arms raised” signal.  Although it was 89th minute, not 90th plus….if that makes a difference.

A question for LM at the pre match press conference, if there is one.

I've analysed every corner for four years and my notepad is full of the word "crap" but that's another story......

In all seriousness you are bang on regarding the corner. My view is Max Bird (who I'm a fan of) made a very poor decision, a minute or so later McNally (who I'm also a fan of), foul or not, made a very questionable decision then Dickie/Knight (who I'm also a fan of) didn't defend the cross well enough and we've chucked two points away. That couple of minutes is all on four of our more in-form players taking responsibility and getting their decision making and execution on point imo. That will happen at isolated times over a season tbf, the problem with us atm is that it happens too often and it's being caused by various players throughout the side.

[Gert Mare]

3 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I'd say NP was exception to a rule in that sense and in the sense of not putting a club at jeopardy or warning to in pursuit of results. Yeah he was undercut in Summer 2023 but he wouldn't pushed cor us to be reckless at all IMO even with license.

This isn't picking on individual managers but he frequently said he didn't wish to sign better than we had. Turning down Ayala albeit low lost, was a strong principle.

He was careful with the Clubs Money in a way that a lot of Managers in the game seem not to be..

He achieved all of his objectives therefore, but was sacked due to a 'perception'. Perhaps his boss should have taken a look at the objectives that he set in the first place!

The whole debacle was utter madness and totally bonkers. I know it's gone, but the problem sadly still remains. Hierarchy that set objectives that they don't even understand or read and make decisions based on how their ego's are doing. Hardly a recipe for long term success!

 

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, Gert Mare said:

Maybe it's down to perception?

Mine is that regardless of league position I felt that Nigel Pearson gave the academy players opportunities. I seem to recall Yeboah getting quite a few 15 minute cameos? He brought in Pring, Bell, Conway, Knight-Lebel, Towler, James and Scott.

So it's my perception that the pathway is now blocked in pursuit of results (as most managers do - Pearson was an exception to the general rule in my opinion)

Pathway is wider than just first team minutes, it has its place in the strategy around recruitment in and out and the knock-on financial impacts of that.  Nor is it just about the “current” too.  Delaying opportunities, whether justified or not, delays development, the player is perennially in the “not sure of ready or not” bracket.  It makes decisions about their future harder to be clinical about too.

I hope Morrison is seen as the rotation / rest option for Roberts as a bare minimum (with Pring likely to be out), I’d like it to be a serious piece of competition.  I think it will do Haydon good too!

Manning was quite proud of saying at the FF that he was brave for playing Elijah in the late minutes of Leeds and Sheffield Utd, but for Leeds it wasn’t when McCrorie went off injured, he chose Sykes first, and for Sheffield Utd we were 1-0 up but lost 2-1.  He’s not featured since, and hasn’t made every squad either.  So, my own view is that I’m still waiting to be convinced.

[Davefevs]

9 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

I've analysed every corner for four years and my notepad is full of the word "crap" but that's another story......

Lack of paper in the AG toilets?  Or only Izel?

[Gert Mare]

8 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Pathway is wider than just first team minutes, it has its place in the strategy around recruitment in and out and the knock-on financial impacts of that.  Nor is it just about the “current” too.  Delaying opportunities, whether justified or not, delays development, the player is perennially in the “not sure of ready or not” bracket.  It makes decisions about their future harder to be clinical about too.

I hope Morrison is seen as the rotation / rest option for Roberts as a bare minimum (with Pring likely to be out), I’d like it to be a serious piece of competition.  I think it will do Haydon good too!

Manning was quite proud of saying at the FF that he was brave for playing Elijah in the late minutes of Leeds and Sheffield Utd, but for Leeds it wasn’t when McCrorie went off injured, he chose Sykes first, and for Sheffield Utd we were 1-0 up but lost 2-1.  He’s not featured since, and hasn’t made every squad either.  So, my own view is that I’m still waiting to be convinced.

Agree with everything here Dave. 

This is why I feel that Nigel Pearson was different to basically any other manager in the football league.

In my opinion Liam Manning is following the form of the other 99% of managers who don't want to play youth at the cost of being fired.

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 minutes ago, Gert Mare said:

Agree with everything here Dave. 

This is why I feel that Nigel Pearson was different to basically any other manager in the football league.

In my opinion Liam Manning is following the form of the other 99% of managers who don't want to play youth at the cost of being fired.

Took long term decisions in the benefit of the Club, with Youth and a Range of issues.

What stupidity to remove him and his team when something was building- I think Manning can do fine, but he's also young and ambitious and if he does well but not well enough to get us up he could get poached.

[NDW4CITY]

20 minutes ago, Gert Mare said:

Agree with everything here Dave. 

This is why I feel that Nigel Pearson was different to basically any other manager in the football league.

In my opinion Liam Manning is following the form of the other 99% of managers who don't want to play youth at the cost of being fired.

In that sense, NP was looking out for the long-term interests of the club, more so than the owners. Scandalous but not surprising. As you say, virtually no other manager would have had the integrity and courage to do that.  

[Numero Uno]

39 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Pathway is wider than just first team minutes, it has its place in the strategy around recruitment in and out and the knock-on financial impacts of that.  Nor is it just about the “current” too.  Delaying opportunities, whether justified or not, delays development, the player is perennially in the “not sure of ready or not” bracket.  It makes decisions about their future harder to be clinical about too.

