The budgets have been slashed and signings blocked by the owners yet you are fixated about the bus? Waggott did communicate, he did a half hour interview with BBC Lancashire, obviously like Broughton has he tried to paint a pretty picture, mentioning the bills being paid etc, but acknowledging the change of circumstances. He is useless, his strategies around pricing etc are counter productive and there is no doubt he needs to go, but on this specific topic, you are shooting the messager.

We need to reign in the gung ho approach, be a bit more willing to counter attack and focus more on being solid like against Watford. Could do that within a 4231 but with Markanday, Telalovic and Dolan not being Chmpionship standard, I would favour a change of shape to either a midfield 3 or a back 3. Wahlstedt Hill Hyam Wharton Brittain Travis Wharton Pickering Moran Sigurdsson Szmodics Scott Wharton lucky to start, but thought process being that a third centre back (you ideally want a left footer in there and Carter deserves dropping) might help not only to keep them out but from set pieces, and it allows the wing backs to push up and provide the width, with the 2 number 10s working around Sigurdsson who isn't the quickest but gives us more of a physical focal point. I expect Dolan for Markanday, maybe Sigurdsson rested but otherwise, more of the same.

"Chat about buying a bus when in fact we leased it" is bizarre behaviour, but come on, its small fry in the grand scheme of the current problems.

Exactly, so the defenders are both exposed and subsequently making mistakes and the midfield is being overwhelmed. Change is needed. So we do need more than a goalscorer. You shouldn't have to score 4 and 5 to win games, its unrealistic.

Presume this is meant for here, I think the quality of the players that left can be underestimated based on them not being out of the team at the end of the season, recency bias. Kaminski started 28 games, including up until the World Cup when we went in 3rd. He was excellent until his injury, kept us in games at times and we would have had far less points without him. Ayala started 23 games and came on twice more, 9 clean sheets included in there and a winning goal. Dack less so, 13 starts and 14 sub appearances but got us a win and a couple of draws when we were otherwise struggling to score. Then you have the wealth of experience they gave the group off the pitch no doubt.

Yep, crap window, down to the owners. Specifically wanted an experienced centre back, wasn't allowed by the owners. Kid on loan warming the bench. Badly needed a striker, got 2 but amidst the restrictions so such a limited field. One a freebie from Plymouth who looks good but is no use constantly injured. One a desperate deadline day punt from the German 4th division who is clearly not up to it but such were the restrictions... Needed width, blocked by the owners. Sigurdsson was poor yesterday but its his third game in a week after a bad injury, overall a promising signing. Moran looks a good player, although the owners unwillingness to allow us a right winger means he may be needed out of position. Pressure on Wahlstedt now to step up as our main signing, and the likes of Tronstad and Hill need to prove they aren't just making up the numbers.

Who is the bigger problem, him or Venkys, in your eyes?

All? Ignoring that we have conceded as many goals as anyone in the division. It isn't Waggott's cost cutting, he might be an incompetent idiot but it isnt him that initially gave a limited budget with no fees available before slashing it mid summer, that is solely down to the owners. I don't think that at the moment Tomasson is getting 15% more than he should out of the current admittedly limited squad though, as per the league table.

Has anyone at all blamed Pears for the 2 at Rotherham? He is being called out for the constant mistakes that I listed and you seemed to agree with, its as simple as that. You keep saying about "giving the lad a chance." I dont get why you keep saying that. Firstly, what people say on here makes absolutely no difference to how our players do anyway, so its totally irrelevant. But Pears has been criticised for making goal costing mistakes, its nothing to do with what the fans think. If Wahlstedt makes mistakes that cost us goals, he will also be criticised.

It was a poor pass I think to Carter initially but the main blame for that went to Markanday, not Pears. As I said, 5 major goal costing errors. Anything around that is small change.

What other managers are saying is exactly what we dont want. Hollow words all from managers who have all managed to exploit our blatant vulnerabilities. Its not a source of pride being patronised.

If you genuinely think that on here no one ever kicked off at Mowbray then you are deluded. Its irrelevant now anyway. Tomasson is here and we have conceded the most in the league down to his tactics.

2nd goal for Hull - standing far too far to one side, leaving a huge gap for an easy finish. 2nd goal for Plymouth - spilt the ball into the path of a striker 3rd goal for Plymouth - ran out of his net and headed the ball directly in the air to a Plymouth player to have a free shot in an open goal 2nd goal v Ipswich - poor kick leading to them scoring with him not set 4th goal v Ipswich - punched a ball he should have caught down to their player to score That is not "scrutiny of Pears over the past few weeks has been ridiculous verging on ludicrous." Its not as if people were mentioning sliced clearances into touch or minor imperfections. People wanted him dropped because of a high quantity of major errors of goals directly leading not to set pieces, not to half chance, but to goals conceded. The stuff about backing players is a deflection tactic. Discussing bad mistakes online does not equal not wanting players to do well in the ground.

