egg

Cross purposes. We would have avoided admin if we stayed up. We didn't. If HR was the cause of our relegation then indirectly the admin was down to him. I agree that the rot had set in before HR arrived.

If he was the reason we went down then indirectly I suppose he is.

My point is that his signings improved Spurs on the pitch. As for overpaid players, If we go down we'll be stranded with overpaid players. Indeed, we're stuck with overpaid players now. Dickson couldn't be moved on as his wages prevented even a loan deal. I suspect wages are the reason Butterfield, Barnard, Forte etc are still on our books. I want to make that I don't want HR near our club, but if we're gonna make a change then there's a convincing case for him.

They'll be a few that do that, but not many. The fairweather fans will replace them if the results are coming.

Probably. The main point though is that opinions will change if he comes in, says the right things and gets the results. Pompey fans hated him when he left but soon forgave him when he went back. Can you imagine fans sreaming for HR to leave if he comes in and wins 4 on the trot? No chance.

Yes, but the posters only represent a minority of fans. The fact is that he only needs to say a few nice words and get a couple of results and the masses will adore him. Footy fans are a fickle bunch.

You hope or you know? This journo doesn't seem to know much about footy but her twitter is not full of gossip. Cortese may feel that we need to change; HR is local and available, so like it or not this might be happening.

The masses will love him as soon as he comes out with "I love this club"," I regret ever leaving", " the fans are the best" etc etc Fwiw, I wouldn't want him back and would stick with NA. With that said, would any of us object to his skills in the transfer market, and Jordan and Bond working with our defence (assuming they all come as a package)?

I've heard this also. Apparently RL waited for NA after training following being subbed against Fulham... ...but, the source was some old bird in the horns on Saturday! Don't get me wrong, she may have been reliable. Alternatively she could have added a bit to something that she heard from someone who in turn added a bit to something heard from someone etc etc. The point is that rumours often grow so should be treated carefully. On the original question, I don't see signs that players aren't playing for NA. The team spirit is still there.

Does that put him beyond criticism though? Someone has fooked up royally and given NA a thankless task. Heads will roll for sure but given the way we do things it might not be NA.

All this talk of Reed being part of the top table is interesting. Is Reed that untouchable ? What if NC makes him the scapegoat for botched transfers and a tactical masterplan? A Ray Wilkins or similar to replace Reed and provide coaching assistance may be what we need. Speaks Italian too.

That's not the point. I agree our strategy was awful but the players we've bought have to be shoehorned in, I would imagine. If you're suggesting 442, where do you put Gaston?

Could anyone suggesting 442 tell me how Gaston will be accomodated. You don't pay £12m for a player then play him out of position.

That doesn't deal with the idea that he may be doing it. It just suggests a car crash if he does. We're seeing car crashes every week.

No. I'm just applying common sense, and to be fair someone above has gone through the "short list". To clarify, I say not credible not just in terms of availability but also ability.

Oh come on. If we're playing fantasy manager we'd all want Ferguson, Guardiola and Mourhinho.

Redknapp would improve us short term, particularly if Bond etc. Long term he would destroy what we're trying to achieve. I'd rather look at the bigger picture and keep NA.

This thread tells me that those calling for Adkins head should be careful what they wish for. There's is not one credible option that has been suggested.

Breaking ranks will make him less employable, not more.

Agree 100%. I don't think any sane coach would have picked our starting 11 at Everton, for example. So many flair players away from home was a recipe for disaster. That selection just seemed like we were shoehorning players into the team because we had to. I think that's the point of the 433 tbh. It gives more scope, in theory, to accomodate all of NC's shiny new players and those on big dollars like AL. Try getting AL, JR, GR, RL into a 442 - even more square pegs in round holes, less bite in the middle, and less protection for full backs. I pity NA. He's been given parts that he doesn't need and is missing parts that he does. His boss wants a fully functioning machine out of those parts and expects parts that don't quite fit to be used regardless. Mental.

We can and we will.

Spot on. I for one am grateful for mlt caring enough about the club to speak out.

He does not need to achieve anything, does he? He's just a fan and club legend expressing his thoughts and concerns. Its sad that it has come to this, but why the criticisn of matt? This thread and wider discussion have, however, been achieved. I'm not sure that's a bad thing.

This. He's actually saying some things that should concern us, such as a chairman apparently meddling in team selection. Matt has more than earned the right to express his concerns about a club he loves and showed great loyalty towards. He has also earned the right to be treated respectfully by the club.

Seems odd for loans though (that's what I was referring to, sorry if I was unclear). My understanding is that it's a policy that applies at all levels, including youngsters going out for league experience. On loans it seems to be a cutting off our nose to spite our face policy, which no doubt p!sses players off.