Mixed bag under limited resources. Certainly nothing to be sure he is a good appointment.

A lot of irrelevant twaddle, but not really elaborating as to you suggestion that there are no question marks over Eustace, having shot down a poster for suggesting there is. There either is or isnt.

You dismissed the idea that there are question marks over him. Even if you like him, you surely have some questions and not absolute and total faith in him.

"Delighted" seems a strong reaction when a person with absolutely no experience or credentials is appointed purely because he was a player here for a bit and he needs to start his career somewhere. Do you think the actions of the club under these owners especially in the last 12 months deserves lots of praise?

Would Gestede have got this job had he never played for us? Based on zero experience, id suggest not.

So you have no question marks at all about Eustace? Even if you see reasons for optimism and green shoots, fine. But surely you have some uncertainty and some questions. He didnt win a home game, we struggled to score, his points tally was relegation worthy. Keep him/sack him, thats one seperate question. But of course there are question marks over him. There were suggestions when he was dropped by Hull that he wasnt in the best physical shape and liked a beer or two. Obviously only rumours so pinch of salt but hes hardly ripped up the league either way.

Absolutely, I mentioned that even if we only managed to get say someone like Ruddy, a freebie counting down days until his imminent retirement, or even nobody, that is just as likely down to finances rather than Eustace specifically wanting him. Do we? Underwhelming goal record, big rumours about application and personal life.

Success is obviously a big thing and would impact sales. But to say people would attend regardless of price is a very naive thing to say, a lot of people simply wont be able to afford current prices. As mattyblue touches on, it would just cause night games and moved games to have stupidly low crowds. Whereas if the full price was just low enough, people would be less concerned that they might miss games but the number of people with season tickets in the first place would be much higher.

My argument is purely that the only way to make any significant difference to attendances is based on the adult prices which would need to come down quite a bit. If someone suspected they might miss some games, if the season ticket was cheap enough they would still potentially get one anyway. If the focus is on cutting kids prices, the high adult price would be the stumbling block. Adult prices are the key and always will be. Anything else is comparatively small fry.

It is my opinion, yes. Its good to have one. Rather than just assume whatever the manager does is correct. Pears as number one? Must think hes good enough. Ruddy as a potential signing? Must trust in him and believe in him. If either is true, Eustace will be IMO wrong.

I think Pears' was at least on par. The thing is, Pears is now remembered for that one mistake. Prior, he was known for repeatedly making mistakes. Clever move.

Both were very bad, but Pears' was much worse. Robinson had a slight excuse of a clear bobble over his foot. Pears didnt, and he also had the chance to salvage the mistake before it crossed the line, and failed.

Cliches about form and deserving to play etc are all well and good. But if we sign a goalkeeper that cannot maintain form sufficient to oust Pears who isnt very good, then it means that we havent signed a very good keeper. If Eustace decides that he wants Pears as number 1, then its a huge error of judgement on his part. If Eustace chooses to recommend John Ruddy, then I would also consider that to be a lapse in judgement.

Im not sure that is true, both him and Tomasson brought through lots of youngsters. At times having to be overly reliant on them.

It is a big if. As he is, he is a very poor keeper at this level. I dont think hes particularly impressive with his feet either personally.

I dont think he is an average Championship keeper, most keepers dont make the number of mistakes that he makes. Last season him and Wahlstedt were the worst keepers I saw. The third worst was Ruddy.

Header? Was quite a weak backpass, wasnt a bobble, just awful keeping. Not sure what you mean by that. Why specifically do you think that Eustace would not stand for not signing a keeper if he wants one? If we keep Pears as number 1, it might just as easily be down to financial restrictions as a lapse in judgement. Either way, it would be a big lapse in judgement. I have no idea if we are interested in Ruddy either way. It is an easy link, doesnt mean its not plausible. My point is, you went from wanting a new number 1 as a top priority alongside a striker to now defending Pears and suggesting that we just need competition for him. In my opinion, and only my opinion. Youve taken the Ruddy link as gospel, probably realise hes hardly a good enough signing, have assumed we will sign him and are defending in advance the fact that we wont be bringing in a good enough number 1, with Ruddy perhaps on par or slightly better at his old age. You also went from wanting significant price cuts even outlining this per stand to defending the club despite prices well above what you suggested.

