CheshireSaint

No one has said he is the worst and the fact that your only justification seems to be, he has a better record than our other keepers, doesn't make him 'decent' either. We could live with 'decent'. For 'decent', see 'steady'. He is neither. You can't quote data as a defence while ignoring more pertinent data of him being consistently toward the lower performing keepers in whatever division he has been in, since being good on loan at Pompey. I know, discussions about him are everywhere but I would welcome a truly steady keeper alongside a similarly steady 7 / 10 number 9 to be a focal point of our attack, particularly when Scienza goes off or isn't available so we can revert to a plan B that doesn't invite the opposition to our defensive third.

I am sure the medical staff know more than me, but if there is a modicum of doubt, I'd be inclined to rest him. Whilst every game in the Championship is tough, Norwich, even away, should not be one of the tougher ones. I know we are struggling for RB / RWB's at the moment and I am not thrilled at the prospect of playing the wee man. If we were to play Edwards there, we would certainly lose an offensive capability but hopefully, we will still have enough to cope with Norwich, and should be better defensively, you know, for when we inevitably hand the initiative to the opposition for their turn.

Intensity and momentum. We start with intensity and very quickly build momentum. This combination is blowing teams away in the first half. Scienza and Armstrong are key to this and it is up to the opposition has to somehow, resist this momentum and reduce the intensity. Harder said than done. Well, it should be. However, by taking Scienza and Armstrong off, the opposition doesn't need to work out a way, we do it for them. The rest of our team then adopt a more negative demeanour and allow the opposition to build their own intensity and momentum and we in turn struggle to resist them. WBA's better second half performance was nothing to do with the ability of Ryan Mason and all to do with the inability of Tonda. Tonda has done brilliantly so far but that second half was shockingly terrible. I understand anyone would struggle maintaining such high tempo football for 90 mins but Tonda needs to find away of slipping out of top gear, into something more effective than neutral. Sublime to Steady, not Sublime to Ridiculous. If we consider Sublime as the final third, Steady as the middle third and Ridiculous as the defensive third; we need to ensure we go from the attacking third, into the middle third instead of conceding the middle third and allowing the opposition to press us constantly in the defensive third. Hopefully the return of Charles, a fitter Romeu and Bragg over Aribo (why is he insisting on him) will help this. Cramming the defence isn't the answer, as the opposition is already there, thanks for the invite. Replacing Scienza with Robinson doesn't help us maintain the tempo nor does it particularly bolster the midfield. Similarly, replacing Armstrong with Archer has the same effect. It significantly weakens one area but doesn't improve any other. Utterly pointless substitutions. Replacing them in combination just doubles the effect. Take Scienza off and replace with Bragg for instance, weakens the attack but strengthens the midfield which should only aid the defence. Point being, we can consolidate the attack when 3 up, as long as we strengthen in the middle and prevent offering the momentum on a plate to the opposition. If we then take off Armstrong for Archer, the impact is lessened as we don't need Archer to track back as much (he doesn't) as we have an additional midfielder in there. Archer can then concentrate on playing on the shoulder of their last defender, giving them something to consider when thinking of committing players forward, chasing the game.

Don't think he was as good as average was he?

So true for me too. Beatles are ok but I don't get the hype. Hardly surprising perhaps that I can't stand Oasis, given the Beatles were apparently influential on Oasis. My beef, rightly or wrongly, was Oasis got the global recognition and success that the Stone Roses, Inspiral Carpets should have had. Especially the latter, criminally underrated. It is probably the success of both Oasis and The Beatles that grates me. Anyone that has heard any Puressence, tell me that Oasis were a patch on them. I had a free ticket to watch Oasis in Manchester recently, Airbnb included. No thanks. I wouldn't cross the road to see them.

You generally only see keepers that close to a post, when the opposition is cutting in parallel to the byline. He should be absolutely shuffling across and from the position and direction the forward is taking, more than a third across, probably just shy of half way across. Nine times from ten, any shot is only going to go exactly where it went. The fact he isn't shuffling just adds to the fact he has no momentum to use and is completely flat footed when the obvious (to everyone else) shot does come in. It's getting a tad boring now. He's just sh1te, simple as that. No positional awareness and little sense of awareness. City had our pants down well and truly. Have you ever had a car that you invested heavily in so just can't let go? The cambelt goes, costly. Can't get rid now, just hand a new cambelt. Head gasket goes, can't get rid now, just had it skimmed, etc. etc. All your mates tell you to get rid but the more you keep it, the more 'I told you so's you have to suffer. SR have not only got his signing wrong, their insistence on him in the team is just reinforcing their nonsensical position but he just isn't going to come good. He is a dodgy, Friday car that you've just got to cut your losses with.

He should have been recognised by England earlier than he was and was probably dismissed too early too. As a young Hampshire Cricket fan I couldn't wait to see him play for England and loved seeing him do well. My favourite cricket player. Seemed a nice guy too, though never met him. Only last week I googled what he was up to nowadays. Very sad indeed. RIP.

The onus and expectations of their fans will also be to be on the front foot against us which should also help, with plenty of space for Scienza and Fellows to exploit. Their win against Stoke is good form, although i'd suggest TE's Saints would have taken Stoke to the cleaners. Two nil Saints. A goal early on (Aziz) and one as they try for an equaliser late on (Robinson).

