Wes Tender

Not forgetting Fuller. I'm thinking of switching to being a Stoke supporter, as they have more of our players that I can identify with. Mind you, they were mostly the players I didn't rate much when they were here.

So probably worth hiring for that eventuality alone.

He can't be a PR plant, Saint1977. You only have to look back at what his 19 posts said to realise that no PR firm would pay good money for that sort of imput; unless of course they were under a remit from the board to darken the image of the posters on here as a load of neanderthals.

I would have wanted Davies after Burley went, but would have been quite content to have retained Pearson's services at the end of last season, but once Lowe had partaken of the magic mushrooms, he wasn't an option. Read Once Bitterne's comments as to why Davies would not be available to us, because he's spot on IMO

Davies is not a hoofer by inclination. He is an astute manager intelligent enough to realise that the most effective route to gain promotion is to utilise the playing resources to their maximum potential. In the case of Derby, that was a strategy of playing the ball forward to the big mobile forward, bypassing the midfield and very effective it was too. Hull used the same strategy when they beat us 5-0 last season. In the case of Preston, they played good passing football and achieved a club record run of 22 matches unbeaten. So if you would prefer a one dimensional manager who apparently cannot change a strategy which is set in concrete, to one who has a proven track record of success in this division, then you just wallow in your own little comfort zone. The decent CB we sold and the decent strikers are all out on loan. We are also short of a commanding central midfielder. But if financial reasons dictated those decisions, then we aren't going to solve them on the cheap, are we?

And you're talking through your posterior again. The reason that Davies has not been appointed by anybody else so far is not that people don't want him. It is myriad other reasons. For example, if you look at the reasons why he hasn't come here, primarily it would be that he is not a yes man, so couldn't work with Lowe. Secondly we probably couldn't afford somebody of his calibre and thirdly it is doubtful that he would want to come here under the current circumstances. There are probably other clubs who have not employed him for similar reasons, or perhaps he is just biding his time for a really good offer, which he is in a good position to do. Of the managers available, Davies has by far the best record of getting teams promoted from this division. Any chairman who had an ounce of intelligence would have gone for the strategy of hiring such a manager instead of going down the route of appointing somebody from a foreign country totally inexperienced in football over here let alone at this level, just because he was cheap. But we all know that Lowe does not do things based on intelligent reasons.

Well, I'm afraid that under certain circumstances you could add me to that list. When we were 3 goals down against Burnley in under 11 minutes, I found myself hoping that we might end the match losing by 10. You bet I'm sad when I reflect on how far we've fallen in a relatively short time. We lost the match anyway, but I reasoned that a massive defeat like that would conceivably have forced some action in response. Either it would have meant that the departure of Poortvliet was hastened as there has been little evidence so far that he is up to it, nice guy that he is, or there would have been growing unrest against the person who instigated the bizarre experiment. Either way, the end would have justified the means IMO. Instead, we just had yet another example of our team not being capable of playing decent football for 90 minutes and the comeback even had some clowns saying that we should have won.

No it's not. It's the lack of money that is the problem.

No. I didn't rate him when he was touted as a possible before Pearson and I don't rate him now that he's proved he's not much cop at Blackburn. He seemed reasonable when he was managing in the lower divisions, so perhaps he can be the one when we are relegated.

Why should he give you a name? It is perfectly sufficient, his contention that Lowe is not the only Chief Executive out there that could do a decent job at running this club. Instead of asking who could do it, why don't you more constructively attempt to debate whether his contention is accurate if you don't agree with it? Would you have plucked out Lowe's name a decade ago as being somebody who could do the job as Chairman and Chief Executive at the time of the reverse takeover? And at that time he had no experience of running a football club at all. I don't recall a chorus of people then saying that there was no alternative to Guy Askham. If any of you lot out there view your remarks that there is no alternative to Lowe against the background of that scenario, you will then realise how ridiculous it makes you look. It might be difficult to scourge us of Lowe, to prise him away from the controls of the train set, but to say that there is nobody else out there who could take over from him is just wrong.

I'm amazed that anybody else hasn't picked up on this. Kept us in touch with what exactly? We're in the relegation zone in case you hadn't noticed with a points per match ratio that will almost certainly ensure that we're playing in the third division next season. Oh, I've just realised what you meant by keeping us in touch. You're talking about the cosy chats in local pubs, aren't you?

No. What would make us shut up was Lowe leaving, together with all the other charlatans. But you just know he isn't even going to apologise, don't you? And what relevance do we have to the GNU Image Manipulation Program?

Are those several squadrons of pigs flying over the stadium?

