Tommy Mulgrew

Does anyone know what he is doing at present? He does not seem to play many games. He went out on loan a couple of times and I remember that he did well at Carlisle and seemed to have been well regarded by the manager and fans. But I have not heard much of him this season. He has the physicality needed for a reasonable cb and his background suggests that he should be skilful enough to play competently for a Championship side now or in future. He’s gone off my radar so I do not know how he is getting on now. If he does go, I wish him a good and long career at a progressive club.

A mixed day for our recent and not so recent leavers: Reading score 4 and win easily😀; Eastleigh concede 4 and lose easily 😩; Charlton draw 1:1🫤. Pompey win 1:0 and remain top of their league😭; Tranmere win 1:0 at Wrexham 😃. 😆

But Bree or Stephens would be an upgrade on Manning. Arguably, Meghoma would, too. (We have seen the truth of those statements earlier this season when those three players played at LB instead of Manning.). We could play either of those replacements depending on the strengths of the opposition. And I bet we would do better than if we did not. But, regrettably, I doubt that RM would agree. Unless RM sees sense, our promotion hopes will remain unfulfilled. IMO, of course.

I agree with you, WG, but that is not the way that our manager wants the team to do it. KM’s first instinct is to control the ball and run with it but he did not even manage to get full control of it because two opponents were on him so quickly. Perhaps he would have yanked it had he done so, perhaps not.

Because Manning fucked up a chance to clear the ball, which fell to Sully, who had two opposition players in close attendance and did not have much of an alternative to trying to cut inside and clear the danger. He did not succeed but imo it is harsh to blame him for the goal. Other than kicking the ball all the way across the pitch and out into row z, he did not have many choices available to him.

RM told Manning to cover the blaze and then tackle it. We’re still waiting. 👀

Brizzl doing the business but Leeds and Leicester win. spoke too soon: IT:BC now 2:2 finished 3:2 bugger!

This was posted a few hours ago: I think you will find that an 8.7% chance justifies “almost over” and that conceding two goals a game by having Manning play the way he is at present justifies “our chances of victory in the play-offs is under threat”. If anyone is over-reacting, it is you NNC. Still, each to his or her own, I suppose.

To me, it does not really matter whether the cause of the problem is Manning or Martin. The problem is costing us about two goals a game at present. Ultimately Martin has to sort that out. Like others on here, I would prefer, in descending order, Bree, Meghoma or Stephens at LB. Even without the required tactical adjustment to stop the problem happening so frequently, that simple change would probably reduce our goals conceded to more acceptable levels. Surely Martin and his staff and the players can see that every one of our recent opponents has targeted No-Mannings Land and been notably successful in doing so. As a result, our push for automatic promotion is almost over and our chances of victory in the play-offs is under threat. If that does not galvanise action to overcome the problem, I don’t know what will. We do not need a change of manager. We do need our present manager to act decisively and shore up our faltering promotion challenge. Him merely saying “rubbish goals” after every match without changing anything is no good whatsoever. Action, not words, Russell. Not long now until we welcome Preston. Please tell him, gio1saints. 🙏 Thank you.

Played for 90 minutes from the start today and provided the pass for Juv’s equalising goal. 2:1 to Napoli in injury time. Have not watched but he probably did well having played almost the whole game. Juve have 28% possession so not quite Russball.

I posted that on a different thread. I think it is relevant on this one; so here it is. FWIW I thought we were pretty good for the first hour or so against Liverpool, mixing up our usual approach with a more direct one via Sully and Edozie, but then went back into our predictable and ponderous, shell fannying around and getting nowhere fast, coughing up two preventable and unnecessary goals. More of the first half please, mixing up our routes out from the back so that we are less predictable and more incisive. It would help if we could score from some of our carefully created chances, though. Looking forward to tomorrow in the Venice of England.

George Kirby?

