Pearson slams 'negative' critics

[Dan]

Was agreeing with nearly all he said until he talked about our formation. If his long term plan is King, James, Drinkwater and Cambiasso in a diamond then we are in genuine trouble.

[Dan]

He's right that there are people who revel in negativity and have waited a while to really complain, but I don't think they are huge in number. A fair few admirers of the manager aren't happy either with what we are producing currently.

 

Could it possibly be a dig at Stringer, who we all know loves to stir up debate and, let's be honest, struggle and failure stoke up more emotion than serenity?

 

Stringer's a nobhead. "Is that the end for Pearson?" when we went 2 down on Saturday. He acts like a tabloid writer.

 

 

Totally understand his comments about the Southampton game; it's not how I would have liked us to "stay in the game" and it was very, very negative but it almost got us an unlikely point.

What this doesn't explain is the diamond at home to West Brom. It also doesn't explain our approach away at a winless Newcastle and at home to a Burnley side missing many key players.

 

Yeah I think in those terms playing Southampton came at the wrong kind of time as we were always doing to be on the backfoot no matter what. The irony is I think we got the first part of our plan spot on for most of the game like Chelsea - but we had absolutely nothing on the counter. I love Vardy but him alone isn't going to rip apart a defence that have let in just five goals all season, 3 in their last 10 now and only the 1 at home (to QPR of all teams).

 

I believe the signing of Mahrez elevated us to another level last season. The 2-1 wins turned into 3-0 wins and dropping him is a massive step backwards regardless of formation. I've always had a theory that OK, we might be a bit light defensively - but will Southampton not be a little bit more light going forward if they're having to watch out for the likes of Mahrez? He's looked quality in nearly every game I've seen of us this season.

 

As for his possession comment - ridiculous. Did we not have about 35%? We weren't playing Barcelona. Possession is over-rated and that's one thing the first five games of this season taught me.

[suffolk fox]

He should accept criticism with a willingness to change?

Unfortunately that is not in his make up as he doesnt care what others think?

I pray and hope he ditches the awful diamond against sunderland at home

I will wait and see

[Captain...]

The teams he has picked since the Burnley game have been pitiful and cannot be excused by the idea of trying to stop conceding goals. What's happened is we've become a worse team, a team that loses more. He has been juvenile, he has been idiotic; putting emphasis on playing a defensive formation has in fact made us more vulnerable at the back (let's not forget we have been playing much poorer teams than the sides we were conceding to in the first 5 games, bar Stoke, where we kept a clean sheet).

 

It's all pretty indefensible as far as I'm concerned. He needs to pull his finger out and accept he's made a mistake by trying to address our defensive weaknesses by changing our style so dramatically.

 

I was taking you seriously until this petulant little tirade.

[Dan]

How much would they have had had we played the 442 many people want, perhaps the 8-0 scoreline some people though might have happened actually would have rather than us not be far away from grabbing an unlikely point

 

There's some denial going on alright, but it from a pretty vocal minority who've just been waiting for a moment like this. Pearson right yet again!

 

Anyway, Sunderland, QPR & Villa in 3 out of our next 4 game are big ones, huuuuge, and our performance levels need to massively improve for us to get the results we need out of them, if we don't then even the staunchiest of Pearson fans will have just cause for massive concern

 

Or how many would they have scored if one of Mane's early crosses was just an inch nearer to Pelle's head?

 

We were lucky it was only 2-0.

[foxinsocks]

As I said above I don't think Nigel is playing for draws, he is trying to find a team that is capable of controlling a game for sustained periods, not all out attack or desperate defending, but keep control of the game and start imposing ourselves.

I think the evidence suggests you are right in your analysis of what he is trying to do - but it is simply not working. As Monty python once said: "Attack is the best form of defence... and the best for of attack is surprise"

 

He should accept criticism with a willingness to change? Unfortunately that is not in his make up as he doesnt care what others think?

My real worry is that he has selected a set of compliant coaches and no one will challenge his views... Let's hope someone speaks up; and soon!

[Guest MattP]

Was agreeing with nearly all he said until he talked about our formation. If his long term plan is King, James, Drinkwater and Cambiasso in a diamond then we are in genuine trouble.

 

It's a scary thought for me that, It just goes against everything we have done that is so successful in the previous 18 months.

 

In Moore, Schulpp, King and Wood we have players playing a big role that all weren't getting in our best starting XI for our championship winning team for large parts of the season. I'm starting to genuinely believe we are a weaker side than we were towards the end of last year and that simply shouldn't be the case when you look at our squad.

 

Or how many would they have scored if one of Mane's early crosses was just an inch nearer to Pelle's head?

 

We were lucky it was only 2-0.

 

This is very true.

