"I voted for Neil harris if I'm honest" Neil warnock, April 2018

https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/spo...-city-14497952

:sherlock:

Think he was up there near the top for most that season tbh.

Neil harris was the bookies favourite the moment warnock was gone. Warnock a few weeks ago said he wanted to help the club pick his successor.

I'd say it's almost beyond doubt warnock recommended him but the way it ended with warnock that may not necessarily go in Harris's favour!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Father Dougal

Neil harris was the bookies favourite the moment warnock was gone. Warnock a few weeks ago said he wanted to help the club pick his successor.

I'd say it's almost beyond doubt warnock recommended him but the way it ended with warnock that may not necessarily go in Harris's favour!

---

I’m not opposing that view, but I’m just saying he had a good season with Wall that year and would have been up there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dembethewarrior

I’m not opposing that view, but I’m just saying he had a good season with Wall that year and would have been up there.

---

Wonder how many other votes Harris had though. But yes I remember that game we had there and they pushed us. Think bamba had a goal disallowed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Father Dougal

Wonder how many other votes Harris had though. But yes I remember that game we had there and they pushed us. Think bamba had a goal disallowed?

---

Friday night game I remember watching it!!

No idea, there’s probably something online, unless they only do that for the Ballon D’or

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dembethewarrior

Friday night game I remember watching it!!

No idea, there’s probably something online, unless they only do that for the Ballon D’or

---

Think it's a secret vote. Warnock only made his comment as a dig at the wolves manager really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Father Dougal

Wonder how many other votes Harris had though. But yes I remember that game we had there and they pushed us. Think bamba had a goal disallowed?

---

Yes for us to have a free kick outside the box.
Referee played advantage after a foul on Bennett, Bamba struck one in and the referee decided to blow up mid shot and give us the free kick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Father Dougal

Think it's a secret vote. Warnock only made his comment as a dig at the wolves manager really.

---

...and would have voted tactically to try and stop him getting the gong...

Harris did a superb job with no money there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lawnmower

Harris did a superb job with no money there.

---

Don’t think anyone has denied that.

He still plays a shit brand of football though, smothering loads of us really don’t want to see here for another 500 years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dembethewarrior

Don’t think anyone has denied that.

He still plays a shit brand of football though, smothering loads of us really don’t want to see here for another 500 years.

---

I instantly lose interest when anyone starts talking about ‘brand of football’

I just want my team to score more than the opposition.

Really don’t see how it matters how it’s done.


I think deep down despite all the pages and pages written on social media that the vast majority feel the same

I had as much enjoyment watching NW’s team as any other manager we’ve ever had .
Didn’t matter one bit that our possession stats were low.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lawnmower

I instantly lose interest when anyone starts talking about ‘brand of football’

I just want my team to score more than the opposition.

Really don’t see how it matters how it’s done.


I think deep down despite all the pages and pages written on social media that the vast majority feel the same

I had as much enjoyment watching NW’s team as any other manager we’ve ever had .
Didn’t matter one bit that our possession stats were low.

---

The brand on of football doesn’t matter when the results are positive, like 17/18. When they’re not like this season and the quality of football has become worse if anything, then you start to get unrest and falling supporter numbers (actual people going rather than announced attendances). Harris would need to start with positive results from the off, as in 4 seasons at Millwall he played a very similar style to Warnock’s City and I can’t see how he would change now if that’s his philosophy despite an increase in playing budget. If results start off badly then it’ll be a similar situation to Slade I feel.

I appreciate you need a period of transition and can only work with the players you’ve got, and that’s probably why they are looking at Harris along with him being available, but surely you need to have point B in mind if you’re trying to move from point A. The appointment of Harris doesn’t do that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lawnmower

I instantly lose interest when anyone starts talking about ‘brand of football’

I just want my team to score more than the opposition.

Really don’t see how it matters how it’s done.

I think deep down despite all the pages and pages written on social media that the vast majority feel the same

I had as much enjoyment watching NW’s team as any other manager we’ve ever had .
Didn’t matter one bit that our possession stats were low.

---

I want a team who can adapt their play on the field so if the long throws and wing play isn't working has enough quality to try passing the ball to create chances, if we're on the back foot then enough quality on the ball to maintain possession to kill the oppositions momentum or, as it was on occasion last year, if we're winning but momentum seems to be turning then enough quality not to give the ball straight back to the side with more impetuous to attack. We don't have to pass it round for sake of possession stats but would be nice to know we feel comfortable doing so, we were getting there last year before taking a step backwards at the start of this season, if the game calls for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stavross1927

The brand on of football doesn’t matter when the results are positive, like 17/18. When they’re not like this season and the quality of football has become worse if anything, then you start to get unrest and falling supporter numbers (actual people going rather than announced attendances). Harris would need to start with positive results from the off, as in 4 seasons at Millwall he played a very similar style to Warnock’s City and I can’t see how he would change now if that’s his philosophy despite an increase in playing budget. If results start off badly then it’ll be a similar situation to Slade I feel.

