What on earth has gone wrong and can it be rectified?

[flowwolf]

I'm sure you understand perfectly well, but for those who really don't have a clue

Play positively and win most of our games, play negatively and lose nearly all of them, how about that then.........

And NFP has gnats knackers? Explains those dreadful shoes........

Since you put it like that Dave I'm with you all the way.

[marbelladave]

Since you put it like that Dave I'm with you all the way.

Great, but I really want to hear more about NFP's gnats bollocks.......

And those giant white trainers........

[Col city fan]

I'm sure you understand perfectly well, but for those who really don't have a clue

Play positively and win most of our games, play negatively and lose nearly all of them, how about that then.........

And NFP has gnats knackers? Explains those dreadful shoes........

You do need to change the record a bit Dave...

For one last time, there's one major problem with playing positively as you describe it... The opposition.

There are games when the opposition won't allow us to 'play positively' OR they have sussed us out so that they know what's coming.

In addition, in those games at the start of the season when we 'played positively' we were still beaten away from home (eg Charlton and Blackburn).

Your analysis is and has been all season, just too simplistic Dave.

Tactics ARE complicated, they take intelligence and a good deal of working out. Unless you contain a team full of superstars (such that you can pretty much play your own game every week and still win) tactics need to be varied according to the opposition, the conditions and the players you have at your disposal.

This is where I have issue with both yourself and Thracian... Both of you appear to think that we can simply play some free-flowing, attacking game, week-in, week- out and still come out victorious. It don't work like that. Why? Because there is an opposition and an opposition manager who will be trying to nullify your tactics, whilst imposing their own onto you.

The major disappointment, for me, with Pearson this season has been his complete inability to sort the side out to get results away from home.

I stated early on that I didn't think we had the personnel to change how we play away. And I still believe this.

[marbelladave]

You do need to change the record a bit Dave...

For one last time, there's one major problem with playing positively as you describe it... The opposition.

There are games when the opposition won't allow us to 'play positively' OR they have sussed us out so that they know what's coming.

In addition, in those games at the start of the season when we 'played positively' we were still beaten away from home (eg Charlton and Blackburn).

Your analysis is and has been all season, just too simplistic Dave.

Tactics ARE complicated, they take intelligence and a good deal of working out. Unless you contain a team full of superstars (such that you can pretty much play your own game every week and still win) tactics need to be varied according to the opposition, the conditions and the players you have at your disposal.

This is where I have issue with both yourself and Thracian... Both of you appear to think that we can simply play some free-flowing, attacking game, week-in, week- out and still come out victorious. It don't work like that. Why? Because there is an opposition and an opposition manager who will be trying to nullify your tactics, whilst imposing their own onto you.

The major disappointment, for me, with Pearson this season has been his complete inability to sort the side out to get results away from home.

I stated early on that I didn't think we had the personnel to change how we play away. And I still believe this.

It may be the same record Col. but it is still very much the best one.

I am very much a practical person with a practical, scientific education and I look at the evidence. I am not 'in the know', I can only make my judgements bases on what I see on the pitch. It works like this.....

After the Blackburn and Charlton games and the integration of Knockaert as a starter we only lost one game up until the Palace game at the end of October, and that was the Wolves game that we came close to winning second half.

At this point we were top of the table, teams could see that and knew what was coming, but no one sussed us out, as you put it.

It was only after we went on the defensive that we were punished, our season turned completely around in less than a handful of games, and all of our own volition.

I have said this before and it looks like I have to say it again, but the only reason I advocate that we play attacking football is because we are much better going forward than sitting back trying to contain.

We never got sussed out and we were never turned over when we played positively, only when we started to play negatively, the evidence is there in the results for anyone to see.

[Col city fan]

It may be the same record Col. but it is still very much the best one.

I am very much a practical person with a practical, scientific education and I look at the evidence. I am not 'in the know', I can only make my judgements bases on what I see on the pitch. It works like this.....

After the Blackburn and Charlton games and the integration of Knockaert as a starter we only lost one game up until the Palace game at the end of October, and that was the Wolves game that we came close to winning second half.

At this point we were top of the table, teams could see that and knew what was coming, but no one sussed us out, as you put it.