He really isnt mid table Championship standard. He isnt playing for a mid table club unless last season mid table was particularly big, but he was as bad as anyone who played regularly. Hyam got loads of criticism for that horrow show. But to say that Pears didnt make as many mistakes all season is absolute nonsense. Sheffield Wednesday, Ipswich, Plymouth x 2, Preston, Hull, theres 6 for starters. Wouldnt go that far. You want him out. Im not his biggest fan but we cant afford for him to go.

Lets not make out like it was an unfair agenda or scapegoating against Pears. He made numerous goal costing errors both before and after his injury. Wahlstedt's performances only compounded the fact that we dont have a competent goalkeeper.

All keepers make mistakes and all keepers make mistakes. Its about the quantity. Pears makes far too many mistakes and doesnt tend to win us points with saves he shouldnt be making. Chaddy has tied himself in knots saying that a keeper was a priority signing prior to Wahlstedt rumours. Now there are rumours of John Ruddy, an experienced keeper but ultimately one past his best, thats what we need, because its believed to potentially be happening. We need a number 1, Pears is not good enough, end of.

I dont know, that was referring to Chaddy saying (correctly most likely) that it along with a striker should be a priority. If we are not though then there is something seriously wrong. Again.

Why do we need to sign a keeper so desperately then? Its the quantity of mistakes that is far too high and makes him not up to standard. Hes not good enough to win points either with saves he shouldnt be making. He did make one good save at Leicester but otherwise a Leicester side coasting didnt test him too much. All keepers make saves, the keys are quantity of mistakes and ability to earn points with saves beyond routine. He isnt good enough on either. You must agree hence wanting a new keeper.

That poster was clearly talking rubbish. The season ticket prices were never going to be noticeably cut. Anyone who met the club didnt do well as the end result isnt the change needed to spike attendances, but the club were never going to listen sadly.

He is crap, relative to Championship standard. Not every player playing at a certain standard is good enough for that standard. There are a number of reasons why a player might be at a level beyond his ability. A club might be skint and have no choice. A club might be promoted and a player may find the step up too much. A player may be backup yet injuries/player sales mean that he plays far more at a level than his ability would warrant. A manager might have a lapse in judgement. Poor recruitment may lead to players being signed that arent up to it. In Pears case, he was backup goalkeeper. We sold a considerably better keeper and messed up in signing a terrible replacement, thus almost by default, he became a Championship number 1. Almost certainly the worst in the division, and likely inferior to goalkeepers in the league below. So he is a Championship number 1 but not necessarily of the standard to be a number 1. Other examples. Telalovic is crap for this level, clearly nowhere near level. Most of Rotherhams team last season was crap and nowhere near the standard. Jason Lowe and Hope Akpan played loads of games at this level for us, they were never good enough. The list goes on. The mistake against Wednesday (it wasnt a dodgy backpass, there are no excuses) was so bad that it almost distracts from his general ability. As bad as it was, if it was somewhat of an anomaly, it could be written off. But he has made so many terrible mistakes across the course of the season, and he didnt even play every game. Our issues arent solely Aynslea Pears, we certainly have other problematic areas where we need to improve. But he makes far, far too many unenforced mistakes well beyond the standard of what you would expect from a goalkeeper at this level. Off the top of my head, he made 2 bad mistakes at Plymouth. He made a bad one at home to Ipswich. There was one at home to Hull where a basic positional error made it very easy for them to score a winner. He made a mess of the second at deepdale. He is not good enough, lets not make the Wednesday one to be anything other than one of many, and anything other than solely his fault.

It is not about me as an individual. Or you. I am saying that in general, the only way to make any significant positive change is only by decreasing adult prices. Any other ideas will make very little difference either way and/or cause further problems. I think they should have reduced it by more, so yes I do think it is still too high. As did you, I thought that the prices you suggested previously were good and would have led to an upsurge in attendances with long term benefits. Although since prices have been released significantly higher than what you suggested, you seem reluctant to criticise for that, and only seem to be able to focus on yourself or other individuals. Rather than say, you think the adult prices should have been cut much more (because you do think that, you said prior to the announcement) in order to increase attendances.