 

Southampton's crossing was absolutely appalling on Saturday, I think that Mane and Tadic must have put 10-12 terrible efforts in in the first half, our full backs were nowhere near either of them for the most part and if they had crossed well Pelle could have had a hat trick by HT.

De Laet was generally on his backside or 5 yards behind Mane and you only have to just knock it a yard past Schulpp and you'll have more than enough time and room to put one in. Our full backs have to get far tighter to their men and it's a genuine concern that they won't when they have no help from a winger in defending.

[Fox Ulike]

He should accept criticism with a willingness to change?

Unfortunately that is not in his make up as he doesnt care what others think?

I pray and hope he ditches the awful diamond against sunderland at home

I will wait and see

 

These kind of comments about Pearson are about three years out-of-date.  It’s actually your view that shows no "illingness to change"

 

 

 

How many times have we already changed formations this season? Pearson’s tried plenty of different formations, and plenty of different players in different positions. He’s clearly showed a willingness to change his ideas and it’s highly likely that those ideas have been discussed with others. Cambiasso for example.

[suffolk fox]

 

These kind of comments about Pearson are about three years out-of-date.  It’s actually your view that shows no "illingness to change"

 

 

 

How many times have we already changed formations this season? Pearson’s tried plenty of different formations, and plenty of different players in different positions. He’s clearly showed a willingness to change his ideas and it’s highly likely that those ideas have been discussed with others. Cambiasso for example.

Not gonna get into a petty argument I will disagree with you. Regarding changing formations and different players? Obviously, you see it different I respect your opinion. Pearson himself has openly stated, he doesn't care what people think, regarding negative tactics(in his view/opinion). On the last three away games he has not changed formation or tactics?

I admit away at Stoke at half time it did change for the better by the introduction of Cambiasso and Drinkwater.

He does stubbornly, my view, stick with this silly diamond and the majority agree it aint working?

[Jacnah]

You're right there are some negative critics... but that doesn't mean nigel can dismiss everyone who challenges what he is doing. I want to know he is not in denial and that he will sort things out. I want him to succeed.

completely agree with you

[Corky]

But if we continue to concede three goals a game we're going to have to do a hell of a lot to keep getting results. I agree that we've gone almost too far the other way but Pearson had to ensure the games were tighter and we had a bit more organisation. In the last couple of games we've had, now we need to impose our game on the opposition more.

 

It is a difficult balancing act between scoring and not conceding and ensuring we are very competent at both. If he goes back to a solid 4-4-2 (which he was roundly criticised for in the past, remember) than that balance might be struck. I do understand why he wanted to tighten up at the back but not at the expense of attacking flair. Four CMs doesn't work.

[Monsell1976]

But if we continue to concede three goals a game we're going to have to do a hell of a lot to keep getting results. I agree that we've gone almost too far the other way but Pearson had to ensure the games were tighter and we had a bit more organisation. In the last couple of games we've had, now we need to impose our game on the opposition more.

It is a difficult balancing act between scoring and not conceding and ensuring we are very competent at both. If he goes back to a solid 4-4-2 (which he was roundly criticised for in the past, remember) than that balance might be struck. I do understand why he wanted to tighten up at the back but not at the expense of attacking flair. Four CMs doesn't work.

Agree with your post, best form of defence is attack for me, they cannot commit numbers into our half, with the fear of what we will do on the break.

The current formation invites pressure, and limits an out let, as prove at Southampton, both goals conceded after panicked clearances, and the way we go about it, it's a matter of time before a goal is conceded, should I say we have to score every game

There is the problem, we have proved we cannot keep a clean sheet, no matter what system we play, but with this system we are playing, all that is being achieved is we are vastly reducing any chance of us out scoring anyone, or should I say not scoring at all.

[Fox Ulike]

Not gonna get into a petty argument I will disagree with you. Regarding changing formations and different players? Obviously, you see it different I respect your opinion. Pearson himself has openly stated, he doesn't care what people think, regarding negative tactics(in his view/opinion). On the last three away games he has not changed formation or tactics?

I admit away at Stoke at half time it did change for the better by the introduction of Cambiasso and Drinkwater.

He does stubbornly, my view, stick with this silly diamond and the majority agree it aint working?

 

 

The diamond is clearly not working but we've played it for TWO games. That hardly indicates a stubborn unwillingness to change.

 

To answer your specific comment that "he has not changed formation " in the last 3 away games:

 

Newcastle: two wingers and one up-front

Swansea: Vardy on the wing, Nugent in the hole supporting Ulloa

Southampton: Diamond. No wide players.

 

You might not agree with me which is fine - but what you’re saying doesn’t agree with reality!

[Dan]

It's a scary thought for me that, It just goes against everything we have done that is so successful in the previous 18 months.

