That certainly wasn't evident on Saturday.

Having a natural goalscorer tends to help the team, to flip it around.

Has it played out publically? It seems like you are eager to prove your earlier assumption. It was said earlier last week that he wasn't going to start due to a lack of minutes. He as expected didn't start and we was winning for most of the game, so he wasn't brought on. A huge deal has been made of that fairly logical sequence of events which lit like wildfire when his girlfriend responded to a fan (stupidly) saying that he wanted to play, which I would be more worried if he wasn't arsed. Ayala played at the weekend and was excellent. Did the whispers come directly from a member of the coaching team or from elsewhere?

Yeah I think many have taken the comments about players being fluid and expressing themselves and really have ran with it to the point whereby actual players thriving in their best position has gone out of the window! If Gallagher for examples keeps playing wide and I really hope he does not, in a couple of months, I suspect that people will stop overlooking that sort of thing regardless of any "fluid front 4" rhetoric when he continues to struggle. Why do you keep going on about his work rate? Why would his work rate noticeably decline after injury? His physical state of course could and my comments have always been subject to him making at least close to a full physical recovery. If he is nowhere near the same player, which we cannot possibly conclude yet, then obviously he may struggle to ever regain his place. But assuming he does, I don't see why he couldn't participate in a pressing side, he is being talked about as if he is Andy Carroll. He has never been quick but he can press even if it would never have been his primary attribute like say a Dolan, who alternatively could only dream of being like Dack in the final third. He has scored goals when either he or a team mate has won the ball back high up in the past, 2 goals that spring to mind are West Brom away and Wigan at home a few seasons ago. The likes of Dolan/Szmodics/Hedges/Gallagher could perhaps be more integral/start the press but it is not as if Dack is a big immobile lump that couldn't help. I think there is a lot of emphasis on him because if you remove him and Brereton, even allowing for another striker coming in which is far from certain, I don't see many goals at all in what remains. You can press all you want but you need to offer a regular and consistent goal threat. Regarding your question, I firmly believe that you build around your players and IF he makes a near full recovery, he is our best player so he takes the number 10 role and we must try to get the best out of him, even if there is a tinge of compromise tactically. But as previously mentioned, I don't see why that is totally at odds with what Tomasson has mentioned anyway. Everything depends on his physical state to which you seem to have already made your mind up on. He came back from one and then after a couple of months had hit form similar to prior to his injury before the unfortunate second injury. Since the second one, due to the timing of the season he has never started a game since. How you can possibly say that he isn't the player he was at this stage seems beyond premature.

It was sharpness that Dack lacked last season though, which he would only get by starting games. Gallagher? Ideally not at all. I never have said that he isn't any better up front, I just think that people seem to have an inflated opinion on his ability and what his goal tally would be if he played as a number 9. That being said, he is more suited playing there than anywhere else, but he shouldn't be first choice.

Hopefully this will work as well in practice as it does in theory but the key is that players begin in positions that best suit them to begin with. For example, Gallagher will struggle regardless of the instructions on how fluid he can be when out on the right wing.

We don't want players who are able to play in positions, we surely want ones who thrive in certain positions that best suit their abilities. Any talk of square pegs in round holes seems to have gone the other way to the point whereby anyone goes anywhere!

https://londonroad.net/Forum/showthread.php?tid=21067&page=4 Some opinions on Szmodics.

Last season he didn't start a single game, any player who had not started for such a long period of time would have appeared as rusty as he did. I am not sure why people seem so convinced that the club is actively planning to discard him. Is this based on the first game in which we knew in advance (a decision I disagreed with) that he wasn't being considered to start due to his lack of pre-season action, and then that he didn't come on in a game that we led in?

Not even about his wage, it is about him being quite clearly (and by a million miles when Brereton goes) our best chance of a goal and our best player in his actual position. Before his injuries, athletically he was fine, obviously the question mark is regarding his recovery but he will never return to form just playing occasional cameos. It might not be necessarily his main strength but his actual main strength makes him a critical player yet it is almost as if hes a 50 year old 20 stone veteran! We have 5 subs now too so even if it means often taking him off after 60-70 minutes of playing in his natural position, fine. I think there seems to have been a massive reaction following him not coming on at the weekend, perhaps an overreaction.

