S-Clarke

It depends what metrics they're learning on. i.e. - is player x increasing in value, so we can sell him. - did we have more than 60% position - are we adhering to the group tactical shape to ensure we sustain the possession metrics. If those metrics are shining green then nothing will change, the job is being done as far as they're concerned.

Exactly this, I know a lot of people didn't rate Will Still but he at least was straight talking - he told it how it was, if it was shit he'd say it was in certain words. I always thought Still saw the same game as me and the supporters, he just wasn't able to change it unfortunately. Now with Tonda, he's doing the thing I hate most in any manager. Trying to create an illusion of positively by frankly lying to the supporters faces. No one can get behind someone who sees an entirely different game than the one we've paid to watch. He said it was a good performance yesterday and that there were lots of positives - major, major alarm bells from that. He doesn't see what we see, which means nothing is going to change. He's probably fooling himself by thinking we're dominant because THB, Stephens and Wood pass it between each other for 70 mins, but we can all see through that bullshit.

I wouldn't call Rosenior elite though, that's what makes it all a bit bonkers from the crazies at Chelsea and BlueCo.

But if you pick a good enough manager they should be good enough to figure out a formula, which includes addressing any missing pieces in the transfer window. I think their recruitment is scattergun at best anyway, so they'll probably change the club style of play in a few months and sign a whole load of new types in the summer. The way they run their club is very similar to us actually, another multi-club 'everyone's hands in the pie' approach, not actually giving any manager true authority over the calls.

For people who think 'the club dictating the style of play' is a conspiracy theory, then Chelsea's approach confirms the modern world of football, and it's almost certainly how we also operate across the SR group of clubs. 'The process to replace the Italian is under way, and it is understood Englishman Rosenior is the frontrunner, though sources have stressed other candidates are also under consideration. Rosenior's current employers are owned by investment vehicle BlueCo - the consortium set up to purchase Chelsea in 2022. 'The club will not change their style of play, so it is highly unlikely they would move for Crystal Palace manager Oliver Glasner.' Am I old school, or should it be about finding the best manager and letting them build their style and image on the club - they should always be the head of the operation. This modern 'approach' is destroying football in front of our eyes.

But their insistence to try and do things 'clever', has actually cost them multi-multi millions in attempts to correct the course. Spending £30-40m on a striker in 2022 for example would have saved them so much money longer term, but they don't seem to plan longer term. They live in this 'current' bubble. You'd have thought their first window in 2022 when we signed all those kids, and it failed, would have been lesson learnt - but they've just doubled down on it harder, and wasted millions and millions more.

It was pretty obvious to me as soon as he was put in, he got that win against QPR (which was utter shite btw) and Spors was down on the pitch hugging him. Then you had all the puff pieces from the players blowing smoke up his arse, he's made it so easy for us, so clear etc etc. The club were desperate to give him the job the moment he was made interim, I doubt they even considered any other name.

Absolutely not, we should have thanked him for steadying the ship and getting us some results up to that International Break. We should have used that International Break to find a proven manager with a track record in this division and country, and moved Tonda back to the U21's - or if the new manager and he fancied it, give him a shot as a first team coach under the new manager. That's what should have happened. That's what any sane football club would have done. But we didn't, and now we've wrapped ourselves up in knots once again by trying to be revolutionary when it wasn't needed.

Words from the puppet.

He won't though, as we have to play 3 at the back. We have to. It cannot ever change. We are not allowed to play any other way, so if Fellows plays he will be a wing back.

I think we all know it's beyond appointing new managers now, it doesn't matter what we do. They will always make a worse decision. 7 managers in 4 years is just unbelievable really, yet they keep doing the same thing over and over again. Inexperienced and left field choices trying to look clever. Giving Ruben Selles the job when we still had a sniff of staying in the PL was bad, then doing it again with Tonda when we had a sniff of getting into the PL is beyond bad. The ownership need to go, how we do that though is the question.

The sort of performance that brings on depression. It was horrific. We have been horrific for weeks, absolutely back to baseline. This squad of players are an absolute mish mash, there are some good individuals, but as a collective it is an absolute mess and needs ripping up. The attack is so isolated because the midfield is invisible, by having 3 at the back you have no numbers in the areas you need. You saw it today, as we saw against Birmingham, Coventry, Oxford - teams will stand back and let us have the ball in our third, they will sit off and block the channels and watch us pass between each other for 90mins. Our phases of play, if you can call it that, are actually worse than slow - it's like slow motion. Everything we do is predicted at least 5 mins before we do it, every pass is telegraphed before we attempt it. It seems as if any imagination or spontaneous play is sucked out of individuals in an effect to make us play and adhere to a structure which is as anti-football as you can get. Tonda has been brought in as a puppet. Modern football is all about having puppets on the touch line who adhere to the overall DoF/Technical Director club strategies and it's sucking the life out of this game quicker than anything I've seen. Credit to Bazunu whilst I'm at it, it was a good save to keep it as 0-0. We probably should have lost it as I thought Millwall had the better openings. Onto the next one, against a Boro side who have lost their last 4 without scoring. I think we all know what happens here.

