On the pitch is this the worst it has been since we got promoted in 03?

While we have been in sticky positions a few times before in this league I am not sure it has ever been so hopeless.

We haven't been without our difficulties several times since 2003 but I have never felt the squad is as doomed as this one is.

When slade, warnock, Harris and Mick came in to a struggling team I always felt the squad was under performing and a bit of a mess, but I always felt we had some good players and with a new manager boost and some basic organisation we would be fine-and every time above we were-comfortably-results picked up and in all 4 cases we were closer to promotion than relegation at the end.

However currently trying to pick my ideal team and every team I select has a defence that I think that will concede, a midfield that won't protect the defence or create anything and kieffer who is only useful if he has lots of good players around him-which he doesnt. While Mick did completely lose the plot I have no idea how a new manager will work with this?

The last 4 times we have been in this position we have got out of jail. Can we do a 5th?

My own thoughts are this is the worst, most negative position the club have been in since season 99/00.

No this is the worst.

Warnock was also backed with free agents.

Used his man management to get the best out of Zohore.

Doesnt appear to be any hope of free agents.

Id say its very likely we sell Moore in the window.

We are going down unless some of these young players can really step up to the plate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hilts

No this is the worst.

Warnock was also backed with free agents.

Used his man management to get the best out of Zohore.

Doesnt appear to be any hope of free agents.

Id say its very likely we sell Moore in the window.

We are going down unless some of these young players can really step up to the plate.

---

I know we were in a mess under trallope but I know a few people who put bets on us to go up under warnock that season when he was appointed. We fell short then as had too much to make up but the vibe was looking up not down. Same when ole warnock and Harris then left-all left as the club wanted to go up but it wasn't quite happening. I don't think relegation was ever seriously on. Of course you never know and teams do under achieve but it would have been an under achievement.

This time however I don't think it would be an underachievement I just think we are a league 1 side currently and if we did go down not many championship clubs would be interested in our players which says it all.

Worst since 2004/05 & 2005/06 I think. And worse than that too.

Notwithstanding the division, but just thinking about performances I think it's the worst since 1999/2000 when City went back down to the fourth tier

2004/05 apart, I don’t think we’ve been in a proper relegation battle since 2003. Early on in 04/05 we went five home matches I think it was without scoring and I remember a 3-0 loss to Watford in a night match that was absolutely dreadful, but that team had a nucleus of good players like Gabbidon, Kav and Thorne while Ledley and Jerome breaking through was a bonus. At the moment, I’m not seeing anyone in this team who can compare to them and, as mentioned earlier in the thread, we need a few of these youngsters to start playing to their potential pretty quickly because this is the worst we’ve been since promotion to the Championship in my opinion.

Werent we in serious trouble years ago. Had to get a PFA loan to pay wages then got the loan and proceeded to piss off other clubs by loaning some players. I think Neil Ardley may have been one. It was enough to keep us up anyway.

We need new players before the window unless these youngsters really step up.

Wasn’t Trollope the change of style and philosophy that we are asking for right now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 19bluebirds27

Wasn’t Trollope the change of style and philosophy that we are asking for right now?

---

yes, I think the club were badly burned there and with the subsequent Warnock remarkable turn around, it is unsurprising that they are reluctant to go down that road again

Warnock was perfect for the players we had at the time.
Nobody regrets his time here with that promotion.

Now we are asking for a 180” turn around on the pitch whilst being closer to drop than we were then.
To achieve this tiki taka, rock n roll football it won’t be achieved directly off the next appointment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 19bluebirds27

Wasn’t Trollope the change of style and philosophy that we are asking for right now?

---

If what happened in two months under Trollope is a justification for what has followed since then, shouldn’t eight defeats on the trot (including two thrashings when we played with a back five of centrebacks) mean that we need to change to a more progressive, watchable style for the next five years or so?

The problem at the moment is we arent even playing direct football. Its just kick it anywhere.

Ive no idea what we were supposed to be doing Saturday.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

If what happened in two months under Trollope is a justification for what has followed since then, shouldn’t eight defeats on the trot (including two thrashings when we played with a back five of centrebacks) mean that we need to change to a more progressive, watchable style for the next five years or so?

