Walter Out

I think he has to go, but I would say that nothing I've seen this season comes close to the frustration and anger I felt after we lost 2-0 at home to Stoke back in March. I'm in the Walter out camp now (only been there since Saturday) but do accept that like Rosenior he's had issues with recruitment to deal with as well as injuries (Millar is a MASSIVE miss), as well as us missing some absolute gimmie chances in the last 2 games in particular which you just can't account for. I felt at the time and on reflection that Rosenior going was a fair decision, if/when Walter goes it will be perhaps even more justified.

 

Spill the beans what players have said what, I must have missed them?

 

Last season was just as toppsy turvy as this one, one week we play like Barcelona and beat Southampton away another day at home we gift some team in the relegation zone 3 points.

Is it 3 home wins this year? Half of the year we played under rosinior. Lets at least look at all the picture not just a bit of it.

 

All ifs and buts

But if our home form was as good as oxfords this season

We'd be currently in the playoffs

 

Carvahlo was not a "Rosenior signing"!! And no more so than "Twine was an Acun signing"!! Acun courted Twine to get the identified signing done. You must of missed the podcast episode where the scouts talked about it (Carvahlo)

 

Burnsie nailing it on today's 1904 podcast. Sick to death of managers with their "philosophies". Should be a red flag. Just get the best out of the players you've got rather than shoe horn them into your philosophy.
Point already made by 1 or 2 on here already.

 

This interview from Kasey Palmer is an interesting listen, you can just tell he really wants to say a lot more than he is https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p0k2r4d4?partner=uk.co.bbc&origin=share-mobile

 

I don't think thats true really, 'philosophies' can be substituted for 'way of playing', 'identity' and probably a bunch of other terms. All teams and managers will have them but just talk about them in a different way. Pragmatism would be a philosophy in itself, adapting and adjusting to the other teams style.

 

agree, Walter has his "philosophy" on how he wants the game to be played & therefore how he wants "his" team to play over 90 minutes.
What's he's now trying to do is bang square pegs into round holes to force the players to play how he wants.
Issue is, his way of playing is totally unsuitable for The Championship (could you imagine City playing his style in The Premier League, we'd be hammered 6-0 every week!!!) & he's shot himself in the foot as he can't now say, "well actually my footballing philosophy is totally wrong & I'm going to get the lads to play in a completely different way starting next match"

 

I have said before about how they are trying to play football as if it's a game of chess. But whatever you move you make your opponent has a number of fixed moves to counter. In football all the plans and sketches on paper go out the window when the opposition player doesn't do what you expect.

 

On today's 1904 Club Podcast, Baz Cooper has been told Tim will still be in charge even if City lose on Sunday. But he says there will come a point when the fans' anger will have an impact on what the owner does.

 

Yep. But the daft thing is, they know exactly what we're going to do, we know what they're going to do against it, yet will still carry on, including when it just isn't working (even in both 2nd halfs against 2 of the poorest sides in this division).

 

Or until he has someone lined up, I’d be amazed if he sacks him without a replacement in the pipeline

 

Yes, that's true, but the difference / point is that our last 2 managers both believed they have some magic, different formula (philosophy). And also arrogantly and stubbornly choose to put that philosophy ahead of consideration of what would get the best out of the actual players they have.

 

We talked about populism on the US thread. Sacking Rosenior was a populist decision, appealing to the basic instincts of people who found it easy to believe that a "more attacking" manager would see us score more goals and play better football. It wasn't a nuanced argument but it was one that was popular to latch on to.

Now we have the "more attacking" manager, the absolute poster boy for attacking football supposedly, and it turns out we're scoring fewer goals and are just as frustrating to watch, and now we're also falling apart entirely when we concede a goal and it's all turning sour. This should really put an end to the idea that we ever needed a "more attacking" manager at all, that that was ever the problem, and remind us of the more nuanced qualities we did have under the previous manager which we perhaps undervalued, but which clearly contributed to us competing at the right end of the table.

 

Frankly yes we could be in this situation. I’d imagine there would be people calling for his head as a result.

The fact is for me under Rosenior we had 2 things that this team currently doesn’t. A way of winning games despite being boring sometimes. Especially in the first half of the season. And secondly, that team had some fight in it at times. They did want to play for him and that always showed. The trend of being a 45 minute team at the moment under Walter suggests to me that’s not the case

 

Yeh I agree that when a team adjusts to our play in the 2nd half we should be making our own adjustments to try and take control again otherwise its just kind of accepting our fate. The only argument I can see for it is that the players need to experience the adversity and improve within that but thats a bit of stretch really.

 

Links with another thought from listening to today's 1904 podcast.
Baz does seem to have an agenda against Walter. I'm sure he also does genuinely want to see City be successful, above any dislike he has for Walter.
Baz obviously has insights way beyond ours, from conversations he has with players & staff for example, as well as what he sees around the club with his own eyes. It sounded to me that he is seeing and hearing worrying stuff (from players etc)and wanting to say much more but can't. It's a bit like he's wanting us to read between the lines.

 

Comparing Rosie and Tim is bonkers.

They were both stubborn and stuck in their ways, for whatever reason they think they know best and stick by that.

The difference is the level of backing they both received, that's not to say Acun has purposefully hamstrung Tim, but the calibre of player we've brought in this season isn't at the same level.

We have no idea what Tim would do with last season's Squad nor what Rosie would have done with this season's Squad, nor whether the players that joined last season joined because of Rosie or not, so it's all a bit pointless really, init.