I appreciate you need a period of transition and can only work with the players you’ve got, and that’s probably why they are looking at Harris along with him being available, but surely you need to have point B in mind if you’re trying to move from point A. The appointment of Harris doesn’t do that.

---

If we brought in say Nathan Jones and he said he’ll get up playing a passing game, but failed to win any of the first 6 it would be exactly the same- he might be given a bit more rope due to being young local and a ‘modern’ style manager, but ultimately attendances and the managers survival will depend almost exclusively on results, which is why the likes of Warnock can walk into job after job.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by surge

I want a team who can adapt their play on the field so if the long throws and wing play isn't working has enough quality to try passing the ball to create chances, if we're on the back foot then enough quality on the ball to maintain possession to kill the oppositions momentum or, as it was on occasion last year, if we're winning but momentum seems to be turning then enough quality not to give the ball straight back to the side with more impetuous to attack. We don't have to pass it round for sake of possession stats but would be nice to know we feel comfortable doing so, we were getting there last year before taking a step backwards at the start of this season, if the game calls for it.

---

So you don’t care if you win or lose as long as you get the above ??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lawnmower

I instantly lose interest when anyone starts talking about ‘brand of football’

I just want my team to score more than the opposition.

Really don’t see how it matters how it’s done.


I think deep down despite all the pages and pages written on social media that the vast majority feel the same

I had as much enjoyment watching NW’s team as any other manager we’ve ever had .
Didn’t matter one bit that our possession stats were low.

---

I’ve seen us promoted twice in recent years, I’m bored of going up and coming down playing crap football. I don’t want to watch us hoof the ball for 90 minutes a game and waste 10 of them sending the man with the biggest throw up to take throw ins or waiting for Flint and Mozza to treck up the field so we can give the opposition an obvious set piece to defend as we knowingly aim for the big man.

I refuse to watch it, if others feel differently then that’s absolutely fine.

I’ll still want us to do well obviously.

It says it all when my daughter told me she wasn’t going to be going anymore because she was bored, yet she will sit with me and watch full 90 mins of games on sky, so it wasn’t football she was bored of it was us.

I’m not saying I want ya to emulate Fulham/Brentford/Swansea style of football, but I want to see players with a bit more flair and a manager who allows his players to get forward in support and doesn’t ALWAYS JUST hoof the ball up top. If we start passing it around the back for the sake of it that would probably bore us to death as well, but a bit more passing and build up mixed in with CALCULATED long balls would be better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stavross1927

The brand on of football doesn’t matter when the results are positive, like 17/18. When they’re not like this season and the quality of football has become worse if anything, then you start to get unrest and falling supporter numbers (actual people going rather than announced attendances). Harris would need to start with positive results from the off, as in 4 seasons at Millwall he played a very similar style to Warnock’s City and I can’t see how he would change now if that’s his philosophy despite an increase in playing budget. If results start off badly then it’ll be a similar situation to Slade I feel.

I appreciate you need a period of transition and can only work with the players you’ve got, and that’s probably why they are looking at Harris along with him being available, but surely you need to have point B in mind if you’re trying to move from point A. The appointment of Harris doesn’t do that.

---

I don't think the first part is necessarily true.

People have this perception that if a new manager tries to set up a team who gave high possession stats he will be backed to the hilt by the fans even if we lose every game.

I just think that's nonsense. Dave Jones teams never ever set up to give the ball away and he used to be slated on here! Chokers etc..... Trollope tried to copy the Wales system with 2 number 10s and he was ridiculed (rightly so).

If we ever approached a game like Luton do- the back 4 passing it around between each other the fans would go absolutely mad! It's total nonsense to suggest it's only when possession stats are low and the team are losing do the fans get restless. I think lawnmower is right.

Also when we were winning under warnock the entertainment levels were absolutely fine; the ground was rocking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lawnmower

So you don’t care if you win or lose as long as you get the above ??

---

We failed to beat 10 men Fulham because we ran out of ideas. Being comfortable on the ball to change the way the opposition has to defend means we would have had a greater chance of winning.

