7 out of 10?! Very generous. He was shit like most of the team.

Understandable to an extent considering the anger and frustration of todays performance. But some absolute drivel on here again, unfavourable comparisons to Kean, worst pound for pound manager ever, have a word with yourselves.

Terrible today, everyone seemed to freeze in the second half. They should have had 2 from terrible mistakes by Wharton and Lenihan. Brereton was miles off it as was Dolan who is overrated IMO. Pickering was crap, Giles was terrible when he came on and Venkys shouldnt have interfered to insist that Rothwell stayed. The bizarre formation we used in the second half made no sense either.

Who keeps telling you this information? A substantial budget that Mowbray presumably chose not to spend? Utter rubbish. But the thing is that it is impossible to disprove. I asked the other day, has anything come from those promising whispers you heard in regards to the owners earlier this season? You think the owners are that proactive? Even if there is no chance of a new deal here, it is in his best interests to get us in the play offs or even promoted as it would be brilliant for his CV. Dont confuse a lack of care and issues regarding competence, for example his strange tactics in the second half. Hes quite a dour, reserved man in general.

Winning games based on a Mowbray signing scoring goals in games we won with clean sheets? He also didn't have an equal say regarding Chile, if Chile call him up, nothing we can do. Again, like many you seem well beyond the point of judging Mowbray from a fair base, which is your choice.

I don't think that the problem since Christmas has been using a back 5, we have been reasonably solid even in the last 3 months but I would certainly agree that certain other tactical choices have been wrong. Buckley as a false 9 went from a crucial part in a winning team to blatantly not working, things like Giles on the right, Gallagher playing too much full stop, there are various things that haven't worked that for me have helped to lead to us not scoring in certain games. But again, our recent form is a perfect example of my point. For a few months we did nothing but win really, his new tactic was working, we won games, he deserves praise. Now it has been leading to draws and losses, he deserves criticism. You can't criticise when we lose and then imply that anyone could have done what he does when we win, in my opinion if you want to judge fairly. