Of course. He has been fortunate that the tests he has faced have been favourable in terms of what they could have been, thats tournament football where you dont play the same games as everyone else, but we have passed them all.

They weren't. They could have been, I presume all teams could but based on results totally out of control all of the best teams fell on the other side. It is the real test. The chance to actually win a tournament which ends any talk about lucky draws etc and makes Southgate an undoubted legend of English football and presumably would see him knighted. I gave him kudos tonight, we played very well in the first half allowing for the luck we got from the referee which you need at times and his subs won us the game.

Absolutely brilliant feeling to reach the final like we did. It still doesnt change the validity of what people have said regarding the luck of the draws that Southgate has had. Any team would love the group that we had and then a path to the final of Slovakia, Switzerland and Holland with Portugal, Spain, France and Germany all on the other side of the draw. But Holland are a step up from who we have faced up until now, and until they made an enforced sub we were so much better bar the poor play from Rice who has been poor on the ball all tournament. Foden was incredible and Mainoo was also very good, Bellingham was very quiet often towards the left and Kane still isnt right. Southgate struggled to adapt and Holland had the better of most of a scrappy second half but his 2 subs made the difference. Spain are the acid test now, can Southgate get us over the line. If we win, you can throw all the arguments about draws and tactics into the bin, no one will ever remember.

No way has Suhail gone over and told the owners not to spend. Regularly during their time when they have withheld funding, theories have been around that others have told them not to as if they were otherwise willing. Rubbish.

I recall you also claimed that Coyle was backed because he signed loads of players notwithstanding that they were all cheap freebies and loans. Backing would depend on what has come in. Loads of money has come in, but backing certainly is never merely being allowed to register players without a fee. Neither have records which suggest that they would score goals with any regularity to improve us particularly. Maybe thats the best possible scenario amidst a pitiful budget, im not criticising your suggestions, and both are obviously better than having to play shit like Vale or 16 year old kids, but we should have money to spend and without it we massively cap quality.

There is definitely a lot of presumably non members demanding action which to me is unfair. I am not a member and from the outside the group seem to be very pally with Waggott etc and his charm seems to be working on them where they start singing from the same hymn sheet. You see the response to season tickets whereby minor changes to pricing that ultimately wont move the dial are painted as a huge success story driven by the group. There is clearly a desire to want to feel important and valued and as if they are making a big difference. But a lot of spare time must be spent so you can somewhat understand it. Ultimately I dont believe that anything they do will make any difference, bar more trivial matters like matchday experience. The culprits are in India unaware of such meetings.

We clearly have a difference in how we define backing. According to you, every single manager is backed because every team signs players of some description.

In both of those scenarios, no, Eustace wouldn't have been backed. Weve brought in nearly £30m in the last 12 months through sales and sell ons and lost some very key players from an already thin squad. No combination of frees and loans would represent being backed. As a side note, and this isnt a criticism of your suggestions because it will be difficult for anyone to improve the squad with such restrictions, these suggestions prove that. Neither scenario would give me any more confidence in the squad. Option A has 2 loans who only padded out the squad last year and Burke is woeful. The second scenario involves a keeper approaching retirement who hasnt played for a while and kids who havent really played senior football.

Where have you read this? I think the Dutch midfield has shown up very well considering its second choice, Reijnders is a very elegant player and Schouten compliments him nicely.

You seem very keen to apportion blame onto individuals who you defended strongly up until they left at which point you turned on them, Tomasson, Broughton and Mowbray. Merely being able to sign players at all doesnt automatically mean backing. Youve named a series of cheap loans, a signing for the academy (Brown) and nominal fees as evidence of backing. It could have perhaps been spent better but you are always struggling signing numerous players with minimal funds. We will sign players this summer, if Eustace brings in 3 loans, a freebie and someone for 200k, would you say he was backed? You have acknowledged a likely summer of frugality. You (in my opinion with zero foundation) have suggested that Eustace could get us into the top 6 with backing. Where do you see us assuming no/minimal funds and potentially a Szmodics sale, do you see relegation as a very possible scenario?

Obviously not the main issue, but John Fleck? An older player who has barely played in 2 years due to breaking his leg twice and subsequently and immediately injuring the plate that is now in his leg as a result. And what makes that potential deal even worse is its not even as if it was sorted to start pre season so he is playing catch up. No to Fleck, no to McFadzean who will turn 38 this season and no to Krul who again is in his late 30s and hasnt played for a while. Such potential additions have strong parallels to the season under Coyle when we signed the likes of Greer and Brown and I suspect there is a big chance of a similar outcome and relegation.

He was linking us with buying Paik last week, so as per usual hes covering all bases. But I think a blind man could see that we wont be buying anyone.

Bang on. And the thing is, forget the cretins who suck up to the owners, Waggott and Suhail. The change of manager, another juggling of backroom staff, Broughton going, Park coming in. Whatever. This problem is solely because of Venkys. Change anything else and its a deckchairs and titanic situation. Couldn't put it better than your last sentence.

An absolute disgrace. These owners are taking us to League 1. Brought in so much money, and having to hold off until we can beg for young kids on loan after the season has started. That claim that the club had leaked to the club that we had a decent budget is looking more hilarious by the day.

To be fair, we wouldn't be narrowing things down much if the benchmark was better than Pears. Of course, but that doesnt have to be someone in his late 30s. Someone like Johansson would have been ideal, a good keeper not only now but for a few years. Sadly, our skint and slow club was never in contention. Hladky is on the older side but would certainly be a lot more preferable coming off the back of such a good season and not being quite as old. I just personally wouldnt want Krul, it isnt about writing him off. I dont want a 36 year old who has been collecting dust for a year. Ill judge anyone on how they play here, but I dont want us to sign him personally.