Nobody on here, and I mean nobody, minds playing out from the back. What some do mind, however, is continuing to play around at the back when we are so effectively pressed that we cannot play out and so gift the ball to an opposition player, with the real possibility of us conceding a goal because we are still in or near our penalty area. All that is required is for us to vary our tactics when we find that our preferred way of playing is under too much pressure. By becoming less predictable we would become harder to play against. And thereby more successful. That is not an attack on RM; it is merely a wish that he should be more flexible and thereby more successful in what really matters: promotion (not the highest possible possession and pass completion statistics). Why some on here cannot see that completely defeats me.

That is precisely the point.

But not yesterday.

Our slow and ponderous crab-football when chasing a winner or an equaliser towards the end of a game. Exciting and incisive? Nah.

Not “Fishy” I hope.

Two-paced or even three-paced, not one-paced; positive, not negative, and progressive, incisive passing; fewer backward or sideways passes when scope for going forward exists; running forward off-the-ball into spaces; speed, not walking pace, in the counter-attack and urgency when chasing the game: all those would help. But he seems not to value them. That is why, IMO, he comes in for criticism on here. Of course we all recognise the good things. Some of us want more. Who, except one or two I could name, is to say we are wrong?

IMO, more like Monsieur Hulot while playing footie on holiday. Agree he was v good yesterday and before Afcon.

IMO the problems with “automatisms” and giving the ball away were caused by the absence of Downes, the presence of Brooks on the right wing and of Rothwell in midfield and Charles and Smallbone doing precious little right, partly caused by the two former points. Because many of our usual passing lanes were not there, we slowed down to almost walking pace and could not play with our usual (recent) intensity. Putting those things right would improve things considerably. Brooks as RW is hopeless because he does not track back defensively and he takes AA’s place, forcing the latter to the centre; AA is not a CF. If Brooks starts as a 10, he will still have to do some defensive work and will have to have a better idea of the automatic passing lines to him than he did at Bristol. If we play both JR and DB without having Downes, as we did on Tuesday, we shall have similar problems. Hopefully, big Joe Aribo is ready to play. The problem of the left side of our defence is easily solved, in Bree’s absence, by playing Meghoma and having our LW (preferably Fraser) doubling up as necessary. Meghoma is good defensively for someone so young but will not have faced a side as good as WBA before; he has done exceptionally well so far and shows every sign of being able to cope. I’d rather have him than Manning. GB, KWP, TBH, JB, Meghoma, FD or SC, JA, DB, AA, SM, RF Subs: Lumley, JS, RM, SA, WS, SAA, JR, Sully, Adams. Bragg and Dibling miss out. If Brooks is injured, WS to get a chance to redeem himself after his nightmare at Bristol and Bragg as a sub, with Dibling missing out. If Adams is not yet fit, Dibling replaces him. And a big, powerful hairdryer for RM.

We played the first half with one DM who is young, inexperienced and misplaced several passes. We played the second half with no DM. We played 70% of the match with two players who have only just arrived here and look lost when they do not have the ball; DB and JR did not make themselves available enough and that led to lots of misplaced passes by others. We played most of the match without a proper CF. We played all the match without a properLB. WS was poor throughout and was hopeless when trying to play as a DM; he misplaced passes and won no duels. We played too slowly and indecisively, just like in September. THB looked appalled by what was happening in front of him. GB had a good game despite the three goals. RM’s hairdryer was not big enough (and no good for WS anyway). On to the next game.

Manning, who else, at fault for the first goal!

13 points for us and 9 for Leeds. That will be enough to give us a bigger cushion to cover our match at Elland Road. Easy-Peasy.

He did pretty well on Saturday when holding off THREE defenders and delicately passing to Edozie, who scored our fifth goal. He seems to have developed a more bulky physique in the last few months and is now more capable of keeping the ball when under pressure from a CB or other defender. Give him time; he is coming good.

Did anyone notice who took over as captain when AA left the field yesterday?