---

This is what I’m saying.
We are now asking for the exact thing that we had a chance of in 2016.

we had an opening 5 minute spell in the first half and went close in the opening 13 minutes of the second...the rest was utter crap and i mean utter crap..long balls to nobody , getting caught with the ball...all the sins

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 19bluebirds27

Wasn’t Trollope the change of style and philosophy that we are asking for right now?

---

Its not the style. It's the quality of the manager delivering it.

There are good long ball managers out there and bad ones, for example MM is doing a worse job of playing long ball than NW.

There will be stronger candidates out there than Trollope that can implement it better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 19bluebirds27

This is what I’m saying.
We are now asking for the exact thing that we had a chance of in 2016.

---

I have to take issue with this. Paul trollope should never have been appointed. We all knew that at the time. It's blatantly obvious he is not manager material. He is clearly a good coach and has an outstanding reputation and record as a coach but as a manager? No way.

The idea that because it failed with trollope (who obviously didn't know what he was doing) means it won't work again or even we should have given trollope more time is nonsense. He wasn't up to it. Hence why he will never be appointed as a manager again as I guess other clubs agree.

Get a manager who knows what they are doing and actually has a plan (I don't believe trollope had one) and of course a change of style can work.

I just nabbed this off the Stoke Forum.
I don't know much about xg...but I know some on here do.

According to the XG table Cardiff should be 8th.

That suggests they're a much better team than results would indicate, so either:

a) They've been very unlucky

b) They've not been able to finish chances they create

c) They have a poor goalkeeper

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 19bluebirds27

This is what I’m saying.
We are now asking for the exact thing that we had a chance of in 2016.

---

Some of us have been asking for it since Warnock left, if not earlier. That said, I’ve never understood the mentality which says if we don’t play the boring crap we have been doing, the only alternative is “tiki taka rock and roll football”, there are stacks of different approaches between those two extremes and an attempt to pass the ball in a manner which the huge majority of our opponents manage to would be a start.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wash DC Blue

I just nabbed this off the Stoke Forum.
I don't know much about xg...but I know some on here do.

According to the XG table Cardiff should be 8th.

That suggests they're a much better team than results would indicate, so either:

a) They've been very unlucky

b) They've not been able to finish chances they create

c) They have a poor goalkeeper

---

what?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 19bluebirds27

Wasn’t Trollope the change of style and philosophy that we are asking for right now?

---

Yes ,that went well lots of fan moans

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

what?

---

As I said I've taken this from a Stoke Forum and I have little idea what it really means.

Is it true for starters?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wash DC Blue

As I said I've taken this from a Stoke Forum and I have little idea what it really means.

Is it true for starters?

---

I think Rjk was expecting a link from you to what you saw - I was.

I saw something a few weeks ago that had us a lot higher in the cg table than I expected us to be mind.

We might have a high XG but that doesn't stop you conceding goals.

I wonder what the XG against us is? Probably significantly higher than for? Fulham could have maybe should have scored 4 or 5 the other night and Boro missed some great chances too on Sat.

Our defence this season has been the biggest and most surprising fall from grace for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

I think Rjk was expecting a link from you to what you saw - I was.

I saw something a few weeks ago that had us a lot higher in the cg table than I expected us to be mind.

---

Ah right.
It didn't paste first time...


According to the XG table Cardiff should be 8th.

That suggests they're a much better team than results would indicate, so either:

a) They've been very unlucky

b) They've not been able to finish chances they create

c) They have a poor goalkeeper

****

Yes without a doubt. There are the players out on loan but apart from maybe Wintle, I doubt they will improve us much. Watters can't seem to get a game at MK Dons, same for Murphy at Preston and Whyte hasn't figured much for Oxford in League 1. As for the youngsters Bowen and Colwill look promising but I'm not sure if Bagan and Sang are good enough for The Championship. Sadly Brown and Harris are league two at best although you could hardly call them youngsters at 23.