I hope Morrison is seen as the rotation / rest option for Roberts as a bare minimum (with Pring likely to be out), I’d like it to be a serious piece of competition.  I think it will do Haydon good too!

Manning was quite proud of saying at the FF that he was brave for playing Elijah in the late minutes of Leeds and Sheffield Utd, but for Leeds it wasn’t when McCrorie went off injured, he chose Sykes first, and for Sheffield Utd we were 1-0 up but lost 2-1.  He’s not featured since, and hasn’t made every squad either.  So, my own view is that I’m still waiting to be convinced.

Morrison for me, has reached the level of first team squad player and must be involved a lot more often than he is. I would be critical of Liam for that. We have two coming back from loan at some point who have probably learned/shown enough to be considered squad players next season and it is, again, up to Liam to utilise them. That might mean, in JKL's case a decision on Atkinson needs to be made (assuming that Naismith is history anyway). Similarly with SPH a decision may have to be made on one of the two forwards we have brought in (we should never have brought both in and if people think that's blocking a pathway I can get on board with that because Sinclair has only shown very isolated patches of what he might do and Fally I won't even comment on after his last "performance"). Yeboah, who knows?

In terms of who is left there doesn't seem to be anyone who is really putting their hand up and saying "what about me?" which includes, of course, showing what you can do in First Team training. If Liam is blocking off the avenue of getting youngsters getting involved in First Team training if they are playing well for the 21's, and I have no reason to believe that currently, then we really do have an issue, one I would expect a competent TD to deal with. I would guess JKS goes out on loan next season plus Yeboah again, after that who is there that we should be looking out for?

Edited January 3 by Numero Uno

[W-S-M Seagull]

3 hours ago, Numero Uno said:

Liam has done the first bit and got us a few results at home against teams that are in the lower reaches of the table. Whether one or two like it or not in terms of the performances failure to beat crap sides has been a consistent stick we beat our managers with (in fact we often find a way to lose to them) and he's managed it in three out of the last four at home. Now we get to see if he wears Big Boys Pants when we are up against teams with a bit more about them. By the end of the season that's around 80 games in charge against all types of opposition, typical runs of form and injuries etc. both with us and our opposition, and we should have a pretty accurate indication where it is all heading under him.

I cannot get on board with people that want to fire every 30-40 games until we get the right bloke in.....unless that 30 games yields about 18 points!! It's mental (and very expensive) thinking.

Why doesn't almost 60 games give us a pretty accurate indication of where it is all heading under him? Why 80? When we get to 80 will you then change it to 100? 

52 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

I've analysed every corner for four years and my notepad is full of the word "crap" but that's another story......

In all seriousness you are bang on regarding the corner. My view is Max Bird (who I'm a fan of) made a very poor decision, a minute or so later McNally (who I'm also a fan of), foul or not, made a very questionable decision then Dickie/Knight (who I'm also a fan of) didn't defend the cross well enough and we've chucked two points away. That couple of minutes is all on four of our more in-form players taking responsibility and getting their decision making and execution on point imo. That will happen at isolated times over a season tbf, the problem with us atm is that it happens too often and it's being caused by various players throughout the side.

At what point do we start to think that so many individual errors are down to the coaching? A good coach should be able to coach these individual errors out of a player, correct? 

[Mr Popodopolous]

One thing I would say about JKL, yea he seems the next cab off the rank.

If LM wants us to be switching between 3 and 4 in game, ie back 3, one steps up, Full Backs drop back is he the right profile of Player or is he mode of an orthodox CB albeit mobile and technically good.

I only say it as it is a rare skillset to switch between back 3 and deepest defensive midfield, not many have it IMO.

[Numero Uno]

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

Why doesn't almost 60 games give us a pretty accurate indication of where it is all heading under him? Why 80? When we get to 80 will you then change it to 100? 

At what point do we start to think that so many individual errors are down to the coaching? A good coach should be able to coach these individual errors out of a player, correct? 

I don't believe in sacking managers after 60 games unless there is no way back. Another 20 games is almost two seasons including one full season which covers most eventualities in terms of recruitment, luck, fitness, form and the like so at that point it's a fair spread of games and time to make a reasonable decision in my view. If you can see definite improvement you will stick and if not you accept that it won't work with him in charge based on a sensible, not kneejerk, sample.

You can advise players but ultimately decision making is down to the person making the decision. It's not like coaching technique, movement, tactics or shape. If the manager is constantly giving the advice and the players are constantly failing to listen then either the players aren't up to it or the message is not being delivered properly. You can tell Max Bird to take a short corner in minute 89 but whether he listens is down to Max Bird (he doesn't need to be told anyway, he has more than enough football intelligence to realise that was the better option in the circumstances of the match, but he made a bad decision and that does happen sometimes - no blame on the Manager whatsoever otherwise you may as well blame the Manager for all 50 or so mistakes most teams will inevitably make in a football match).

Whether Liam can get the message across and we become more ruthless will be demonstrated over the next 21 league games.......and he will get that barring a disaster whether you agree or otherwise.

