Could you not just be patient?

Wasn't Anderson in some kind of bother? Possibly I'm thinking of SEM/Kentaro in general (what ever happened with that in the end?) but I thought I'd seen Anderson named explicitly in something at some stage.

Will Travis have good positional sense in a position he has never played? On a side that's his wrong foot? It doesn't matter whether you're right that he should be played there this game (I don't think you are for what it's worth), Mowbray isn't going to do it. This game is crucial now, he just said back to basics, he doesn't seem to rate Travis as highly as most of us do...I'd bet a significant amount of money that he won't line up at left back for this match.

Fucking hell. I've only just looked at December's fixtures and I wish I hadn't. Need to beat Wednesday or we could be looking at a relegation fight by January. Playing 4 of the top 5, mostly away...the easiest game after Sheff Weds is Brum at home, and they're three spots above us! We really have cocked up by only taking 1 point from these last 3 games which were all winnable.

We don't really count you as foreign, you know

Think they will be licking their lips if our young centre mid who sometimes plays right back, but barely plays at all lately, lines up at left back too. I'm not sure where all this appealing for Travis at LB came from, other than Bell and Williams both playing poorly lately, but I wouldn't get your hopes up for it happening against Sheff W. One of Bell or Williams will be playing. I'd go with Bell. If you look at those last 7 goals shipped, Williams has been gash for an alarming amount of them. Especially after saying 'back to basics', Mowbray isn't about to play a LB who has never played there.

Blackburn Rovers it is then.

How the hell have we managed to go from the best Championship team in Lancashire to the worst, in just 4 days?

Williams also completely lost his man for the first, who duly obliged with the goal. The only reason it's not more obvious is because of the camera angle. He had a shocker.

The fourth goal was the worst of the lot, a total clusterfuck. I think the players had lost heart and focus by then. Mulgrew didn't take up the number 9 who set it up - that was fine, as his movement was fine at first as he had to watch for the goalscorer's run too. But then if you watch it back, once the cross goes in, he does a strange run (more of a jog really, total lack of urgency) to the byline, This was why he wasn't at the post in time for when the shot came in. Lenihan also moves correctly initially, but is caught ball-watching the crosser for too long instead of the goalscorer. When he does clock the goalscorer has peeled off him too far, he runs backwards which slows him down and gives him too much space. Reed is similarly guilty of ball-watching and sauntering a bit, which is unlike him. Williams just ambles along throughout the whole thing, woefully far from affecting any of it and with a shameful disinterest in doing so. The shot isn't a clean one or powerful at all, and Raya should be able to stop it if he was at his usual high standards. Basically, not one of the five involved did the right thing. I think we do have to account for the fact the game was pretty much out of sight though.

I went with 'too much' because 'too far' had even worse connotations in this context. You've undone my work.

Then pop his cork. White wine going in...if he's too rough, red wine coming out (too much?)

This perpetual pint-flirting between Mercer and Chaddy is hilarious. 'Go on Chaddy, take my pint you dirty bastard'. I think the man needs to learn to take no for an answer, this is becoming alcoholic harassment now. Maybe he thinks Chaddy is just playing hard to get, and before you know it one pint will lead to another and then...

Collectively, they've had the left sided attacker position sewn up. Only players he signed this summer have played there really. They just haven't displaced each other, but that's fine. Other than that, you're exactly right. The squad was strengthened considerably, but for the regular starting XI, only one slot out of 11 has been regularly occupied by new starters. Which is worrying, although he seems to have had an odd lack of faith in his own guys at times when most of us have wanted them to start. Actually I just remembered Reed has played quite consistently too, in a mix of positions...but he's not ours.

In fairness, this is the first time they've ever done that. Assuming this was them this time and not Mowbray (I'm also assuming this, but we don't know it for a fact). Everyone else we've spent a million or more on has been a starter or rotation player right from the off (not counting TM's traditional bedding in period that he would probably even apply to Messi). The only time they spent anything close to this before was Rhodes, the guaranteed starter and goal machine. That's what makes this one so strange. Thought the rest of your post, the bit I deleted to save space, was spot on though.

If you mean that we should have bought him for 7 million right away, rather than in January, you're still wrong and your logic doesn't hold up any better now than it did then (if it was you making that suggestion then and now, and I'm not getting mixed up). In either case we would be left with the player for 7 million, for better or worse, with no way out of it. Absolutely the same outcome. If the deal isn't one we are happy with, it will be lamented equally either way. Anyone who thinks any different is kidding themselves.

He doesn't even need to hold the ball up really, he is a prolific diver! Could win us a lot of free kicks in dangerous areas for Mulgrew. Moreover, why buy any player (let alone for that amount) who you feel doesn't have the attributes to play in the position you ostensibly wanted him for? Sure, strength can be built up in the gym, but probably at the expense of a bit of pace which, whilst he's not lightning, is one of the attributes he does have. Making him a pure target man will also probably take a year or two, if it is feasible, as there is a lot that would need coaching into him (and a lot of things likely to be coached out of him that are assets of his game now). Target man strikers are not the only kind of forward. Whether TM believes it or not, Brereton IS a forward. He just appears to be a different type of forward to the one TM is willing to play with. So again, WHY has he bought him with the intention of completely changing his game instead of buying another striker who plays the type of game he wants to utilise? I'm leaning more to the idea that signing Brereton wasn't really TM's idea.

It really is very strange when you think about it - we now have a side where strikers (Brereton, Armstrong) are preferred in midfield, and midfielders (Dack, Palmer) are used up front. What the hell is that all about?

For any Preston fans having a nosy, that's a Leeds fan saying that.

I never said the manager isn't doing a great job. Don't straw man me please. The manager is doing a great job. Today wasn't a shining example of it, and he does make errors, like any other human being. We're entitled to point it out when they happen without it being Tony hate, or as though we don't think he's doing a great job.

He is honest, he just can't see that he is making the wrong decisions sometimes. If he could see they were the wrong decisions, he wouldn't make them. Still worrying, as I picture him scratching his head wondering what wrong today and in other games when we can (mostly) all see it, but I'm not going to accuse him of dishonesty. I believe he is speaking his mind, but because he thinks moves like Palmer up front are logically sound, he is looking for other failings. To be fair, you don't ship 4 when the defence are on point.

I don't know if you're being sarcastic? Did the manager pick the right lineup today then? Does the manager always pick the right lineup? Is the manager infallible?

Uh nope, I didn't. In fact I wrote that post pretty much exactly because I had seen the tweet from Sharpe saying he hadn't trained for two weeks. That's why I said the question that needed to be asked WASNT why Graham hadn't started.

So, Palmer did well up front today?

The only way I see him as being 'protected' is the fact he isn't being started. Guess we will have to just agree to differ on this one.