Fabrice29

Happy to play 3 at the back. The tests we've had in pre season are nothing like what we'll face in the PL and especially Burnley. It suits dealing with direct play and crosses. Burnley won't be winning the ball high up and exploiting gaps with clever technical players. So happy to play 3 at the back as long as there's no Hoedt or Stephens. More worrying is going forward.

He'd be quite good in Spain I think. Good at one on ones and close range efforts. Don't think there'll be as many crosses to deal with.

And as an extra point to the above I love that people demand signings for outfield players like there's no tomorrow but when it comes to keepers having more than 2 is a shambles. 4 strikers and 4 wingers but still demanding more but when we replace the **** we have in goal its a shambles

Shambles? Sweating? I'd be sweating more if we had him near the first team. Do you honestly give a **** about saving his salary? Obviously not that much if you rather have not signed Gunn. Call it what you want I guess but to me I say fair play to the club. They've noticed a weakness and rather than sit on it because he's got a big salary and contract they've decided **** it, it needs repairing and they have sorted it. Such is life if we can't get rid yet.

Why?

We aren't signing Danny Ings. Never have been.

Yes quite. One of those players who when he plays well he looks very good and everyone takes notice but actually more often than not he wont. I wanted him back at one stage and wouldn't be anti it if he did come back but I think we're probably looking for a level and consistency above now. Decent player, good guy but I think palace would be a good move for him.

If we lose a CM we don't need to replace him. We had far too many last season and we've had 2 return from loan since and signed Armstrong who could play there, albeit further up the pitch.

It's the oldest trick in the book. Happens all the time and you surely don't need explaining why.

Couple of myths to debunk. Players dont seek assurances that blatently and if they do the club isn't the one to give them it. "I'll sign if I'm 1st choice" "Well you're 1st choice now, so unless you plan on being **** over the summer you'll be first choice when the season starts. We might sign a keeper but we're not saying you're 1st choice only to see you be **** and not be able to drop you" Like every other position its competition for places with a young talent. If we signed a striker now people aren't going to be querying how ****ed of Austin would be. It'll be a case of who performs best is in.

The idea that McCarthy is on the verge of a big move soom is funny btw. He was available when we signed him and it took him a while to get into pir team but nobody was hunting him then. He did well when he did get in of.course but are we in danger of over hyping his performances because of how bad Forster was and we forgot what a competent keeper should be able to do. All reports and hype around Gunn suggests to me that he's the one that we should be expecting moves from in a couple of years. City rated him but have circumstances that means he can't get in. As with most City deals now it'll have a buy back clause in it and I wouldn't be surprised to see this kid by pass McCarthy soon and City enforce it when the hype becomes real. It's a great signing.

I'm not sure it's that odd really. We want proper competition for places and he's a young English talent which we pride ourselves on being interested in. He will look at us as a club which continually improves young players. He'll look at Hughes and what he did for Butland. He'll back himself to get in the team and stay there when given a chance but in the meantime he'll improve more here as a player than under a Championship team development.

There's no evidence his role or duties have changed. There's plenty evidence however that he/the media team are trying convince you that his role and duties have changed and he's just been taken out of the firing line.

Did LeG ever post his information?

5 pages. Incredible.

Pretty sure as people are currently on holiday this has been put forward a little to appease the impending meltdown the fans were waffling on about. Proper interviews will take place when everyone is back I'm guessing but for now I think this has been a case of someone somewhere feeling like something needed to be put out.

If Hughes does badly we can all rest assured it'll turn into a Les Reed appointment.

All 3 of those midfielders are the same safe player. Understand playing all 3 but there has to be a link to the attack and that Is Tadic. Therefore theres no room for 2 strikers. 2 strikers just get isolated otherwise. Bertrand and Cedric can only go forward when they feel the ball is going to go forward. Seeing as the midfield kept going back and the 2 strikers couldn't hold onto it they couldn't get forward. Hence why when Tadic comes on Bertrand especially knows it'll go forward and immediately bombs on and puts a cross in. (A **** one tbf). Thats the difference he makes and it's why 2 up front is terrible idea with this squad. The only conceivable way it can work is if Tadic is dropped in behind them and we play just 2 midfielders. Every time we've played just 2 central midfielders we've struggled though so it isn't ideal. This squad isn't cut out for 2 strikers. The only time we've played with it in recent years was for a bit under Koeman and Pelle was playing who had an ability to hold up the ball that no one else in our team does right now. It worked then because full backs had time to get up the pitch. This team isn't going to get that with our strikers now so we have to play Tadic so he can hold it up and link the midfield and attack in his own frustrating way but it's our best way sadly.

I think we've learnt quite comprehensively not to start 2 up front and never to drop Tadic again.

Do you honestly think 2 strikers was a wise idea last night? I get that we needed to win and go for it some more but to do that we need the ball. We couldn't get the ball in the second half. As someone has said above we've been worse with 2 strikers all season. If we had put Austin with Long last night we'd have dropped even deeper and lost even more of the ball. There's much bigger issues than not playing 2 strikers. If we could put Long back into JWP's position and Austin up top then I'd be happy but maybe the staff aren't confident about that. It certainly takes away set pieces and Cedric as attacking options but it might be worth the gamble against Bournemouth but to play them alongside each other as strikers is suicidal.

No. Jokanavic if Fulham somehow don't go up or Dean Smith.

McCarthy Cedric Yoshida Hoedt Bertrand Romeu Hoijberg Lemina JWP Tadic Austin Yoshida has to start, our best defender before his injury suddenly can't get in the team but Stephens who's yet to show any interest in winning a header is a starter. That hasto change. 442 is laughable outdated formation and we've never played well with it so rightly back to 5 midfielders and those 3 together centrally compete better together. JWP was in good form and his set pieces are our biggest threat so no idea why he's suddenly not in the side. Tadic is so frustrating but its no coincidence his and Austin form was best together so play them both. Boufal unlucky not to be in but the likes of Redmond and Gabbi can do one. Sadly we look better with Long in the side too so if we are to play 442 Long has to play as he's the only one in our side who can get us up the pitch.

Best option by far thats been linked and even better if it is just until the end of the season for now. Much better option than Silva. Can't quite believe anyone thinks otherwise. Silvas time at Hull ended in relegation and 9 points worse off than where they began in comparison to their rivals. Dont like Hughes much, moans about refs far too much but actually did OK at Stoke. A few Stoke fans I've heard now have ssid he was let down this year by his recruitment team. They wanted Lemina and also he wanted Soares before so I can see him enjoying our squad. QPR fans can be ignored a little. Car crash of a club anyway.

Realistically and most likely the reason he's still here is going to be the lack of alternative available. Do we sign someone up for a few games. Who'd realistically want that? Big risk for little reward. Any realistic long term manager will probably want to wait, he might even be at another club atm. So do we sign someone we don't really want and sack them in the summer if they keep us up? The reaction to that could be toxic. Or do we gamble with this guy and get who we want in the summer. When a suitable alternative wants it, I suspect he'll be gone.

We've had a criteria of wanting a manager who has implemented his style at at least two clubs so I'm not sure Potter fits. I think its just a bit of a hipsters/ex player choice/link than anything substantial. Jokanavic impresses me alot. Plays an attractive style and good with youth. I'm surprised we or anyone hasn't taken a chance on him before tbh.