[Charlie BCFC]

I fear this topic wouldn’t have so many replies had we defended a set piece against Plymouth and had 9 points from a last possible 9, something Pearson was never able to do but Manning did a month after he was appointed 

[Northern Red]

4 minutes ago, Charlie BCFC said:

I fear this topic wouldn’t have so many replies had we defended a set piece against Plymouth and had 9 points from a last possible 9, something Pearson was never able to do but Manning did a month after he was appointed 

Of course it wouldn't. Same way as if we win tomorrow it'll slowly drop down the page.

[Gert Mare]

48 minutes ago, NDW4CITY said:

In that sense, NP was looking out for the long-term interests of the club, more so than the owners. Scandalous but not surprising. As you say, virtually no other manager would have had the integrity and courage to do that.  

Key word!

Sadly lacking in both Jon and Brian.

[W-S-M Seagull]

7 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

I don't believe in sacking managers after 60 games unless there is no way back. Another 20 games is almost two seasons including one full season which covers most eventualities in terms of recruitment, luck, fitness, form and the like so at that point it's a fair spread of games and time to make a reasonable decision in my view. If you can see definite improvement you will stick and if not you accept that it won't work with him in charge based on a sensible, not kneejerk, sample.

You can advise players but ultimately decision making is down to the person making the decision. It's not like coaching technique, movement, tactics or shape. If the manager is constantly giving the advice and the players are constantly failing to listen then either the players aren't up to it or the message is not being delivered properly. You can tell Max Bird to take a short corner in minute 89 but whether he listens is down to Max Bird (he doesn't need to be told anyway, he has more than enough football intelligence to realise that was the better option in the circumstances of the match, but he made a bad decision and that does happen sometimes - no blame on the Manager whatsoever otherwise you may as well blame the Manager for all 50 or so mistakes most teams will inevitably make in a football match).

Whether Liam can get the message across and we become more ruthless will be demonstrated over the next 21 league games.......and he will get that barring a disaster whether you agree or otherwise.

I suppose where I'm at is in a situation like Liams, if it's not worked out after 60 games then an extra 20 games won't move the dial. 60 games isn't kneejerk. 

If we go back 12 months, has there really been tangible progress? I'd say not really, especially considering the money spent. So that makes me think that if there has been little progress in 12 months then there is unlikely to be progress in the next 20 games.

Sorry but I think it is absolutely the responsibility of a coach to coach his players to make the right decisions. That's man management. If for example Sir Alex would have told his players to take a short corner in the 89th minute, they absolutely would have. Ultimately it's down to the manager and to blame the players is a total cop out. 

He most likely will be given the next 20 games at least, doesn't mean I have to agree with it. 

Stoke realised they made a mistake so they got rid of their manager. That's being ruthless. We however are just bumbling along and praying it will work out. 

[W-S-M Seagull]

24 minutes ago, Charlie BCFC said:

I fear this topic wouldn’t have so many replies had we defended a set piece against Plymouth and had 9 points from a last possible 9, something Pearson was never able to do but Manning did a month after he was appointed 

We can spin this the other way can't we? I'd suggest if Oxford scored their 'certain' goal amongst other similar situations then this thread would be consigned to history. 

[Solent Robin]

This thread will never disappear even if we went on a 8 match winning run, as the ghost of Nige and the way he was treated will always be lurking in the background. OTIB is a haunted house I tell thee and can only be exorcised by promotion!

[Gert Mare]

1 hour ago, Numero Uno said:

Morrison for me, has reached the level of first team squad player and must be involved a lot more often than he is. I would be critical of Liam for that. We have two coming back from loan at some point who have probably learned/shown enough to be considered squad players next season and it is, again, up to Liam to utilise them. That might mean, in JKL's case a decision on Atkinson needs to be made (assuming that Naismith is history anyway). Similarly with SPH a decision may have to be made on one of the two forwards we have brought in (we should never have brought both in and if people think that's blocking a pathway I can get on board with that because Sinclair has only shown very isolated patches of what he might do and Fally I won't even comment on after his last "performance"). Yeboah, who knows?

In terms of who is left there doesn't seem to be anyone who is really putting their hand up and saying "what about me?" which includes, of course, showing what you can do in First Team training. If Liam is blocking off the avenue of getting youngsters getting involved in First Team training if they are playing well for the 21's, and I have no reason to believe that currently, then we really do have an issue, one I would expect a competent TD to deal with. I would guess JKS goes out on loan next season plus Yeboah again, after that who is there that we should be looking out for?

I liked the look of Rae Nelson during pre-season. Shame he had to have an op. I think there is a player in there that could come good with experience.

[lenred]

31 minutes ago, Charlie BCFC said:

I fear this topic wouldn’t have so many replies had we defended a set piece against Plymouth and had 9 points from a last possible 9, something Pearson was never able to do but Manning did a month after he was appointed 

And round and round and round and round  we go…….

Trouble is is that we didn’t defend it, it would’ve been great if we did, but we didn’t. I’m sure all the teams we’ve taken points off of this season because we scored a goal feel the same but it doesn’t really matter does it as that’s the game…

As I said yesterday, this purgatory on here of supporters of his blowing smoke and his detractors shouting him down when we balls up, will last until he goes.  

Personally I hope that’s sooner rather than later (along with at least Tinnion - the Lansdowns going is pipe dream atm) as we need a clean slate as a club and a manager and DOF who can progress us.   But I’m not holding my breath and think Manning at least will be here a good while yet I think.  So this forum, the socials, and the atmosphere in the ground will stay as it is for a good while also.  

