derry

He didn't come near enough to his comfort zone so he just let him go. The second important time he could have read the situation he didn't bother. If he doesn't block the critical ones he doesn't deserve to play, that's his only reason for being on the field, not for his penetrating passes, penetrating runs or goals he's the defensive midfielder we are all told. Well not for me. He can take his comfort zone back to France anytime he wants for me.

hear hear.

Spot on and he's earned the right to see it through but only if he is manager without interference. Otherwise he should just walk.

Without breaking confidences, he has.

I think it wouldn't work for two reasons, Cork isn't match fit and Schneiderlin just doesn't defend. We need to bring in better players at the back and a defensive midfielder but we have to get through to January and Schneiderlin, Lallana and Davis leave us open with a back four who aren't good enough at this level. I will say Cork was poor v Sheff Wed until injured.

It could have worked, I bet it was good to watch. As you say the defence was it's undoing.

As long as it stops us conceding goals, not sure it will.

This might be a literal translation but not tied to a diamond. Ardiles and Kempes both attacking players played behind Bertini, Luque and Ortiz, Essien and Lampard were totally different, all round international midfielders, but played behind Drogba there was no attacking playmaker in either side.

The penny may have dropped all round. The Chairman suddenly aware passing isn't getting points, the manager and staff on borrowed time unless points are won, the players looking at being shipped out in due course. I'm not sure about the change in environment unless there is a major change in the way we play.

No I'm not and I did say 'albeit' but Davis and Schneiderlin won't, Ramirez and Lallana can carry the ball and Yosida or Fonte could probably be the defensive midfielder until we get a proper defensive midfielder. A compromise but letting in shedloads of goals isn't going to keep us up, nor are the existing midfielders going to suddenly change, and close down competently. It's a sad choice, more of the same or do something different. Shuffling the names is just shuffling the names it won't change the porous defence.

True but Ardiles and Kempes were attackers. I had thought initially Schneiderlin and Davis but they are so negative, poor in defence, I thought sod it just put in our best player who is an international midfielder and give Lallana another chance. It doesn't mean just attack, the front three and middle two still have to track back(451) as they do now but if they get it wrong there is an added defender to cover. Just look at the way Schneiderlin and Lallana defended for that first goal, and it happens all the time, we have to find a way of defending better and we aren't going to get Davis, Schneiderlin, Lallana etc suddenly becoming competent or Fox not getting caught out. I don't like it any more than you do but we have to stop leaking goals but still be able to score.

I rate Gazzaniga as a decent goalkeeper. Boruc has done nothing in the two games so far that could label him as a good keeper. Very poor at WH and looked pretty static v Spurs. He has to earn his place and Gazzaniga has done nothing to deserve dropping as Boruc has done nothing to suggest that he deserves to be picked ahead of Gazzaniga. Our selection of goalkeepers is bizarre, Davis is obviously behind Gazzaniga and Boruc but is always substitute, (I know about his influence etc) that is nonsense.

As I said 4123, which is basically a 433 which during a game can become 451 or any combination of it. Argentina won the world cup playing it with five attack minded players (4123), Mourinho played it at Chelsea albeit with Makelele in front of the back four, Essien and Lampard as the carrileros with Robben. Drogba and Duff. Roma amongst others played it. Other international teams have also used it. We don't have a competent defensive midfielder but we do have a couple of mobile centre backs (Yoshida was a midfielder) who probably could do the job. Either way as defenders, Lallana, Davis and Schneiderlin leave us wide open. Some of the best managers in the world have used it with defenders in front of the back four and you had no idea.

After watching us getting ripped apart by poor covering and inept defending, watching us change from one formation to another and still not working, I'd still be surprised if we do anything different against Swansea. If teams increase the number of defenders it usually stops goals at both ends but rarely changes the results just less goals. The existing CMs neither defend or attack and Ramirez is a much better player than Davis and so is Lallana. This was my opinion but like everything on this site plenty criticism for original thinking and loads of lineups that don't blend, just shuffling the pack. I'm not saying it would work or that we have anybody that is ideally suited but we have hardly been successful with our team selections to date. 28 goals is a lot of goals in 10 matches. I think the attacking players may well keep the opponents busy and take some of the pressure off the defence by being more direct.

He was pretty poor v Sheff Wed in midfield before doing his knee. I can't see him being a regular first teamer.

It's not 505 FFS, it's 4123 and Ramirez played as the midfield playmaker for Uruguay in his last match and Lallana has played there for us this season. And as for a front sweeper, if you've never experienced it why comment. I've used it very successfully to do precisely what I'm advocating here. And as for having never kicked a ball and understanding the game, where did you get that nonsense from. With that sort of thinking they might as well scrap coaching courses, I obviously wasted my time.

I rest my case.

Beats me.

With reservations, I think Adkins deserves to be given time to turn this around. The reservations, last season, nearly costing us promotion by playing three negative midfielders together for too many games, doing the same this year with Davis and Schneiderlin who don't defend well enough and underusing Mayuka.

This is the key. We need somebody who can do that job defending properly from midfield. All our midfielders are hopeless defenders.

IMO the problem we have is a lack of defensive tackling in covering, yet we play two deep lying midfielders who neither defend or attack leaving our full backs especially exposed and create gaps that the central defenders struggle to cover.

In this case they are, because they criticised but then showed no idea how a front sweeper is utilised.

When they criticise something then display a lack of knowledge about the point they are criticising they demonstrate that they have a superficial understanding.

I've managed and coached teams at a semi professional level.

You two clowns really take the biscuit. You show no real understanding of even an elementary level of tactics/formations involved in blending a team, yet you criticise and belittle a team formation that has been successfully used for years. Gary Neville said that about an instant in time, then went on to hammer Schneiderlin, the same for the second goal and at the end descibed WBA as efficient and criticised our formation by saying he didn't understand what we were trying to do. As for a front sweeper, how you can criticise the concept when you then demonstrate that you don't even understand what the player does by talking about covering the full backs. The front sweeper covers across the whole width of the pitch and is either the first defender to try and block an attack or the first player to slot in and cover the first back four player that commits to block an attack leaving the defence compact. He also drops in behind as the circumstances dictate to cover for any gap that could occurr without the extra defender. Schneiderlin doesn't cover anyone neither does Davis but a proper defender or a proper defensive midfielder would, allowing for more attack minded midfielders which Schneiderlin and Davis aren't either. Maybe you should learn a bit about the game before you start pontificating about something you clearly know little about.