So I am guessing that you are still 100% behind Ismael and think he is still the right man for the job. He might want us to have more possession to create more chances, we arent creating more and even after 2 weeks on the training pitch we looked just as bad if not worse. Do you really think this set of players is technically capable of dominating the ball successfully and winning games doing it? And have you found any positives in Ismael's first 5 games to cling on to? The players dont seem to have a clue what they are doing. Yes, Cauley Woodrow starting and as the main striker was bizarre. Its not the first time hes picked a weird team. Its also certainly not the first time we have failed to get any points against struggling sides under him, in fact thats 4 times in a row. Unacceptable, indefensible, a crap manager who we are now stuck with. And also an arrogant tosser who cant be arsed to face fans who have paid hard earned money and wasted their Saturday travelling so far. Eustace won 45 points from 31 games, Lowe 6 from 3 games, Ismael 1 from 5. Hes not the main problem, Venkys are. But hes a poor manager picked in desperation after 2 talented managers decided understandably that they couldnt be arsed working in these conditions anymore. Im guessing in your head, Ismael is still the right man and we can still make the play offs.

We are 63 points worse off than he has predicted. Surprised he isnt more critical.

We havent played any specific style under this clown. Just slow, passive, tedious shite. Revert back to criticising previous managers though, I am guessing you arent concerned that we may have just employed a shit manager on a long term deal as you cant bare to see the reality in front of you.

If thats the result of Ismael having 2 weeks to work with the team then that says it all. The French Owen Coyle picking a weird team again and never did we look like scoring. Even if we had got a below par points tally from 4 struggling sides then we would still have an outside chance of the play offs. To get absolutely nothing is extraordinarily bad. Ive seen enough to see why all of the fans of his previous 2 clubs who sacked him hated him so much. The talk this week has been about deflecting the anger away from the team. Not sure they even deserve it. Passionless wasters.

His usually excellent passing has been poor but its his off the ball play and his tackling that is his big weakness. Tomasson mentioned that here. Such a talented player but still big areas to improve.

Its this willing and able to inject £20m a season in that I dont get. It makes out as if its done out of anything other than necessity to cover costs. They will have to "pump money in" each year going forward because like any Championship club we spend more than we receive. They had been intent solely on reducing losses even in the years before the court case. Selling Armstrong and not reinvesting anything was a similar example. I dont get why you make out as if they were chucking in money prior the court case as some sort of attempt to progress the club, it was merely to pay the bills which even then were kept as low as possible. The only difference post court case is that the primary objective of reducing losses has been actioned even more aggressively and it happened to coincide with Wharton being ripe for a sale.

They have never been useful. They have to offset losses like the majority of Championship owners but they have not been allowing us to improve the squad for a number of years, well before the court case. The only reason they didnt put in money in the last financial year was not because of the court case. It was because for them we had a fortunate one off sellable asset that meant that we actually kept a small profit. This financial year, they will have to put something in to offset the loss again. Would you be happy for them to stay if the court case ended and they reverted back to what you perceive them to have been like before it started in the summer of 2023?

I look forward to roverandout coming on saying that Latvia arent a bad side later on.

Yes, it is a bad thing. Dilutes the quality and also makes it asymmetrical where you remove any jeopardy by having 3rd place teams going through groups.

Is that your token response now whenever a question is asked that you know you cant answer, in this case because there is an inconsistency in your logic? If Hedges' worth is proven because managers pick him, surely so is Pears' worth? IMO, both have played so much simply as a symptom of our lack of budget and poor recruitment over a number of years. Every window we call for "a new number 1" and a "pacy winger." Offers hard work and is a team player. They should be a given. Versatile? Equally ineffective in a few positions. And scores "the odd goal!" You are stretching it there, literally one this season, one last. Youve literally listed goalscoring as one of his strengths.

There should be pre qualifiers. And on a seperate note, they shouldnt have increased the size of the World Cup to 48 teams and the Euros to 24 teams. As you said, harder not to qualify.

How is there pressure? From who?

Tough game tonight against a side ranked lower than Madagascar and Tajikstan. Pointless game.

Those same managers keep picking Pears. So based on your logic we shouldnt want him replaced, shouldnt focus on what he cant do and should see that they must see him as a good player?

Repeatedly picked in a position that is symptomatic of the lack of budget and poor recruitment over a number of years. Hence why people calling for "pacey wingers" has become a running joke. Hes a wide man who doesnt score, doesnt create, cant take on his full back, is slow and his decision making is poor. Might be a nice guy and might work hard but thats not enough. Some make out as if hes a brilliant player off the ball but I dont even think hes that.

Wing wizard Ryan Hedges is back? Maybe that play off push isnt as dead as we thought.

Dont forget our record away at promoted sides and its really difficult to look past a home win.

It would be best for him to leave permanently in the summer if anyone wants him in the lower leagues. He looked out of his depth last season which considering his age there certainly was no shame in, but hes struggled to get minutes even in League 1 and now League 2. I cant see him making it at this level similar to Markanday. Probably more chance of him and Buckley being our first choice midfield next season though knowing our owners.

Doesnt change anything that I said. Our negotiating position was weak because we was desperate to sell ASAP.

But the argument is that had we not been so desperate and had waited until at least the summer, to put ourselves in a much stronger negotiating position, that we would get more money. Not a bit more and with a reduction of the release clause whereby it somehow comes to being less overall.

That is based on the assumption that a sell on fee was instead of more money up front. Had we waited and not been as desperate then we should have been able to get more of a fee but still include the sell on. So say you receive £10m extra, the only difference beyond that is that the profit of any future sale is £10m less so the % of that is reduced, say by 12.5/15%.

Had he played more football for us then he likely would have improved upon and proved those weaker areas and generated more attention. Also, you downplay it but £18-20m is not an insignifant amount especially considering FFP to spend in January even if its a bargain as teams restructure their team more in the summer. But even if it was still only Palace, they would have had to pay more if we werent so desperate. We were desperate to sell, it was January and had he stayed he would have proven his quality more. I dont care about other incomparable players, England under 21 caps or Nixon rumours, its surely basic business logic that had we waited and not been so desperate we most likely would have got more.

You can go down the rabbit hole of well this player went for this, Nixon thinks this player is worth this, this player has these England under 21 caps, whatever. Surely it is common sense that if it wasnt in the much quieter January window, if we werent as desperate and if he had more experience and game time under his belt, we would naturally be in a position to get more money. There probably was a ceiling in that he would only ever go for the big, big money after proving himself in the Premier League. But due to the various circumstances leading to us pushing him out of the door, his value was reduced.

Typical refusal to believe that the club could have possibly done wrong. Of course as a Championship player there would always be a cap on his value. But common sense says, if we werent so desperate, had there likely been more interested parties in a summer window where teams naturally spend much more and after further proof of his ability playing for us, we could have got more. Its not even about direct comparisons to other players, its just logic based on our weak negotiating power. It doesnt matter anyway. £10m, £20m, £30m, it makes no difference to the club as we dont see a penny.

Its incredible revisionism to now have people suggesting that West Brom and Watford were wrong to sack him. Delusion.