[Numero Uno]

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

I suppose where I'm at is in a situation like Liams, if it's not worked out after 60 games then an extra 20 games won't move the dial. 60 games isn't kneejerk. 

If we go back 12 months, has there really been tangible progress? I'd say not really, especially considering the money spent. So that makes me think that if there has been little progress in 12 months then there is unlikely to be progress in the next 20 games.

Sorry but I think it is absolutely the responsibility of a coach to coach his players to make the right decisions. That's man management. If for example Sir Alex would have told his players to take a short corner in the 89th minute, they absolutely would have. Ultimately it's down to the manager and to blame the players is a total cop out. 

He most likely will be given the next 20 games at least, doesn't mean I have to agree with it. 

Stoke realised they made a mistake so they got rid of their manager. That's being ruthless. We however are just bumbling along and praying it will work out. 

Ultimately the coach takes responsibility if his players make bad decisions and he cannot get the message across. We all know that. That doesn't make the players blameless and not responsible though. If I come for a cross, get nowhere near it, and their Centre Forward says "don't mind if I do mate" how can I charge into a dressing room shouting and bawling at the Manager or the Centre Half?!! The only thing anyone worth their salt does is stand up in front of the staff and rest of the lads and say "sorry boys, that's on me".......then half an hour later, certainly below pro level anyway, everyone is taking the piss out of you. Like the other week "Max, was there a medical emergency on the halfway line?".  Players do make mistakes and managers will carry the can if they keep making them unless they are in a position to get rid of repeat offenders first.

[Natchfever]

22 minutes ago, Solent Robin said:

This thread will never disappear even if we went on a 8 match winning run, as the ghost of Nige and the way he was treated will always be lurking in the background. OTIB is a haunted house I tell thee and can only be exorcised by promotion!

Agree with you on the spectre of Pearsons manner of dismissal which will rumble on until something happens to consign it to history if only temporarily.

Something that is irrelevant if results are going our way, but I dont personally warm to Manning and I dont think im alone in that. I think if he was more likeable and less robotic hed get less pelters possibly.

Either way we arent going down so give him to seasons end which should provide a proper measure of meeting stated expectations.

Edited January 3 by Natchfever

[DaveInSA]

Where I am at is that we’re no better.

A great coach/manager makes improvements and they happen quickly.

There are a few case studies this season alone : Nottingham Forest, Bournemouth, Blackburn Rovers, Bristol Rovers

I don’t buy this narrative that we need to give managers 3 or 4 windows. They should be able to work with 2 windows maximum - improve what you’ve got - and kick on. We’ve seen no tangible improvement. We make the same mistakes over and over. We’ve got hammered away from home 3-0 three times this season - two of them against promoted teams - it’s just not acceptable. It’s poor.

[Mr Popodopolous]

Bournemouth have spent a shedload of money since January 2023 with one big sale in Solanke and they had half a PL squad to begin...was looking at some of their US Parent company figures and their Revenue rose by X but Player Costs may have risen sharply! Solanke going is a bit of a reversal..and impressively though he's doing it is 2nd season.

They also had a host of players who had played in PL in Championship.

Blackburn are one for sure, Nottingham Forest somewhere between the two.

[Davefevs]

4 hours ago, Charlie BCFC said:

I fear this topic wouldn’t have so many replies had we defended a set piece against Plymouth and had 9 points from a last possible 9, something Pearson was never able to do but Manning did a month after he was appointed 

If the dog had have stopped for a shit, it wouldn’t have won the race!

Continued…

3 hours ago, Solent Robin said:

This thread will never disappear even if we went on a 8 match winning run, as the ghost of Nige and the way he was treated will always be lurking in the background. OTIB is a haunted house I tell thee and can only be exorcised by promotion!

it depends what it follows and then what follows it.

Thats the problem, whichever “side” you’re on, or not even on any side at all.

We peak, we trough, we semi-peak, we semi-trough, we go a bit linear….but there is no mistaking we level out at circa one win, one draw, one lose.  That is factual.

Whether “you” (I don’t mean you) selectively pick a small bunch of games to frame it one way or the other, the facts are the facts.

Whether “you” pick a “what if” scenario to frame it, ie. If we win the next two, if we lose the next two, the facts are still the facts.

However, if you want to look at the recent trend of what has happened, even if just by using resuits, the 3-game trend is upward.  That’s great.  The context of that upward trend is that it followed a downward trend.

=====

But….if we genuinely win the next 8 that would be an easy discussion on here to say that we look like we’ve broken out of win, lose, draw.  Anyone harping on about anything else will be seen as “clear agenda”.

It is nothing to do with Pearson.  It’s a bit childish to use things like “ghost of Nige”.  If you can’t construct a discussion viewpoint on behalf of Manning after 56 league games in charge without bringing it back to Pearson, it probably means you’ve not really got a strong “argument”.  The only ghost laid to rest after an 8-game winning run would be Manning’s own “win, lose, draw” spectre (Not Johnathan).

Move on!

[BobBobBobbin]

4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

If the dog had have stopped for a shit, it wouldn’t have won the race!

Continued…

it depends what it follows and then what follows it.

Thats the problem, whichever “side” you’re on, or not even on any side at all.

We peak, we trough, we semi-peak, we semi-trough, we go a bit linear….but there is no mistaking we level out at circa one win, one draw, one lose.  That is factual.

Whether “you” (I don’t mean you) selectively pick a small bunch of games to frame it one way or the other, the facts are the facts.

Whether “you” pick a “what if” scenario to frame it, ie. If we win the next two, if we lose the next two, the facts are still the facts.

However, if you want to look at the recent trend of what has happened, even if just by using resuits, the 3-game trend is upward.  That’s great.  The context of that upward trend is that it followed a downward trend.

=====

But….if we genuinely win the next 8 that would be an easy discussion on here to say that we look like we’ve broken out of win, lose, draw.  Anyone harping on about anything else will be seen as “clear agenda”.

It is nothing to do with Pearson.  It’s a bit childish to use things like “ghost of Nige”.  If you can’t construct a discussion viewpoint on behalf of Manning after 56 league games in charge without bringing it back to Pearson, it probably means you’ve not really got a strong “argument”.  The only ghost laid to rest after an 8-game winning run would be Manning’s own “win, lose, draw” spectre (Not Johnathan).

Move on!

[MarcusX]

10 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I’ve been analysing every corner since Watford (a).  Until NYD we’d had 2 corners in the 90th minute plus…both taken by Eathy, both taken short, one blatantly time wasting keeping it in the corner, the other a possession phase where we kept it for a period.

On NYD we didn’t.  Earthy went short as an option but was ignored as Bird gave the “two arms raised” signal.  Although it was 89th minute, not 90th plus….if that makes a difference.

A question for LM at the pre match press conference, if there is one.

It's an interesting spot. Do you think it's instructed by LM, or player decisions?

It's similar to that decision against QPR to leave no one back.

You and I have both played at the back - I'm sure you'd agree it's one of the first things you sort out before an attacking corner (I was usually barking commands as I made my way up, bit of a danger man at corners ). I fully believe that's on the players to manage that situation and it's a lapse in concentration not to sort it (or complacency). POtentially complacency and thinking we were on top led to just taking a normal corner rather than trying to keep the ball?

Another thing I noticed just before the goal, and I think it was @The turtle mentioned it in the podcast? The Vyner throw in where we lost the ball. Another poor decision.

 

 

[The turtle]

1 minute ago, MarcusX said:

Another thing I noticed just before the goal, and I think it was @The turtle mentioned it in the podcast? The Vyner throw in where we lost the ball. Another poor decision

I was complaining about the corner going in needlessly on 89/90 mins mins.

It was @Curr Avon who also bought up giving away from the throw which led to the goal.

It wasn't just one of those things, it was a pattern.

It's not enough to simply slow the game down and keep it messy. You've also got to show street smarts within that context.

We didn't.

 

 

 

[The turtle]

4 minutes ago, MarcusX said:

I'm sure you'd agree it's one of the first things you sort out before an attacking corner (I was usually barking commands as I made my way up, bit of a danger man at corners ). I fully believe that's on the players to manage that situation

Other teams have 100% identified us as weakly set up when it comes attacking set pieces. You can see it in post games post QPR , they all feel it's on.

I think you're right to an extent within a game it's on players. But it's also on management to identify issue both pre game/post game and in game.

It's just impossible to believe with all the video analysis they haven't gone over it.

QPR - obviously 

WBA - there were two examples 

Luton /Portsmouth -i can't lie this has become a bit of a blur, but I remember a couple of attacking occasions, there were a couple of occasions where they were actively trying spring a counter 

Plymouth - the reverse , this time putting a ball in that has no business doing so .

(**There may have been an example v Norwich where they also broke on us.. but  the memory is vague)

.....

 

There is a trend there, and the door needs to be shut.

 

 

 

[Davefevs]

36 minutes ago, MarcusX said:

It's an interesting spot. Do you think it's instructed by LM, or player decisions?

It's similar to that decision against QPR to leave no one back.

You and I have both played at the back - I'm sure you'd agree it's one of the first things you sort out before an attacking corner (I was usually barking commands as I made my way up, bit of a danger man at corners ). I fully believe that's on the players to manage that situation and it's a lapse in concentration not to sort it (or complacency). POtentially complacency and thinking we were on top led to just taking a normal corner rather than trying to keep the ball?

Another thing I noticed just before the goal, and I think it was @The turtle mentioned it in the podcast? The Vyner throw in where we lost the ball. Another poor decision.

 

 

I dunno Marcus.

I think the high line rather than old-skool h-w line (to pen them in) is Manning, but when to take a time-wasting short corner has got to be on both, players use common-sense or coach barks out instruction if they attempt to do something undesirable.  Detail?

=====

Yep. As a CB as you go forward, you’re usually doing that, checking that you’ve got one more back than they’ve got forward, e.g. 2v1, or 3v2.  If you’re chasing a game, then that’s different.  As a 2v1 one of the 2 might try to goad the attacker by looking to go forward and see if he goes with them.  A mini game of bluff and double bluff.

When I was at St Brendan’s our footie teacher was the art teacher Rod Wesson.  Here we go, what will the art teacher know about footie….then he ran out onto the pitch with his tracksuit with RW initials on it (in my mind it was an English FA trackie), he was a proper coach.  He taught me the near post run, that started with me marking the full-back on the back-post, who was happy that he could mark me and the post.  But as the taker ran up, I made my run behind the keeper towards the near post.  Nobody ever went with me, free header every time, flick on the intention, not to score…if the delivery was right.  Rod Wesson later was key in setting up Rovers Academy (poor bloke).  I used the same routines at Bris and Odd Down.  Simple but effective.

[MarcusX]

4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I dunno Marcus.

I think the high line rather than old-skool h-w line (to pen them in) is Manning, but when to take a time-wasting short corner has got to be on both, players use common-sense or coach barks out instruction if they attempt to do something undesirable.  Detail?

=====

Yep. As a CB as you go forward, you’re usually doing that, checking that you’ve got one more back than they’ve got forward, e.g. 2v1, or 3v2.  If you’re chasing a game, then that’s different.  As a 2v1 one of the 2 might try to goad the attacker by looking to go forward and see if he goes with them.  A mini game of bluff and double bluff.

When I was at St Brendan’s our footie teacher was the art teacher Rod Wesson.  Here we go, what will the art teacher know about footie….then he ran out onto the pitch with his tracksuit with RW initials on it (in my mind it was an English FA trackie), he was a proper coach.  He taught me the near post run, that started with me marking the full-back on the back-post, who was happy that he could mark me and the post.  But as the taker ran up, I made my run behind the keeper towards the near post.  Nobody ever went with me, free header every time, flick on the intention, not to score…if the delivery was right.  Rod Wesson later was key in setting up Rovers Academy (poor bloke).  I used the same routines at Bris and Odd Down.  Simple but effective.

Interesting, I have a similar run starting near the back of box but I dont try to get to the front post, just in that pocket between back post and keeper, anything over hit or missed by the keeper is easy pickings. Usually good for 5-7 goals a season

[MarcusX]

On 02/01/2025 at 15:49, MarcusX said:

 

Edit: I suppose back to the original point - can Nahki Wells play 3 games in 9 days? Of course he can. Will he run as far, be as sharp, be as productive by game 3 as he would if he was 100%? Potentially not, and that's why managers "mollycoddle" and rely on the science to try and reduce the load on players.

Yesterday's performance kinda proves my point. Wells not quite at the same levels as recently, heavy touches, struggled to hold off defenders and generally a bit less involvment.

@Cider man

[Jackson Lamb]

Probably get shot down for this but I still see no real progress from the investment we’ve made, and I’m still in the Manning out camp.

Great to see us win the last 3 home games but it’s yet again just papered over the cracks. You can only beat what it’s front of you but none of the performances bar Portsmouth (defensive pair of Towler and Pack helped mind) were stellar or slick.

Great to see us 8th and I really do hope we push on. But where we are now in the league is where we should be on the back of the comments made by Jon last year and the summer investment.

I predicted us to finish 12-15th start of the season. If we finish top ten then Manning deserves more time and one more summer to push us for a top six finish.

It’s given Liam a bit of breathing space for now. Which I’m sure he appreciates. But I’m still not convinced.

[tubba]

Blows my mind people are even doubting him at the moment. We are in a good position and in great form results wise. Before Sheffield United we were eight or nine unbeaten too? If it wasn't for two late player errors we win that. That's arguaboy been the case a lot. Little blip and climbing the table again. 

It's an incredibly tough league to crack as it is, but looks at the resources of most of the clubs above us. People expect too much. 

Manning is the right man imo but it's recruitment that needs to improve, in certain areas at least. McNally and Bird great additions. Fally and Sincs are, well.... They're not it are they? 

 

 

[fly in the air]

for Manning to say he is happy with what he has is a concern.  two strikers who are lg 1 or lg 2 standard at best. and can he show a bit of enthusiasm when he is interviewed not reading from a fa manual 

[Numero Uno]

1 hour ago, fly in the air said:

for Manning to say he is happy with what he has is a concern.  two strikers who are lg 1 or lg 2 standard at best. and can he show a bit of enthusiasm when he is interviewed not reading from a fa manual 

If the club has indicated that you won't be given money to spend in the window, or if they indicated that you will have to balance the books in order to bring a player or two in and that will probably take the whole window to achieve, what would you say about the squad right this minute whilst still trying to get them to win matches?

If he turns round and say "I'm not really happy with the squad and it's going to take me a month to fix it" should results then go South I would wager you might be right at the top of the queue saying "Liam's comments demoralised the players".........

The fact he's not saying "we are always on the lookout to improve the squad" suggests to me that he has been told he's not getting much or even anything this window.

[Numero Uno]

On 05/01/2025 at 14:12, MarcusX said:

Yesterday's performance kinda proves my point. Wells not quite at the same levels as recently, heavy touches, struggled to hold off defenders and generally a bit less involvment.

@Cider man

To be fair I think that last round of games were low quality all over as a result of the Christmas and New Year Schedule. A huge number of managers saying that the quality was low and that players were leggy. I realise they have squads etc. etc and could freshen up to an extent but managers are reluctant to rest their key players. It did seem to be a "thing" on Saturday in all leagues. On the flip side, Portsmouth freshened it up a bit against us and got obliterated......which probably explains why managers may be reluctant to do it.

We didn't get out of second gear on Saturday, what helped us was that Derby barely reached second gear themselves over the ninety minutes and in the end the win was relatively comfortable.

[mozo]

2 hours ago, fly in the air said:

for Manning to say he is happy with what he has is a concern.  two strikers who are lg 1 or lg 2 standard at best. and can he show a bit of enthusiasm when he is interviewed not reading from a fa manual 

I recall Nige saying that he was happy with his squad after being refused any serious spending after the Scott sale. He couldn't have been though. It's just the best thing to say at the time.

[fly in the air]

if Manning is happy with his squad which is unbelievable then what does Tinnion and the recruitment team do.

[Mr Popodopolous]

12 minutes ago, mozo said:

I recall Nige saying that he was happy with his squad after being refused any serious spending after the Scott sale. He couldn't have been though. It's just the best thing to say at the time.

Manning has been backed, when a manager gets two strikers.. and said manager ostracises one other first reserve/depth option the onus is on him to vindicate said calls.

Edited January 7 by Mr Popodopolous

[Redrascal2]

On 03/01/2025 at 13:51, Gert Mare said:

Maybe it's down to perception?

Mine is that regardless of league position I felt that Nigel Pearson gave the academy players opportunities. I seem to recall Yeboah getting quite a few 15 minute cameos? He brought in Pring, Bell, Conway, Knight-Lebel, Towler, James and Scott.

So it's my perception that the pathway is now blocked in pursuit of results (as most managers do - Pearson was an exception to the general rule in my opinion)

I don't think the pathway is blocked, I don't think there is pathway with Manning in charge. It has been our life blood over the last few years and for those to sit back and allow this to take place is utter stupidity. It will have a massive detrimental effect to the club in the years to come.

[Northern Red]

2 hours ago, Numero Uno said:

If the club has indicated that you won't be given money to spend in the window, or if they indicated that you will have to balance the books in order to bring a player or two in and that will probably take the whole window to achieve, what would you say about the squad right this minute whilst still trying to get them to win matches?

If he turns round and say "I'm not really happy with the squad and it's going to take me a month to fix it" should results then go South I would wager you might be right at the top of the queue saying "Liam's comments demoralised the players".........

The fact he's not saying "we are always on the lookout to improve the squad" suggests to me that he has been told he's not getting much or even anything this window.

Not only that but if you make it known that you're desperate to add a player then the asking price of your target goes up accordingly.

[Northern Red]

Is any manager really ever completely happy with their squad? I'd wager not.

[RedGrucky]

On 07/01/2025 at 14:01, Mr Popodopolous said:

Manning has been backed, when a manager gets two strikers.. and said manager ostracises one other first reserve/depth option the onus is on him to vindicate said calls.

Indeed he has. According to the article re: Nakhi speculation https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/liam-manning-responds-nahki-wells-9839334 Manning's still saying he'd love to bring in more players, but recognises he has to offload first. Would love some follow up questions on transfer window and making the most of the current (full) squad when normal journo interviews resume.

 

[italian dave]

On 03/01/2025 at 23:48, MarcusX said:

It's an interesting spot. Do you think it's instructed by LM, or player decisions?

It's similar to that decision against QPR to leave no one back.

 

 

 

Bit of both, isn’t it?

It’s evidently an instruction to have one back. We often do it. We’ve done it since.

But the instruction, presumably, is just that: to have one back.

It’s the player’s decision to run twenty yards forward and then plant a header straight to an opponent!! 

[Davefevs]

26 minutes ago, italian dave said:

Bit of both, isn’t it?

It’s evidently an instruction to have one back. We often do it. We’ve done it since.

But the instruction, presumably, is just that: to have one back.

It’s the player’s decision to run twenty yards forward and then plant a header straight to an opponent!! 

I guess us fans typically think of having “one back” (or one more than them back) as being on the halfway line.  But it is clear Manning wants to pin / squeeze / condense the pitch on any defensive clearance.  So they tend to be circa 35-40 yards from goal not 55-60 yards from goal.

That QPR goal was almost preceded by the corner just before it (1m18s before!)…but we recycled possession through Wells and Bird…Pring just out of shot.

 

The next corner, the goal conceded, we see Pring advance, because Smyth is gonna bear down on the cleared ball.  He stuffs up the header, but had he stayed 10 yards back, he is possibly in no-man’s land as Smyth attacks him, a bit like Michael Owen ghosting past a stationery Argentinian defender…before that other defender appeared on the screen!

This is Manning’s approach to the defensive side of an attacking corner.  Everything he plans is always gonna be down to execution on the pitch.  He must buy the risk / reward, because he’s still doing the same!

[Mr Popodopolous]

I'm probably oversimplifying greatly but two on halfway, especially if our quicker players and we don't concede that goal.

Had Max stayed more maybe we don't concede anyway but it put him in a tricky position.

[Mr Popodopolous]

The same for all corners or most, surely it needs tweaking a bit for context.

ie When you've been knocking on the door for an hour and unpicked the lock, that is bordering on reckless. There were shouts for a penalty in the 2-3 mins before QPR equalised but nothing major?

[italian dave]

11 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I guess us fans typically think of having “one back” (or one more than them back) as being on the halfway line.  But it is clear Manning wants to pin / squeeze / condense the pitch on any defensive clearance.  So they tend to be circa 35-40 yards from goal not 55-60 yards from goal.

That QPR goal was almost preceded by the corner just before it (1m18s before!)…but we recycled possession through Wells and Bird…Pring just out of shot.

 

The next corner, the goal conceded, we see Pring advance, because Smyth is gonna bear down on the cleared ball.  He stuffs up the header, but had he stayed 10 yards back, he is possibly in no-man’s land as Smyth attacks him, a bit like Michael Owen ghosting past a stationery Argentinian defender…before that other defender appeared on the screen!

This is Manning’s approach to the defensive side of an attacking corner.  Everything he plans is always gonna be down to execution on the pitch.  He must buy the risk / reward, because he’s still doing the same!

Sure, but I think I’d argue that better in no man’s land, but at least with a defender and a goalkeeper (on his feet and able to use his hands) in between Smyth and a goal than what we ended up with.

You’re right, of course: it’s a risk/reward judgement: in that first clip if we’ve got two back we possibly don't have either the possession or the options to recycle that ball. (Which maybe addresses @Mr Popodopolouss comment?)

Maybe it’s over-simplifying it to talk just about instruction (strategy) and decision/execution on the pitch. Maybe there should also be an element of players taking the responsibility to determine the right strategy on the pitch. Not a free for all! But within ‘instructed’ parameters. 

[Davefevs]

23 minutes ago, italian dave said:

Sure, but I think I’d argue that better in no man’s land, but at least with a defender and a goalkeeper (on his feet and able to use his hands) in between Smyth and a goal than what we ended up with.

Agree.  A lot can go wrong for the attacker over 90 yards!

[Mr Popodopolous]

31 minutes ago, italian dave said:

Sure, but I think I’d argue that better in no man’s land, but at least with a defender and a goalkeeper (on his feet and able to use his hands) in between Smyth and a goal than what we ended up with.

You’re right, of course: it’s a risk/reward judgement: in that first clip if we’ve got two back we possibly don't have either the possession or the options to recycle that ball. (Which maybe addresses @Mr Popodopolouss comment?)

Maybe it’s over-simplifying it to talk just about instruction (strategy) and decision/execution on the pitch. Maybe there should also be an element of players taking the responsibility to determine the right strategy on the pitch. Not a free for all! But within ‘instructed’ parameters. 

Still you have a fair amount of opportunity to consolidate and recycle, that was QPR's main out at that time and the gift, it lifted their morale to boot.

To mess that up, brainless all round in the context of that. Variation within parameters seems a plan but it doesn't seem like something Manning is that keen on?

[42nite]

On 07/01/2025 at 13:54, fly in the air said:

if Manning is happy with his squad which is unbelievable then what does Tinnion and the recruitment team do.

 

Make it worse!

 

[willy bedlock]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

I guess us fans typically think of having “one back” (or one more than them back) as being on the halfway line.  But it is clear Manning wants to pin / squeeze / condense the pitch on any defensive clearance.  So they tend to be circa 35-40 yards from goal not 55-60 yards from goal.

That QPR goal was almost preceded by the corner just before it (1m18s before!)…but we recycled possession through Wells and Bird…Pring just out of shot.

 

The next corner, the goal conceded, we see Pring advance, because Smyth is gonna bear down on the cleared ball.  He stuffs up the header, but had he stayed 10 yards back, he is possibly in no-man’s land as Smyth attacks him, a bit like Michael Owen ghosting past a stationery Argentinian defender…before that other defender appeared on the screen!

This is Manning’s approach to the defensive side of an attacking corner.  Everything he plans is always gonna be down to execution on the pitch.  He must buy the risk / reward, because he’s still doing the same!

Qpr have all 11 players behind the ball , and they still score , freak goal imo , only 1 in 25 _50 goes in , bad decision from max , should have body checked  their player , yellow at most

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 minute ago, willy bedlock said:

Qpr have all 11 players behind the ball , and they still score , freak goal imo , only 1 in 25 _50 goes in , bad decision from max , should have body checked  their player , yellow at most

Straight red as Last man, Denial of Goal Scoring Opportunity?

[1960maaan]

1 hour ago, willy bedlock said:

Qpr have all 11 players behind the ball , and they still score , freak goal imo , only 1 in 25 _50 goes in , bad decision from max , should have body checked  their player , yellow at most

Poor decision by Max and the punishment for "taking him out" is debatable .
But it still comes down to one question .
Why at 1-0 up and dominating a game against a side that barely troubled us, do we end up with every outfield player in the final 3rd ?
Manning and Hogg should be screaming to make sure we have 2/3 back at all times , it's worse than schoolboy ( or girl) football.

[MarcusX]

On 07/01/2025 at 12:17, Numero Uno said:

To be fair I think that last round of games were low quality all over as a result of the Christmas and New Year Schedule. A huge number of managers saying that the quality was low and that players were leggy. I realise they have squads etc. etc and could freshen up to an extent but managers are reluctant to rest their key players. It did seem to be a "thing" on Saturday in all leagues. On the flip side, Portsmouth freshened it up a bit against us and got obliterated......which probably explains why managers may be reluctant to do it.

We didn't get out of second gear on Saturday, what helped us was that Derby barely reached second gear themselves over the ninety minutes and in the end the win was relatively comfortable.

Yea I agree and wasn’t knocking Wells, just re-enforcing the point that performance levels tend to drop by game 3 in a short space of time - but as you say complete rotation isn’t always a good idea either