As usual, I come on here and ask again and again why we cannot sustain any decent play for ninety minutes. Is is too much to ask? Sometimes we are good during the first half and crap the second. Today we were total crap the first half and somehow managed almost to get back on equal terms the second half. Had we done so, it would have been a travesty, as without the aid of the crossbar and the post and some incredible saves by Davies yet again, the game would have been out of sight. So another three points down the drain and thankfully the goal difference was only an additional -1. But the time has cometo replace Poortvliet, I'm afraid. He just doesn't have a clue tactically and is plainly out of his depth. When we attained the upper hand in the second half and some momentum, he should have had the balls to have gambled with two strikers up front with plenty of time to have had an effect. Instead, he put on Robinson far too late. So here we are at the halfway stage in the bottom three and I'm not at all confident that we will have the ability to get ourselves out of this hole if we lose any half decent players in a few weeks time.

Having dismantled your argument point by point, as has Um Pahars on other points, I wonder why you continue to dig an ever bigger hole for yourself. I always conclude that when somebody has to resort to name calling, it is indicative that they have lost the ability to argue their position in an adult manner.

Not strictly true. We are 9 points adrift of where we were at exactly this time last year, when we had 4 more wins under our belt and had lost one match less than we have this season. When you look at the number of matches lost, it is pretty close, but when comparing the number of wins and draws, it is clear that last season we were capable of turning more of those draws into wins. With those extra 9 points this season, we would be lying 11th, just three points away from the play-off positions. As everybody realises apart from the board, we badly need a cutting edge up front. And perhaps peoples' views of our current situation are coloured also by having witnessed only one league win at home this season. There is obviously time to turn it around with half a season left, but if we repeated our performance in the first half, we would stand a good chance of being relegated.

Sorry to be a pedant, but unless some people are really thick and have difficulty with comprehension of their mother tongue, (assuming of course that English is their mother tongue) there should be few who fail to understand what st.throbber was saying, as it was well expressed gramatically. Whether they agree with all of it is another matter.

What am I making up that didn't exist? Look, stop wriggling. I was responding to the following part of a post by you. Which to my mind seems to be inviting a comparison between how Pearson did against how Poortvliet has fared this season within the same time span. If you don't want the debate, then don't make the conjecture that Pearson would not have been better than Poortvliet. And how disingenous to suggest that the highest scorer of the season be removed to help your argument. You might as well suggest that Leicester's current position at the top of League 1 under Pearson might look a lot different without the 17 league goals scored by Matt Fryatt so far.

I rate Surman also and would be sorry to lose him. It could be that there is a rather childish reaction when a player looks like leaving when some are tempted through bravado to belittle their worth and try and make out that it is no loss. I suspect that Lallana will be off too in January, the money from their sales will disappear into the black hole that is our overdraught and a couple of younger, less experienced academy players will gain their chance to attempt to fill their shoes before they're ready, or we'll dabble with loans which might disrupt the squad. I hope it doesn't turn out like that, as one side effect could well be further falls in the attendances, but we'll soon know in a few weeks.

Aren't these the very players that you and the other muppets decried as being the overpaid primadonnas that couldn't be bothered to play with their heart and soul for the club and that you were glad had gone because you preferred watching the youngsters? You can't have it both ways. Make up your mind. Were they an asset or a liability?

Again, just look at the statistics between the two of them. They prove that Pearson's record was better than Poortvliet's. Or are you and Village Saint both totally oblivious to the truth?

If you cared to read the thread more carefully, you would realie that there is some dispute about whether Pearson was actually in charge for the Plymouth game or not. Certainly, as far as I understand things, the team was picked for him and he had not had time to train with the players. Contrast that with JP having had the closed season to assess exactly what he had at his disposal. But let's be generous to you, as you might otherwise throw a wobbly and I'll include the Plymouth game just for your benefit. Then the respective records over 14 games would read:- Nigel Pearson - Won 3, lost 4, drew 7, a total of 16 points Jan Poortvliet - Won 3, lost 7, drew 4, a total of 13 points. So which ever way you want to look at it, as I said perfectly correctly, Pearson had a better record than Poortvliet. Didn't he?

Only if goaded.

Please don't bracket me with others. As Slickmick and Saintjay correctly guessed, I was being sarcastic at Red and White's assumption that he was entitled to speak for others when he said that nobody was interested in what either you or Alpine had to say. Even if that were true of many, he had no right to assume that he could speak on their behalf.

Aha. Somebody so well known, admired and respected by the majority of the posters on here that he is able to act as a spokesman for them. Nothing more needs to be added to this thread, as Red and White Army has spoken on behalf of us all.