I know what yourself and Badger are getting at with Bazunu and Gunn coming from City as another big club - but they came from the City Academy setups, rather than the first team setup. This guy was/is at least part of the Bayern Munich first team setup and was their bench keeper last year, so he's not just a 'kid' keeper with potential from a big club as before. Seems like it has a bit more substance to it, but we'll see. Bayern do make some bad transfer calls too!

I agree that he needs some backup 'experience' around him, but haven't we got it all back to front here? The main man should have the experience, the coaches around him could be younger up and coming voices. If we are now saying the manager needs 'experience' around him, then it makes their decision to appoint Tonda look even dafter than it did. I don't really buy the comparisons with other takeovers, or the suggestion that it could be much worse. From my point of view, watching this team for the last 2 years - it can't get much worse. We are owned by a group who have had full control for 4 years, in that 4 years they have relegated us twice - one of those relegations is among the worst in footballing history. We are now sat bottom half in a lower division after splurging £55m. I notice you mention Wrexham as starting to collapse, but they are 5 points and 5 league places above us in the league. When Sports Republic assumed control of us, Wrexham were battling for promotion from the National League, we were established in the PL. Wrexham are now above us in the football standings. I get that you take a positive view and you like to think things are getting better, which is fair - but there comes a point where you need to take a step back and realise that actually there's no route to 'gold' with these owners. They don't have a scooby.

Strasbourg are part of the 'BlueCo' group, so Rosenior is effectively already paid for by Chelsea's owners - they'd just move him around the group at no cost. I don't see that happening as he's not at the level they need, it's probably Fabrizo putting 2+2 together and coming up with 50.

Take stats out of it and watch with your eyes - you can see without stats that he is not a goalkeeper. He has the presence of a nervous pigeon, the goal dwarfs him, and any shot on target goes in as his wrists are weak. So he cannot command the area, he can't get across the goal as he's not a big enough presence, his positioning on the line is poor and often ill-judged, and he cannot save strong shots because his wrists are too weak. None of that equals a goalkeeper. When you combine what you see with your eyes with stats, it paints a very clear picture.

I'm pleased we're looking at a goalkeeper, but I can't say I know a great deal about this guy as he doesn't seem to ever play. You have to have something about you to be backup at Bayern though, you'd have to say - and that immediately puts him many levels ahead of Bazunu. All I want is a goalkeeper who makes saves, not asking for anything revolutionary, just someone who makes saves. I hope it's not a foreign version of George Long, as that would be utterly pointless.

Does anyone know what's happened to Smallbone? I thought he was doing fairly well there at the start of the season, but he doesn't even make the squads nowadays. I assume he's injured, he does seem very injury prone tbh. Another one worth scrapping off long term I think.

I don't fully disagree with you on this one, I believe the problems go far deeper than any manager here today. The makeup of the squad is all wrong to start with. But...that does all boil down to the ownership making bad decision after bad decision with the managers since Ralph, which has created us such a confused and odd looking squad caught between a few playing styles. (add the constant cycle of DoF's to that as well) For this season in particular I believe the club have needlessly gambled and thrown away a season to try and be clever and seen as 'revolutionary' by appointing a left field choice, when in many ways it's like throwing a lamb to the slaughter with the mishmash of a squad we have.

Someone better tell Fabio Cannavaro, Thiago Silva, Baresi and Puyol then.

I've seen this mentioned a few times now, it seems bonkers to suggest that a formation/tactical setup is being used to hide/dilute the limitations of the players we have. It's entirely backwards if that is the logic and it's not how formations are meant to be used. Tactical setups/formations are in place to give you a foundation and structure to get the best out of the players you have in the squad profile, they're not there to be used as an aid to cover deficiencies and gaps in individual quality. Let me suggest something ground breaking - maybe to cover deficiencies, you buy better players? Just thinking outside the box here. But no, they keep renewing the contracts of these poor players so we're in a groundhog day loop.

But our CB's aren't short. They're within the normal ranges of heights expected from CB's. I don't know what you're getting at here. Proclaiming that we have to play 5 at the back because our CB's are short/poor is just so flawed. Formations aren't there to cover gaps in quality or individual limitations in players, they're there to bring the best out of the players you have. The fix for individual limitations/gaps in quality is to improve them with recruitment.

Goztepe seem pretty wedded to 3 at the back/5 at the back, not sure about Valenciennes as there are no historical line-ups/formations listed anywhere I can see.

Nah I don't truly buy that. When we had Mads and Jelert available earlier this season, we still played 5 at the back. When Jelert came on yesterday we still played 5 at the back. The idea seems to be that our attack needs to be supplied by our full backs, which I think is flawed. We've got Leo, Fellows, Robinson etc as wide players - let them supply the attack, let the full backs defend. We've even had Robinson and Fraser playing as wing backs this season, everything just seems so backwards - just out of absolute desperation to keep 5 at the back no matter what. A lot can be made of formations, and sometimes too much focus is placed on them. In simple terms you need your best players in the 11 in their natural positions, but we don't do that - we shoehorn players into positions they're not as effective in, just to accommodate 5 at the back.

You were a huge supporter of the decision to renew Stephens contract in the summer, siting it as good due to his leadership and experience. As we all said at the time it was flawed, and it was a decision which pretty much nailed our trajectory this season.