Hardly. Point 1 - Armstrong playing deeper is linking forward play but preventing him from being a centre point for that forward play. Point 2 - When Armstrong does get in good positions, he is determined to get a shot off even when a shot isn't necessarily the best option and others are far better placed. Not sure anything there is a ridiculous thing to point out.

Despite an absolutely sublime ball to Scienza for the Azaz goal, Adam Armstrong is not a centre forward. When he is in the mixer, he is more Fox in the Fog than Fox in the Box. His ability to drop deeper, is bearing fruit in one aspect but this then prevents him taking up a centre forward position. There was a move last night when Fellows got to the by-line (again) pulled a great ball back, but AA was still 20 yards too deep to get on the end of it. A problem TE will need to work on. Another incident when he received the ball on the edge of the box, back to goal and he needed to just pass it on one more time across the edge of the box to a midfielder who was facing goal, for an unobstructed shot. Instead he did his usual turn and shot straight at the keeper.

The whole saga had SR written all over it. He was bought under Nathan Jones and you could see the logic in that. Until however, you consider that SR must have already had provisional plans to replace Jones, and with him, his stye of play. No following Managers had a style of play that particularly suited him. Until now. It's almost as if we bought him intentionally not to fit in and made sure he was gone before he could. We all know he isn't Ronaldo but I do believe as a target man he could have offered a focus which could then bring in Armstrong and Archer, playing off him. Old school. I understand the justification for the original question, as whilst it may not be for the purists, wingers going at fullbacks, crossing in to the big man to attack the ball or knock down to a second striker, might be football at its most basic, but for all the Martinesque poncing about, it would make a refreshing and excitable change and makes me think back to wins at home to Liverpool back at the dell in the 80's.

If I recall correctly, when he first signed, he toured the city, getting a feel for the place and it's history, immersing himself in his new home and it's feeling. Gives the impression he doesn't just treat the club as a cash cow. We see many examples of players stating this and that club is special, but with Orio, it feels sincere. AMN for example, gave the impression of the exact opposite. With Lavia, we were only ever going to be a stepping stone, but everyone was aware and resigned to that. Orio has been one of my fave players in recent years as I rate passion and willingness to muck in, as sought after attributes. He has these in abundance. Great signing and hopefully sat in front of a back 4, will instil some composure, confidence and grit into our otherwise fragile and delicate mess of a defence. His studious nature will serve him well if he ever goes into coaching. Unlike Nivea boy who is only just trying to ensure he continues to make a living, remaining on the periphery of everything, stealing a living.

If I recall, he was disparaging against the clubs willingness to push on, when we were in and around the top 4. His comments were snide at the time, but in hindsight, they were very on point. I cannot stand the man either, if he was made of chocolate, he'd eat himself. However, it isn't about that. Could he do a better job than Still? Could he pushback against Rasmus and Co.? Could he get us up the table and secure a play off spot at least? If the answer is yes to all three, he would be a more than obvious choice.

Unless we play 4 at the back, with an emphasis on not fooking about and get the ball to the teeth players in midfield and up front. Having 5 at the back just gives them an appearance of more security, and options of playing it across the back. Urgency is something we continue to lack. Allowing defences to settle and play on their terms, in their comfort zones. We will never be up and at 'em with 5 at the back.

For me, the problem isn't whether it's the Manager or the recruitment / board. It is both. We can't do much about recruitment at present. We can do something about the Manager. I was really optimistic about his appointment at first, with it being controversial and left field. Worth a chance I thought. Now, reality hits. He doesn't know what to do. He is thinking he needs a solid foundation and he is withdrawing behind what he thinks is a defensive wall, literally. 3 CB's is acceptable when required. Away at a team riding high say, at least for the first half perhaps. Playing 3 CB's from the start against.....everyone, home or away is weakness personified. Last night, by half time, we had lost the initiative completely. There was no point sending the same team out and expecting them to wrestle it back without anything changing. That's stupid. He then went on to not only put on the worst player we have, but sacrificed a midfielder whilst still maintaining 3 CB's. That isn't naivety or lack of experience, that's stupidity and ineptitude. It matters little, how many centre halves we have when they are running back to their own goal and the opposition is swarming forward, waiting to pick out a run into the channels. That swarm needs to be stopped at source. You do that by having a competitive midfield. With numbers in midfield, that's where you play the ball around, probing for an opportunity. You don't play it around the back where it is unlikely you will find a killer pass and the jeopardy is increased if a wayward pass occurs, as it did. It's set up completely wrong and Still is a complete fookwit for doing so. Repeatedly. Away from home we need to pack the midfield to keep it tight. Not the defence. In other news, there was a move and cross that summed Downs up last night. A cross come in and Downs was in his usual position of between centre halves, hiding. Instead of looking to get in front of the centre half to meet the ball, he was happy staying between the two where he could slightly jump, for effect, knowing he was never going to get the ball. He has no wish to contest anything, as proven by his lack of touches. I have said it before and i'll say it again, Get Azaz up front. Still needs to go. We have an abundance of offensive talent, apart from the absolute point of the diamond. Get that sorted (January) and play with a freedom that line up deserves and we should dominate. Certainly against very mediocre Swansea and Bristol City. One point return against them, it's inexcusable and as such, certainly justification for a change already.