I think it is harsh to say that Reijnders isnt up to it, he has looked good during the tournament driving through midfield with Schouten next to him. They obviously miss De Jong and Koopemeiners but it should be an equal midfield battle. Walker is the best at dealing one on one with pace out wide but he can switch off as we saw for the Swiss goal. Gakpo running at Walker isnt necessarily the worry but Gakpo is really clever at popping up at the back post to score so we need to hope that Walker doesnt switch off. I almost feel like Walker would prefer to be up against a Vinicius or an Mbappe because he can neutralise their speed.

I dont think we specifically need a really experienced keeper as in one at the very end of his career. Its not as if we have a really promising keeper that can take over after a year or 2. The Ruddy rumour thankfully turned out to be a load of rubbish. Krul is not an inspiring link either, 36 and didnt play a league minute last season. Why cant we sign someone at a good age whereby he isnt too young but equally he has a good few years in him as our number 1.

Its just lowering and lowering of standards. Can we only specifically sign players that have already moved in the window? And excluding a considerable chunk who I hadnt heard of who might be good but I dont know either way. If my argument was that our snail like speed has seen us miss out on potentially good signings, fair enough but it isnt. Our club always seems to have changes behind the scenes, never a good sign to have such high staff turnover. But either way, budget meetings shouldnt be happening 6 weeks after the season has ended. It should have long since been sorted regardless of staff turnover. We have a manager, we have a CEO and the staff we brought in could have been doing workm I wasnt the one who predicted players in before pre season. I just find it strange that Eustace (IMO wrongly) wants McFadzean, a deal was agreed in principle and based on his quotes from the weekend he doesnt even know where its at.

The likes of Yates, Longstaff, Murphy and Jackson fall into a similar category for me. Would I consider any of them to be considerable upgrades on our starting 11? No. Would I rather us be more ambitious? Certainly. But would they all be strongly pushing for a starting spot here amidst our below average Championship attack? Yes. Are they considerable improvements on the dross we have below Gallagher/Hedges/Dolan (none of whom are that good at his level themselves) in the likes of Markanday, Sigurdsson and Vale? Undoubtedly. And do I predict us getting anyone better? Not with any confidence. So I dont see these players as ones that I am sad that we missed out on, but equally, they would definitely have improved the squad. My issues arent around individuals. They are around how poorly we are run as a club. Budgets being decided so late, gaps in communication to the manager leaving him as a clueless as anyone, no scope to reinvest considerable sales proceeds, a constant churn in staff off the field.

Yes we would all like to have a functional club that doesnt wait 6 weeks to start discussing budgets but we dont so oh well. These bastard owners continue to be a massive hindrance around our neck.

I think your natural bias is making you think that the current crop is better comparative to that generation than it actually is. You have pin pointed areas of perceived weakness. I think Rice is very good at what he does (especially for his club, the way he is needed for England hinders him to an extent) but what we lacked then could have been resolved by using one of 2 excellent holding midfielders. Michael Carrick would have compliment both that squad and the current squad perfectly, a top player at the highest level for many years. Hargreaves was also a very good holding midfielder although injuries meant it wasnt for as long. The midfield options we had then were incredible. We also had strength in depth at centre back then as strong as any country. Rio Ferdinand, Sol Campbell and John Terry were all top class. Stones is below all of them and there is no shame in that. The likes of King, Carragher and Woodgate would all walk into the current side, top players. You mention players like Gordon, good players who have had a good season and would provide good balance but is there much difference between him and say Shaun Wright Phillips? Both squads have some excellent players in there, with notable issues in certain areas.

I listed a number of (on paper) good Championship signings that I know of, explained how what we need will differ and then listed a number of further signings made that I cant comment Im not saying that Suhail the snake should have been accompanied to India for the annual arse kissing convention. Im saying that our budget should not have remained unfinalised 6 weeks after the season had finished. It should have been finalised before the season had finished pending division or at least very shortly after. I do know where the Wharton money has gone yes, and the timing is irrelevant. The owners sole focus is on clawing back every penny possible and that is at the cost of any emphasis on bettering the football club. Both McFadzean and Eustace want a deal to be signed and a deal is agreed in principle according to the LT. "Still in talks" and "no paperwork has been signed." Such a simple renewal not done such is our club under Venkys.

The market has become much more active recently. Lets be frank, the biggest factors that slow us down are internal. The usual delays sorting budgets being a primary one, we shouldnt have Pasha the snake flying out only 2 weeks ago to India, yet we arent surprised. Limited funds again play a part, in a way that considering recent incoming fees, it shouldnt be quite so restrictive. The Euros is a factor but that should primarily be affecting loans from the big clubs which should just be a couple of cherrys on top of an already formed cake. Mind you, some Championship loans have already been done.

Its probably a bit far to say he doesnt have a clue how to manage a football team.

He seems totally in the dark and not willing to put on any pressure in public. Him, Kayden Jackson and to a lesser extent Josh Murphy all come into one category for me. None are great nor am I gutted to miss out on, all have gone to promoted sides, although all 3 would make our starting 11 most likely and at the very least give us stronger options off the bench than we have. But when the window ends and we likely have not even brought in players at that level and start the season with Vale and Markanday in the squad, we will look back thinking we could have done with them.