derry

I will say that with the club's emphasis on bringing through the youngsters, that dropping one that is playing well for a 30 year old on a short term contract, isn't sending the right message to the young players. As long as Gazzaniga plays well I'd hope that Adkins will keep picking him.

I wouldn't think for one minute that we promised him anything other than the opportunity to mount a challenge for the starting spot. The Davis/Gazzaniga position is obvious and Boruc will fancy his chances of breaking through in due course, although I like Gazzaniga and feel he may take a lot of shifting. I do expect Boruc to get the next chance if the standard isn't maintained.

Best wishes

Papers today saying Halsey being changed for tomorrow,

Gazzaniga was impressive in probably Nigel Adkins most important game for a long time. He didn't put a foot wrong, made one top class save and the centre backs were confident in front of him. Look at it this way if Boruc now replaced him and messed up in the next game he would be in a difficult position. Give Gazzaniga his chance, furthermore I suspect the signing of Boruc had more to do with Davis's dire displays and the problem if Gazzaniga was injured having only Davis as a goalkeeping option. It was a window of opportunity that wouldn't be available much longer, as we had a goalkeeping crisis, we grabbed him.

Stern John v Sheff Utd in the last game of the season we had to win to stay up.

Gazzaniga did four things yesterday that were standout. He calmed Fonte who was much more assured not having to worry about KD, He made a top class save at his near post one on one, with Bent clear through, He made a clearance when the last man outside the area, he was assured when he was given the ball and was being closed down and didn't rush his clearance. Furthermore he had no part in the goal we conceded as the players played pinball in front of him then the ball was deflected with Fox totally failing to react. Davis has been a good servant and well paid for it since he arrived, the problem now is that his deficiencies have been accentuated by the greater skill levels of the Premier League. He got by with superb shot stopping in the lower leagues but the better finishing in the Premier is depriving him of that, plus his vulnerability at the near post, which has been there for a long time, eg Peterborough (a) in Div 1.

I will say in the past I've seen goalkeepers playing for teams under pressure looking like good players and keeping them in the game or keeping thescore down. Davis has made very few saves in the four matches and let in 14 goals. Gazzaniga is the club's back up goalkeeper that we paid a lot of money for, the No1 is failing, give him a go.

If we were going to close mark Scholes then they were the only defenders available. It would have been an attacker that would have to be replaced as the marker wouldn't be playing anywhere but tight marking Scholes. The midfield and defence would still be intact. I don't think Utd would have been at all pleased as it might well have taken him out of the equation.

Eric has travelled the world and dined out on that ever since. Top bloke.SMS ST holder.

Over 18000 hours dear boy and never a problem. But you aren't wrong, there are a quite a few accidents out there waiting to happen. I lost some good friends in crashes, tail came off, aileron fell off, aircraft on fire crashed, hit a mountain in bad weather etc. One of the guys I sit with lost all four engines on a B747. If you knew what I know you just wouldn't be nervous, you wouldn't get on another aircraft. Then again you might consider yourself lucky. Quite what that had to do with a hypothetical discussion on formations. I will say one of the Cup winning team felt we should have close marked Scholes and said it was a no brainer, but then what did he know.

I have a contact who worked closely with him, was treated really well but gave up in the end. 'He was hard to work for'. As for the Bristol Rovers episode, I know what happened and NC had no choice. The same outcome in any company in the land. I think he doesn't take any prisoners.

Absolutely true and they are all on here now slating him. Goalkeeper as the weakest link is a nightmare. He isn't even shotstopping, now they are going in.

Now is the time to get it right not Christmas. Adkins won't be given that time anyway so will try and sort it out. It is not a knee jerk reaction as we only brought three new players in this week so there has to be changes in personnel and possibly tactics. The centre backs this week will probably be Fonte and Yoshi as Hooiveld has a calf injury which can take weeks if bad enough. The midfield is work in progress and although it probably won't happen I would like to see Gazzaniga in goal v Villa. If Davis continues his present form I wouldn't want Gazzaniga to have to debut at Everton. I know all about R&S but it needed a defender to close mark Scholes. That means following him everywhere and both of them could have got up Schole's nose by getting at him. Once a player is committed to close mark irrespective of what is happening elsewhere he never leaves his mark, either could have disrupted Scholes by doing that and not damaged the team.

Adkins is going to have to change the system or the midfield if Ramirez is going to play in the middle. We are still trying to find how to play and who to play, that is a problem together with a goalkeeper that is suffering, a left back struggling to adapt, a centre half that is below par giving us a porous defence. Unless we go back to a high tempo pressing game we are going to leak goals.

Like Wigan then. I get it.

Scholes has been around for 20 years, if Utd weren't playing well he was definitely coming on, everybody knows how he plays, We weren't prepared to neutralise him we just let him play. He isn't quick he needed stamping on and Richardson or Seaborne could have tight marked him. MS has never figured in paper speculation.

Or 532, becomes 352, becomes 325, becomes 316 becomes 10 behind the ball. 442 isn't allowed.

Did you miss Scholes pulling us apart. We had no answer. We needed to man to man Scholes but gave him the freedom of SMS to pressurise us. As for MS, if he is so good how come nobody is trying to take him.

It is strengthening the defence, giving more defence in the air and covering the full backs. Anybody would think the defence was ok, Fonte and Fox are the finished article they won't get any better. It isn't strong enough and the flaky goalkeeper makes it worse. The third centre back instead of the non defensive holding midfielder might help. The 433/451 with orthodox players isn't working. 40% possession isn't keeping the ball so trying something else isn't a problem. Hoddle played three at the back maybe we should look at that. What I've suggested is halfway there.

Only if they play like you think. Fonte isn't a CM he is a front sweeper, a proper defender who covers in front of the back four getting to the ball before the back four has to commit. The team doesn't play as three compartments it should be a formation of 10 defending and 6/7 attacking. Playing 3 centre backs and two full backs and playing on the break with pace is grinding out results. Not 5 lightweights losing the midfield as we are at the moment.

Like we got destroyed on Saturday and lost four in a row. How would you know, as this team has never played and probably never will. I'd just like to see whether it would work.

Gazzaniga, Clyne, Yoshida, Hoiveldt, Fox; Fonte; Ramirez + (1 from Lallana, Schneiderlin, Davis, JWP etc); Mayuka, Lambert (Rodriguez), Lee. I would like to see how they would play in a 4123 set up. Like I said above it is difficult to predict how the new players will perform but we have lacked mobility and pace up front and defensive solidity.

Sadly not with 40% possession, But I loved the way Johnny Giles used to sometimes lift the ball and loft it very high coming down almost vertically onto the centre backs. We did one in the first half v MU and Ferdinand and Vidic were all at sea being bullied by Lambert and we nearly created something. Variation is the secret I suppose.

Quite.