David I'm genuinely interested in a balanced debate and I'm trying to get my head around your post... If I read this correctly you are saying that RM has done ok because we were shit last year and we're in the top half which makes a nice change and that it's not RMs fault because we haven't got enough firepower up front?
You mentioned the unbeaten run, but how many games did we needlessly draw that we should have won during that period if we'd taken a few more risks with the ball? The unbeaten run was a bit of a red herring... If rather than drawing 2 games we'd one one and lost one we would be better off. Do you think this risk adverse approach actually works?
It is easy to focus on the lack of a Striker and blame the recruitment for all our woes, but that ignores the bizarre team selections, the lack of tactical adaptability, the inability to consistently get the side playing with the tempo needed for Russball to work, ... We have plenty of goals in the side, as we have demonstrated from time to time (as you rightly highlighted) but it seems to me that our tactics (that insist on ball retention over risk) lead to us creating fewer good chances than we should. Do you think our approach is ok?
Our expectations as a club were to get promoted this year. If RM fails to do that now via the playoffs he has failed to meet expectations. Our current form doesn't suggest we're the team to beat going into the playoffs. Do you think RM should be given a pass for looking like he is heading for failure?