On the pitch, yes. I know there are differing opinions on why we're playing so badly - wrong selection, wrong formation, players not motivated, etc, etc, but the stark truth is that our squad is devoid of any 'footballing' talent. On Saturday, a decent but workmanlike Middlesbrough side looked player-for-player a league above us.
But off the pitch we've lost our way totally. To see Sol Bamba playing his 3rd game in a week when he was surplus to requirements here, sums up the muddled, confused, state of the club.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A Quiet Monkfish

On the pitch, yes. I know there are differing opinions on why we're playing so badly - wrong selection, wrong formation, players not motivated, etc, etc, but the stark truth is that our squad is devoid of any 'footballing' talent. On Saturday, a decent but workmanlike Middlesbrough side looked player-for-player a league above us.
But off the pitch we've lost our way totally. To see Sol Bamba playing his 3rd game in a week when he was surplus to requirements here, sums up the muddled, confused, state of the club.

---

Mmmm perhaps management is better ,let's go and grab Neil.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wash DC Blue

According to the XG table Cardiff should be 8th.

---

Unfortunately, the problem with xG is that it's complete and utter bollocks.

I can decode what you've read on the Stoke forum for you: in a nutshell, the xG boffins are saying that if Cardiff City's players were considerably better at playing football, they'd be scoring more goals. But they aren't, so they're not.

I don’t get this xG stuff, is it like the Saturday after game inquest in the pub/club after getting beat by Grange Quins? “If you hadn’t have missed that sitter early on we’d have been one up”..........“That was never a foul for their first pelanty”...........”And the chances we wasted after their third went in, sheesh!!”........So by 8 o’clock after you’ve had a few pints you’ve convinced yourselves you’ve pinched a draw.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by splott parker

I don’t get this xG stuff, is it like the Saturday after game inquest in the pub/club after getting beat by Grange Quins? “If you hadn’t have missed that sitter early on we’d have been one up”..........“That was never a foul for their first pelanty”...........”And the chances we wasted after their third went in, sheesh!!”........So by 8 o’clock after you’ve had a few pints you’ve convinced yourselves you’ve pinched a draw.

---

Xg isn't the same as saying if we scored early on blah blah.

Its just a way of analysing the performance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by splott parker

I don’t get this xG stuff, is it like the Saturday after game inquest in the pub/club after getting beat by Grange Quins? “If you hadn’t have missed that sitter early on we’d have been one up”..........“That was never a foul for their first pelanty”...........”And the chances we wasted after their third went in, sheesh!!”........So by 8 o’clock after you’ve had a few pints you’ve convinced yourselves you’ve pinched a draw.

---

It's basically a way of quantifying how good a team's shots were. You might see that Team A had 5 shots on target to Team B's 1, and Team B won 1-0. You might think they were a bit fortunate, but when you see where the shots were from - Team A's were all from 30+ yards and trickling towards the keeper, Team B's was a tap in - then you might think that Team B were more deserving.

xG takes that information and reduces it down to a single number to make comparisons easier without watching the game. Unfortunately, the xG nerds are nerds so they're not great at explaining what it is, and have given it a name that is open to ridicule. "No one ever scored an expected goal!"

No one should read too much into it, but it is a lot more useful than possession stats which are utter nonsense but fans will often conclude that their team was better because they had 55% possession. Certainly no one should think that we deserve to be challenging from the playoffs just because our xG is high.

It is useful for betting, so that you can see a wide range of teams who have been 'unlucky'. For example, lost three in a row without scoring but with a good xG which suggests that maybe their chances of winning the next game are a lot better than the odds the bookies are offering. Or it might suggest that their players are fluffing easy chances because they're crap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hilts

The problem at the moment is we arent even playing direct football. Its just kick it anywhere.

Ive no idea what we were supposed to be doing Saturday.

---

Direct football can work Warnock proved that. he he had been a better manager than he was was he could even have kept us up with it. We have just been playing aimless useless football with our striker isolated. If you are going to lump it forward you need someone to lump it forward to and someone else to support him and other help arriving quickly. McCarthy usually started with 8 defenders on the pitch and latterly they weren't even that good at defending.