It was only after we went on the defensive that we were punished, our season turned completely around in less than a handful of games, and all of our own volition.

I have said this before and it looks like I have to say it again, but the only reason I advocate that we play attacking football is because we are much better going forward than sitting back trying to contain.

We never got sussed out and we were never turned over when we played positively, only when we started to play negatively, the evidence is there in the results for anyone to see.

Why then Dave, did we change tactically?

I believe it was Pearson felt that we HAD TO.

We WERE getting sussed out... Especially away from home where (facts) our record this season was and still is shocking.

Players CAN go off the boil too. I believe Knocky was being sussed out by the opposition and Pearson knew this, such that Plan B needed to become operationalised.

I've made it crystal clear as to what my plan B would have been. Get a big stopper in, play him off the back four and free up the attack minded players to attack. So, if you think about it, your's and mine views on letting the attackers attack are not too dissimilar. We would have just implemented this in a different way.

Your view is that this winning run ended because we changed our set-up. My view is that it ended because the opposition teams wised-up as to how we were playing and thwarted our tactics. The Wolves game being a great example where they filled-up the midfield and stopped us playing.

What do you think managers and scouts do all week Dave? Sit on their arses and watch videos?

In the modern age of football, most of them at this level, I would suspect look at how the opposition play, weigh it up and then set up their teams in the best way possible.

Pearson's biggest weakness IMO is that he can't seem to do this particularly well.

In some ways, no disrespect meant, you come across similar to Nige in that you feel we can beat most teams if we 'play our own game'.

Again, it don't work like that. There's much more to it. Being a football manager in this day and age and getting it right, must be a hugely complex job if you really want to succeed.

[styers]

The balance of the squad is totally different to pre Huddersfield now. Pearson's gone for strengthening the forward positions when we were scoring goals for fun, which seems to have unsettled the apple cart. I'm sure this was to give more attacking options and fresh legs for the run in, but it just hasn't worked - e.g. Nugent can't get into scoring positions because he's being forced out wide to get the ball. We don't seem to have a reliable passer in midfield - someone who can switch play or spot that clever pass - we have runners and shooters - and that system's been found out. Also not sure why we're letting St Ledger go on loan when we've hardly got any defenders that are playing well and a few of them are so injury prone it's a huge risk - they look exhausted so surely we need all the experience and legs at the back as we can get? Season of two halves and I'm not sure the move around of personnel has really worked out. However, interesting stats that we're the 3rd highest passers of the ball in the division (pre Derby game) and have kept the most clean sheets (14 - again pre Derby). It's a bizarre league this Championship!

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

Whenever Pearson is interviewed he just mumbles his way through, and lacks any sign of personality. If this is how he talks to his players he will have lost the dressing room.

Even the pro Pearson brigade cannot truthfully say he is worth a million pounds a year. He will have to get us promoted to be worth that money. Getting into the play offs will not be good enough, and I cannot envisage that we will go up.

What has gone wrong? In a nutshell, this.

[Bateman]

The unarguable fact is that City have one of the strongest squads in the division but even at its best, would not be good enough to survive in the Premiership. Pearson has been flattered by the results up to the collapse as the defence has often looked weak; and the goal difference has been inflated by a handful of high scores.

I grow tired of the lame excuses Pearson trots out for the current run of abysmal results; he seems to think that it's basically a run of bad luck! Of course the players must take their share of the blame; too many lack guts and the desire to pull the Club out of its present predicament. But Pearson is not up to the job and should be sacked.

Martin O'Neill was a truly inspirational manager who produced a team with well above the collective ability of the individual parts - and he is currently available. In the interim Pearson should bring in a sports psychologist to talk to the players and pop up the road to see Richard Cotterill at the Tigers - he knows a thing or two about motivating players.

[David Hankey]

To my mind it all went wrong in the FA Cup fixture away at Huddersfield. Pearson knowing we had thrashed them at home in the League thought he could win this tie by leaving Wood & Nugent on the bench - to disastrous effect. OK we got the draw but didn't want the extra game. That in a nutshell is where the rot set in because the manager thought he could be clever and it backfired on him, the Club, the players and supporters.

