Fabrice29

What has Romeu done to be involved? Let alone involved in a match against opposition who are a step up. All well and good not prioritising the cup but sticking him in from nowhere would be unfair on all those around him.

Or maybe I've just watched games and seen that the ultimately conclusive camera angle is not always the first one they watch and shown within 30 seconds.

If you think 30 seconds is enough time to wheel out every camera angle available to spot an obvious issue then please do get yourself into that world and quicken things up. Just last week a Liverpool player clearly used an arm to put the ball into the net and it took more than 30 seconds to come to the correct decision. And just before anyone posts it, the FA’s new idea of 2 unsuccessful challenges each is also a terrible idea. But hey ho, it sounds simple and effective so I’m sure no doubt people will think it’s common sense to do it.

Yes that’s fine and how we rise to the challenges is of course interesting. I’m pointing out that it’s not on the manager to rise to that challenge, but players. Can they cut out mistakes, continue to be resilient and continue to take chances? Because I think it was painfully obvious that’s where the failings have been this season rather than how good our managers supposedly are. All things a manager can influence a bit but predominantly on the players and we should reframe those conversations for me. But yeah, different people, different perspectives.

I'm not saying he doesn't have influence. I'm saying judging managers in batches of 7 games, ranked on difficulty, is something we should stop doing. We've gone through a significant portion of managers recently, mainly because we've wet the bed almost every time a bad run of results happen. I've said this before but we have to stick with a manager through poor form at some stage, but the fans initial reaction every time we lose once/twice/7 times is to always blame the manager. I think we started to address some of the major issues in January, we haven't addressed them all though and the defenders who have never shown themselves to be too far away from a mistake and unreliable goalscorers will rear their head again at some stage this season and when they do I think we should look in those directions rather than immediately declare the manager as not good enough because it's in a self chosen 7 game batch that we've somehow decided is a marker.

You’re making out Fellows hasn’t played as a RWB semi regularly before, including in arguably his biggest game before signing for us, against us. And making out we didn’t go on a mad run of form with him playing there and making out he’s not been pretty bang average and dropped since moving to RW.

Barely played CB well let alone RB.

You don’t seem to mention anything else as far as I can see? And you seem pretty keen to point out the next 7 games will tell us how much the managers influence has had so I just assumed that’s what you meant.

Probably worth noting Fellows form has dropped since the change (because having less space to run into as a dribbler isn’t always ideal) and it was also a change facilitated by actually having a fit and available right back too.

You’re right but claims like ‘let’s see what the next 7 games are like’ seem a bit wild to me. What if Eckert passes trousers test over the next 7 games with flying colours but never wins a game again. Good or bad? There’s obvious differences a manager can make, you’ve named some and Eckert has done well in some but I do think this fan base can take a step back from wild conclusions on managers, good or bad, based on small samples of results especially when 11 players on the pitch have stopped giving stupid goals away which immediately makes us more competitive.

Do we really believe the defining factor between the top teams in each division is the manager? And therefore the results between them are solely on the manager?

Except what people want is the right decision which if is clearly and obviously available if somebody just took a little more time to find it, seems perfectly reasonable. Your approach is all lovely as an idea down the pub but the moment you stick a 30 second/1 or 2 minute clock on it and Paul Tierny is thrashing around trying to find the right camera angles and the countdown clock is playing and Gary Neville is screaming on the TV and the crowd is cheering the last 10 seconds it all becomes a bit daft and messy. Especially when 20 seconds after the clock run out Sky roll out a clear and obvious angle showing the VAR missed something.

For a whole host of reasons but predominantly because sticking a clock in the face of people who are trying (and in some cases struggling) to make high pressure decisions wouldn’t make it run any smoother, clearer or better. It would lead to assumptions, guesswork and rushing (even more some would say).

This would be an awful idea in fairness.

Funny because the perceived wisdom on here over the previous weeks has been that he needs to stop doing this and our tactics should be designed to keep him out wide.