Is there that emphasis specific to the attacking midfield role? And Buckley has been moved out from that pressing role to further back so that doesn't tally up. Surely the striker would be the first man to press? When Dack has been used as a number 9 fleetingly in the past, it didn't suit him.

There is a lot of talk about a "fluid front 4" but equally it shouldn't be forgotten that players in general tend to thrive in a specific position more often than not for a reason. Indeed when Mowbray mentioned players being versatile he was often lambasted. By all means I can understand encouraging players to roam from their positions at times but looking at the players we have at the moment, who prefers to play where? Brereton is best suited to the left, Dack undoubtedly as a number 10, Hedges and Markanday seemingly from the right, Gallagher central (albeit not to the standard that people have made out) as well as Vale. Szmodics seemingly also central with the most flexible being Dolan, but then again, is that because he has never consistently excelled in a specific position? I am not too keen on the idea of moving players around constantly to the point when too much fluidity leads to inconsistency. Peterborough fans seem to be consistent in the idea that Szmodics is best centrally, we only really have Dack there so in a way I hope he has to find a role elsewhere as it would mean that Dack is back firing, but it does seem a lot of money for a player in that position. I felt that on Saturday, Brereton was the only one of the front 4 to be effective and from his natural role. Vale struggled in general, Gallagher again looked lost out wide for all the talk of it being different him playing there under Tomasson and Hedges got crowded out too often starting central rather than coming in from the right where would be more space.

Hardly glowing.

Sublime touches and reminders of Mark Hughes? Crazy. I remember one good touch on the right hand side that was good albeit maybe not sublime, otherwise...

Lets take the Dack from prior to his injury, as I have acknowledged that the big variable is whether he returns to his old self. He did after the first injury and was thriving before he did the other knee What was wrong with his work rate? Was the old Dack lacking athleticism to the point that it was a major problem? Does a team have to be built around him, it was a lazy assumption based on the Graham days but does long ball necessarily suit a player like him? How have you concluded having seen one game under Tomasson and based on the Dack of old that he won't fit in? If athleticism is the sole focus, lets just get athletes in. We've got a bloody good player, an entertainer and a goal scorer if he we can get him right, which as I said is the main question. It's not as if he was immobile and couldn't press even if he perhaps wont have the same energy levels as some of other options, but it doesn't mean that he can't fit into the team, even if the likes of Dolan and Szmodics are swarming around more than Dack whereas Dack scores more goals than the likes of those 2. Even if he has declined, it surely won't be his work rate that falls. We play a formation that includes a player in his natural position, rather than trying to stick him elsewhere, surely he plays in his actual position?

Lots of assumptions that Dack cannot fit the way that you have suggested that Tomasson wants to play. Is this based on Paul Mani who also said that Ayala (potential man of the match on Saturday) was really struggling too? Just a case of chinese whispers. Is this based on Dack not coming on during Saturdays game, when we was already winning, and potentially having a bit of a sulk because he wants to play? Seems like the general "Dack is finished" narrative that is being written at the moment is very premature. Why are you so keen to downplay the potential suitability for Dack in our team? Prior to his injury, I would definitely suggest that he could play in a pressing team, it wasn't Dack's shortcomings that led to us playing direct, it was elsewhere in the team. It's all about how well he has recovered. But never lose focus of the fact that the most important thing for a player in his position is goals and assists! Even if pressing is not his main talent, we have lots of energy in the final third but how much composure? Surely they can compliment If we needed a goal and made those 4 changes, we would be mad. Its a nonsense argument. Just because people wanted signings in prior to the season, that removes their right to be critical when appropriate of any doubts they may have about the individuals that have signed? If anything, a regular argument for those defending an up to now lack of recruitment has been that we want the right players, as if anyone suggested otherwise! But surely those people more than anyone would be critical of any new signings, considering they for weeks and weeks proclaimed that only improvements to the first team would be required?