As to the second part, can it be rectified? Yes, by showing Pearson the door!!

[smudgerfox]

Do we have one of the strongest squads in the division? Or do we just have a lot of players who are well known but haven't quite made the Premiership grade?

[deep blue]

A few thoughts

Pearson has completely failed to deal with the balance of our central midfielders and we have become rediculously easy to play against and dominate

Enough coaching staff for the first team? Given last time we had both Powell and Taggs here?

More experienced players, Wes apart, going backwards quickly in terms of performance,(ie konchesky, dyer, whitbred) therefore not enough strong senior players to get around the less experienced ones

The need to obviously have to save money am save it quickly. Surely NP wouldn't be running with such a small squad if he didnt have to?

Some bad decisions on players. Tom Kennedy > Konchesky for example

Lack of leadership during games

Whatever has happened to the dressing room and what his role was in it we will probably never know but he now seems at a complete loss.

Agree with so much of this post. I agree with the idea of balancing the side with a few experienced players, but it has backfired massively with Konch. What I find so difficult to fathom is how players handpicked by Pearson for, among other things, their hungry and team-oriented attitude, in whom Pearson shows great loyalty, appear to have turned their backs on him; also how they are showing so little respect for the club that employs them and the fans that turn up (esp at away games) to support them in numbers.

[marbelladave]

Why then Dave, did we change tactically?

I believe it was Pearson felt that we HAD TO.

We WERE getting sussed out... Especially away from home where (facts) our record this season was and still is shocking.

Players CAN go off the boil too. I believe Knocky was being sussed out by the opposition and Pearson knew this, such that Plan B needed to become operationalised.

I've made it crystal clear as to what my plan B would have been. Get a big stopper in, play him off the back four and free up the attack minded players to attack. So, if you think about it, your's and mine views on letting the attackers attack are not too dissimilar. We would have just implemented this in a different way.

Your view is that this winning run ended because we changed our set-up. My view is that it ended because the opposition teams wised-up as to how we were playing and thwarted our tactics. The Wolves game being a great example where they filled-up the midfield and stopped us playing.

What do you think managers and scouts do all week Dave? Sit on their arses and watch videos?

In the modern age of football, most of them at this level, I would suspect look at how the opposition play, weigh it up and then set up their teams in the best way possible.

Pearson's biggest weakness IMO is that he can't seem to do this particularly well.

In some ways, no disrespect meant, you come across similar to Nige in that you feel we can beat most teams if we 'play our own game'.

Again, it don't work like that. There's much more to it. Being a football manager in this day and age and getting it right, must be a hugely complex job if you really want to succeed.

When exactly was that? If it was before the Palace game then I must have missed it.

I know we were not perfect, I made plenty of comments to that effect and we were less effective away from home but we were still effective enough to be top of the league going into Palace.

That was the pivotal game, even though we were at home we set up defensively and for the first time this season we had absolutely no options going forward, hoof........

The games that followed continued that trend, perhaps not every game but in the tougher games we set up negatively, losing games and points we barely tried to win, look at Watford, Millwall, Leeds, if you need examples.

Like you I do not know why NFP made the changes, the only one that makes sense to me is that, finding us top of the table, he made the decision to 'tighten things up' in an attempt to defend our position. Clearly that is only my opinion but it makes sense.

I an clear on this, our down turn was our own doing, we never were 'sussed', we simply invited other teams on to us and they obliged....

[Corky]

Next year will be fun, when everything the new manager says will be analysed and scrutinised before screaming "He can't handle the pressure!" after each poor result.

Bring it on.

[MC Prussian]

Next year will be fun, when everything the new manager says will be analysed and scrutinised before screaming "He can't handle the pressure!" after each poor result.

Bring it on.

How many Leicester fans actually do believe that patience is just a card game?

[gerrytaggart]

This dismal run has to end soon right?..and just maybe it will end in time for a gallop back into the play offs...capped by a wembley final victory! hip hip hooooraaaay.

just saying!

*i tried to add this as a new topic to add a small amount of balance and positivity to the forum...but someone decided it should be tucked away at the back end of this post!!...thanks mods...obviously i dont have enough posts to deserve a thread of my own!