 

In Moore, Schulpp, King and Wood we have players playing a big role that all weren't getting in our best starting XI for our championship winning team for large parts of the season. I'm starting to genuinely believe we are a weaker side than we were towards the end of last year and that simply shouldn't be the case when you look at our squad.

 

 

This is very true.

 

Southampton's crossing was absolutely appalling on Saturday, I think that Mane and Tadic must have put 10-12 terrible efforts in in the first half, our full backs were nowhere near either of them for the most part and if they had crossed well Pelle could have had a hat trick by HT.

De Laet was generally on his backside or 5 yards behind Mane and you only have to just knock it a yard past Schulpp and you'll have more than enough time and room to put one in. Our full backs have to get far tighter to their men and it's a genuine concern that they won't when they have no help from a winger in defending.

 

If it's our long term plan then we're relying on monumental displays from our full backs - who've probably been our weak link this season. I'd respect the advantage it gives us if we were actually controlling the midfield and keeping clean sheets but we're doing neither. Four central midfielders and we only had 35% of possession, doing very little with that possession (which is more important than the possession itself, see Arsenal at home). One clean sheet all season, I wasn't at Stoke but by all accounts it could've been a different story.

 

Southampton were always going to pick us off in the end. The time when they had six corners in a row was absolutely unbearable reminds me of my first ever game, funnily enough at home to Southampton when we had about five corners in a row. Their crossing I agree was awful. People say we weren't far away from getting a draw - and that is true, we weren't, but lets not pretend if we had it would've been anything other than daylight robbery.

 

Our defending has improved, but not by enough to make this whole change worthwhile.

 

We are without a doubt weaker than last season for me. We've relied on one man for goals and we're now playing a system that provides absolutely nothing for him. One shot in six games about says it all for Ulloa and five nil's in six does too, the only time we scored was against a Championship standard opponent (I'm basing that on their injuries as well).

 

We are well on the way to undoing everything good about last year. The way we played last year would keep us up and that's why I've been so bullish in saying we'd stay up, up until now, because I never for one second saw us completely changing our style of play to become a negative, flat side.

[Dan]

Not gonna get into a petty argument I will disagree with you. Regarding changing formations and different players? Obviously, you see it different I respect your opinion. Pearson himself has openly stated, he doesn't care what people think, regarding negative tactics(in his view/opinion). On the last three away games he has not changed formation or tactics?

I admit away at Stoke at half time it did change for the better by the introduction of Cambiasso and Drinkwater.

He does stubbornly, my view, stick with this silly diamond and the majority agree it aint working?

 

We've played three different formations and got it hideously wrong every time.

 

Nothing wrong with 4-4-2 at all for me. Chelsea away springs to mind. The best team in the country by a considerable distance and we actually created chances whilst defending resolutely.

[ImBlue]

The diamond is clearly not working but we've played it for TWO games. That hardly indicates a stubborn unwillingness to change.

To answer your specific comment that "he has not changed formation " in the last 3 away games:

Newcastle: two wingers and one up-front

Swansea: Vardy on the wing, Nugent in the hole supporting Ulloa

Southampton: Diamond. No wide players.

You might not agree with me which is fine - but what you’re saying doesn’t agree with reality!

Newcastle - 1 winger and albrighton (not sure what he is, but he couldn't beat an egg)

Swansea - vardy on the wing? Square pegs round holes..

West brom - no wingers

Southampton - no wingers

Go back to having 2 creative players in knockaert and mahrez.

[Dan]

Still wouldn't mind seeing Albrighton given a run in the team. Name any player who looks any good in cameos like he's had.

 

Mahrez is the big one though. It's a joke that he isn't playing. Easily our best attacker.

[Hirsty The Blue 94]

Do you not remember all the comments on here about how many we were conceding, it was a worry, and still is, he tried to rectify that problem by having more presence in midfield against Newcastle, it sort of worked as we limited them to very few chances, but we weren't creating enough so he brought 2 forwards on and went on the attack and we got hit on the counter.

 

Against Swansea he went for a more attack/defence split, with Mahrez Ulloa Vardy and Nugent going forwards and Hammond and Drinkwater screening the defence, but it was a disaster and we never got on the ball and despite our forward options didn't look like scoring.

 

Against West Brom he went for a centre midfield diamond, we restricted them to very few chances, and carved out some good ones of our own, but not enough and one piece of bad luck did for us.

 

He persisted with this formation (remember the comments on here about using too many players, too much chopping and changing, we need a settled side) to restrict Southampton (2nd in the league) which worked for 70 odd minutes, despite their pressure and possession, Kasper only made one or 2 saves until Long came on and terrorized our tired defence.

 

I'm not saying I agree with this formation (I don't) but I can see the thought processes and logic, and I'm not going to call NP an idiot or juvenile for trying to address what were clearly problems at the back. I don't think we will see the diamond against Sunderland as they are a team of the level of West Brom, and we need to be more creative and attacking at home against teams that will see a safe point as a good reward, rather than risking going for the win. Or if we do play a diamond it will be with Nugent at the tip, I guess it depends on Mahrez and Schlupp and their fitness after the internationals, as I would like to see both of them play.

What he said.

[Hirsty The Blue 94]

Newcastle - 1 winger and albrighton (not sure what he is, but he couldn't beat an egg)

Swansea - vardy on the wing? Square pegs round holes..

West brom - no wingers

Southampton - no wingers

Go back to having 2 creative players in knockaert and mahrez.

Basically you want Knocky to play then? Your point has nothing to do with the formation.

[ImBlue]

Basically you want Knocky to play then? Your point has nothing to do with the formation.

What's the point in having width if it's your best striker you've stuck on the wing out of position? Or someone so unbelievably useless he may as well not even be there.

He could play 5-4-1, 4-5-1, 4-4-2, 4-4-2 diamond, 4-3-3, but if it's all the same players it won't make all that much difference.

My point is you need creative personnel, not just any body's out wide.

[Guest Col city fan]

I will if you will... give everyone a rest then

We both know the place wouldn't be the same without you buddy. Keep us 'on our toes' yeah?

[Kitchandro]

I was taking you seriously until this petulant little tirade.

 

What's petulant about it?

 

This is not out of the blue criticism, it's based on the factual evidence of our recent results and consistent trends that are developing in our play.

 

Pearson is being foolish, this is plainly obvious and well backed up by our change in results. I've been very fair with Pearson in his time with the club and now as usual I will say it as I see it. At this point he deserves some very harsh criticism.

[Kitchandro]

But if we continue to concede three goals a game we're going to have to do a hell of a lot to keep getting results. I agree that we've gone almost too far the other way but Pearson had to ensure the games were tighter and we had a bit more organisation. In the last couple of games we've had, now we need to impose our game on the opposition more.

 

It is a difficult balancing act between scoring and not conceding and ensuring we are very competent at both. If he goes back to a solid 4-4-2 (which he was roundly criticised for in the past, remember) than that balance might be struck. I do understand why he wanted to tighten up at the back but not at the expense of attacking flair. Four CMs doesn't work.

 

We conceded 3 against the most expensive side of all time. We didn't concede 3 goals a game.

 

As far as I'm concerned our defending wasn't that bad in the early games. It still isn't now on the whole. We have to accept that we will concede goals. That's part and parcel of being where we are. You can't make keeping out goals a priority.

 

Pearson has essentially bottled it, he was too scared to have confidence in his players and is instead trying to compensate for what he believes are weaknesses by making us weaker in other areas. This was completely unnecessary.

 

I totally disagree that we needed it to be tighter, it just doesn't suit us. We were doing very well the way we were playing, it's not like we just showed potential to do well, we were getting the results and deserving them.

 

How can you justify changing things when our league position was great, our form was great and our performances were great?

 

It's madness.

[suffolk fox]

The diamond is clearly not working but we've played it for TWO games. That hardly indicates a stubborn unwillingness to change.

 

To answer your specific comment that "he has not changed formation " in the last 3 away games:

 

Newcastle: two wingers and one up-front

Swansea: Vardy on the wing, Nugent in the hole supporting Ulloa

Southampton: Diamond. No wide players.

 

You might not agree with me which is fine - but what you’re saying doesn’t agree with reality!

I was at the Newcastle and Swansea games. Two wingers at Newcastle? Really, both were so deep it left Ulloa isolated up front on his own? Two feeble attempts on target. Swansea come on Vardy is no winger but to suggest again, he was out wide is laughable? Again, Ulloa up front on his own? Southampton no wide players at all according to you fair enough didnt make this game but everyone who went says the diamond isnt working? Obviously our take on games is totally different. No wingers against West Brom, Southampton?

Some people would say we created chances against West Brom at home? I would disagree we never looked like scoring Foster hardly made any saves. We all have differing opinions on games just because mine differs from yours doesnt make it more real or not?

All of this makes no difference all I suggested is at times NIgel Pearson would be better to be more humble in interviews and accept sometimes he maybe wrong? Hence the saying, "accept criticism with a willingness to change?"

People including you pay a lot of money to follow city so when statements made appear to be,"I don't care what people think". Doesn't endure him to anyone. Including me.

[Legend_in_blue]

If he continues in a similar vein for the next home game, he'll end up with even more critics.

 

I just don't see where his current set up, tactics, management in game, call it what you will, is getting us.

 

Any team placing too much focus on the opposition rather than themselves is asking for trouble imo.

 

People are quite right to insist that he's bottling it. 

 

It baffles me that in the top tier of English football he is making such amateurish mistakes when the problems are quite clear for everyone, bar himself, to see.