The reiterated message throughout the window so far has been (often based on an illogical quality v speed debate) that we must wait to ensure that we get players that don't just fill out the squad and instead sign first team starters. The question is, do we think so far that we are starting to do that? I am not so sure obviously acknowledging that we are just judging on the individuals prior to joining. Brittain for example is a sure fire starter but we had no Championship standard right backs left at the club, but either way, we have signed a guaranteed starter. Morton on the other hand I suspect wouldn't start if everyone was fit. Szmodics is in between, I think if everyone is fit, anyone will struggle to displace Dack so again it might be a case of finding a role for Szmodics around that. Lets see how we replace Van Hecke and Lenihan, a huge ask, and then potentially Brereton. So much rests on the goalscoring front, we can talk about pressing and flexibility until we are blue in the face but we need a regular source of goals. Either here or elsewhere, the likes of Gallagher, Dolan, Hedges and Szmodics have proven that they can chip in with single figures but if any gets double figures, it would be a step up for them. Expecting them (and Markanday and Vale who are less proven) to all share that goalscoring mantle would be unrealistic. So that leaves 2 potential sources. Brereton will go and it is of critical importance that we sign a proper striker that can get us a reasonable tally of goals. Also a lot is dependant on Dack and whether he returns to a good level. If either/both of the above are sorted then having lots of energetic, pressing options chipping in beside that could get us plenty of goals. Expecting them to take on the mantle without a fit Dack and/or a Brereton replacement could lead to struggles.

He was easily our best player. If he is anything like the old one (the million dollar question) then he still is. He wasnt lazy and he was quick enough to keep up and regularly contribute. Im guessing you watched Hertha Berlin regularly as no one could surely conclude that from his time here, albeit brief. "Great player?!" Can he score and assist regularly? If hes not been badly affected by injuries then yes he can so it is in Tomasson's best interests to play in a way that suits his best player.

Give me a number 10 as effective as Dack any day of the week, for all of your "metrics" about athleticism. Hope Szmodics can step up to the Championship at the third time of asking, hopefully he can also fit into the same side as Dack and they can get the best out of each other. We need players that can run in behind off the ball and it seems like he wants to do that.

Ahmedhodzic is banned for a game, carried over from Bordeaux.

He wouldn't and to clarify, Hourihane is just an example, not a specific recommendation. But any slightly older head would not need to be really expensive, Hourihane has joined Derby who are in League 1 and under (I think) some restrictions. But it would also give us that experienced head, not necessarily to play 46 games, and I wouldn't want someone over the hill like Johnson, but he could play a part in giving us some composure when required. I don't think 3 is enough for such an important position. Seri would have been one of the first names on the team sheet, very good Championship player. Harsh. 2 are unproven.

Why is that the only option, a young loanee or an older player on big wages? Surely there is a middle ground, especially if we have money to spend. For me especially in the heart of midfield, we could do with at least 4 so for me, Morton could have been a much more comfortable addition with another midfielder aswell. Johnson clearly was over the hill last season (although was excellent as a steady head at home to QPR) so he is an extreme example but we could have for me done with an older head perhaps, someone who could more than contribute and give a very inexperienced side (especially when Ayala hibernates in a month or two) a bit of know how, even if he doesn't usually start but he can come in as and when. Hourihane was mentioned and in the absence of anyone more suitable for the role in my immediate mind, I would have been happy with him and a younger body to give us some real strength in there.

I think 3 central midfielders for 2 positions over 46 games is leaving us very short.

To be fair, Leighton Clarkson had also played for their first team, as much as I am keen to avoid that lazy comparison. Mowbray was quite successful in the loan market to be fair and there was always more of an onus on the loan market in the absence of funds. Hopefully this summer, there won't be as much focus on the loan market and we can get more permanent deals done. I may be wrong but didn't Broughton acknowledge that Brittain had been on the list before his appointment so I think the similarities are more than coincidence. Lets hope more creativity in the market follows.

Not an equivalent but at least someone who is a similar type of player.