I would be surprised if Rangers went back to the Championship, especially for someone who is 18th in the league. I know he is a big name but im not convinced that the job he has done here is remarkable enough to put him at the top of lists like that.

So when you said 3-1 was the right time to "vent anger" towards Waggott. Did you?

Why didnt you start it yourself, or was you tucked away in the hospitality near him again?

I would agree. The root cause of our problems is Venkys. Rejecting bids and slashing budgets later, the squad is not very strong. The club is run poorly from the top. Just like Waggott can be labelled an incompetent CEO without being the primary issue, Tomasson can be criticised if he makes poor footballing decisions.

Its such a flawed theory that the manager is purposely prioritising style over results as its seen as more desirable. Maybe its just a case that this modern day data driven footballing world is totally backwards and there is truth in that. But I dont believe it. I think Tomasson is doing it because quite possibly having been told by Broughton when he arrived that its how we plan to play and this season is the culmination of over a years work and how he likes his team to play.

The thing with the questions around the style is that it isn't a drastic change to being direct, set pieces or anything like that, our current squad is inexperienced, small and not suited to that. Our measly 10 points from 9 games has not been a direct result of gung ho football. We picked 7 of them up from 4 games, one of which was a one off approach by Tomasson that has not been repeated where we went to Watford, sat in and hit them on the break, keeping our only clean sheet. The other 2 were 2-1 home wins against poor looking sides yet neither was our most attacking performance of the season, and the draw at Rotherham was down to them getting a soft red card at 2 up. We can't just expect to keep chucking so many bodies forward and the goals suddenly stop hitting the back of our net. Sometimes we need to sit a little deeper and look to counter where we can look more dangerous. There are also the fine margins, our set pieces are obviously an attempt at avoiding chucking it into the box in the absence of height, but they are almost always terrible. Results wise, the first half of last season was our most successful chunk under Tomasson and it was the opposite of what we see now, it was lots of narrow wins built on organisation and discipline. How we could (I don't think we will, Tomasson as per most managers seems stubborn and has been building towards this style during his time here) shore up could be more subtle by tweaking things within the current formation to ensure more bodies are back especially the 2 in front of the defence and sometimes being willing to play more on the counter, or it could also prompt a change of shape. Maybe a third centre back for example would not only stiffen us up but also give us more height, seeing Travis marking giants shows how small we are.

I do get that and find it totally baffling, but Martin did finish 9th or 10th at Swansea in the end. I don't think anyone decent goes for Tomasson with us near the bottom.

But they have left us with such a poor and thin squad. If the owners hadnt have been so stubborn with potential sales and slashed the budget so aggressively then the disparity wouldnt be as vast. Tomasson deserves criticism for how we are playing but to just dismiss where the main blame lies is crazy.

I dont think incredibly there is that total agreement. Some prefer to deflect the brunt of the blame onto people over here, usually Waggott who admittedly is a pathetic CEO but still only a symptom. I think some think that once he goes things will get considerably better.

It's not necessarily the reality, more your theory. They won't back him in January because Venkys (the blame doesn't need distributing, its 100% in India) have slashed the budgets and have turned the taps off, nothing to do with not seeing Tomasson here long term. This idea that Tomasson is sticking to the style purely focusing on his personal career makes no sense. These clubs won't come in for him regardless of style if we are near the bottom. If he is unconcerned about the club and putting his reputation first over the wellbeing of the club, then he needs to go. But it is such a warped theory, he will get more suitors if we are higher up the table. He clearly has always wanted to build towards this style, either through personal choice or this backward way in which clubs now run whereby the director of football chooses the style and the actual person who knows how to manage a team goes along with it. Obviously he is reluctant to rip up or even tweak something he has been working on for over a year.

Absolute shite and slipping naively into a relegation battle with a team full of kids. Goal difference getting higher and higher into the minuses. This comes down to the owners, not even specifically Waggott or Broughton, just Venkys. Their stubbornness in the past over players whose contracts are expiring coupled with the aggressive mid summer slashing of the budget has left the squad as a shell. But saying that, that doesn't give Tomasson free reign, the way we are playing very much is down to him and it is simply not fit for purpose. We have conceded 4 today, 3 v Sunderland, 4 v Ipswich and 3 v Plymouth and overall as many as any team in the league. This cannot go on, we simply are not giving ourselves a chance to win games. It is partly down to individual mistakes but they are massively exposed by our gung ho tactics. "Fortress Ewood" is long gone too. If he doesn't make significant changes to how we play, we will continue to leak goals and slide into a relegation battle and there aren't many of our lads that you would want in the trenches with you. Carter needs dropping, mistake after mistake, Hyam has also looked far shakier although both are again being exposed. Markanday isn't Championship standard, Sigurdsson struggled today and doesn't look very quick, and it says so much that Telalovic doesn't get more game time considering we need a striker so badly. Thought our best 3 players were the full backs and Moran.

"As simple as that."