So you're happy to take only one point against 10 men because you don't want to talk about "brand of football"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by surge

We failed to beat 10 men Fulham because we ran out of ideas. Being comfortable on the ball to change the way the opposition has to defend means we would have had a greater chance of winning.

So you're happy to take only one point against 10 men because you don't want to talk about "brand of football"?

---

That’s a bit of a wild one. Doesn’t really help your point at all.
Fulham with their team or stars failed to break us down all day.

On the other hand we beat Birmingham with 10 men a few weeks later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lawnmower

That’s a bit of a wild one. Doesn’t really help your point at all.
Fulham with their team or stars failed to break us down all day.

On the other hand we beat Birmingham with 10 men a few weeks later.

---

And how many of our chances in that came from long balls, long throw-ins, wing play etc.? How often did we immediately give the ball back to Brum? That's a perfect example where we changed our tactics to play the circumstances ahead of us, showed we can pass the ball around a bit to control possession better than we usually do and went on to win comfortably. We showed we have that in our locker whereas we didn't try it at all against Fulham.

For a man who doesn't find it interesting to talk about different styles of playing football you are responding to a lot of comments where it's brought up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by surge

And how many of our chances in that came from long balls, long throw-ins, wing play etc.? How often did we immediately give the ball back to Brum? That's a perfect example where we changed our tactics to play the circumstances ahead of us, showed we can pass the ball around a bit to control possession better than we usually do and went on to win comfortably. We showed we have that in our locker whereas we didn't try it at all against Fulham.

For a man who doesn't find it interesting to talk about different styles of playing football you are responding to a lot of comments where it's brought up.

---

You do realise the circumstances were completely different.

As for styles/ tactics , I’m fine with that but I hate the term ‘brand’ when it comes to football.

I also remember most fans leaving happy after we beat QPR 3-0 despite playing poorly, but being completely pissed off when Dave Jones’s galacticos gave away late goals to lose/ draw games they had dominated..

I can still remember the outcry

Gutless, bottlers, not fit to wear the shirt, shithouses... etc

For all the high and mighty talk of brands, styles etc.. it’s all about results

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lawnmower

I instantly lose interest when anyone starts talking about ‘brand of football’

I just want my team to score more than the opposition.

Really don’t see how it matters how it’s done.

I think deep down despite all the pages and pages written on social media that the vast majority feel the same

I had as much enjoyment watching NW’s team as any other manager we’ve ever had .

Didn’t matter one bit that our possession stats were low.

---

I don't think the vast majority of fans feel the same at all.

I think the majority of die-hard supporters like you who have the club in their DNA probably feel the same, but history shows us there aren't too many of those.

Based on my own experiences of talking to people, I believe the majority of supporters are far happier when their team is winning but they also want to see some decent football, which is hardly an outrageous requirement. The problem is that, during and after Warnock's reign, a certain percentage of fans have to come to believe that the two are mutually exclusive. They start talking in extremes, which is not the way most people view the game.

Bear in mind you're a supporter who regularly defended the football played under Russell Slade and who talked in positive terms about the abilities of Alex Revell. That's because it's in your nature to defend the club at all costs and try to find positives in everything it does. Slade actually won more games as a City manager than he lost, but crowds dropped all the same because people were bored by the poor-quality football his team played. The same was happening under Warnock.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

I don't think the vast majority of fans feel the same at all.

I think the majority of die-hard supporters like you who have the club in their DNA probably feel the same, but history shows us there aren't too many of those.

Based on my own experiences of talking to people, I believe the majority of supporters are far happier when their team is winning but they also want to see some decent football, which is hardly an outrageous requirement. The problem is that, during and after Warnock's reign, a certain percentage of fans have to come to believe that the two are mutually exclusive. They start talking in extremes, which is not the way most people view the game.

Bear in mind you're a supporter who regularly defended the football played under Russell Slade and who talked in positive terms about the abilities of Alex Revell. That's because it's in your nature to defend the club at all costs and try to find positives in everything it does. Slade actually won more games as a City manager than he lost, but crowds dropped all the same because people were bored by the poor-quality football his team played. The same was happening under Warnock.

---

Don’t forget you called Peter Thorne ‘barn door’ 👍

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lawnmower

Don’t forget you called Peter Thorne ‘barn door’ ��

---

Certainly did. Never rated him. Still don't.

:hehe:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Father Dougal

https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/spo...-city-14497952

:sherlock:

---

Well there we go. I posted this as tongue in cheek as I hope the club haven't based their appointment just on who warnock voted for as manager of the season 2 years ago to wind up the wolves manager.

Here's hoping.....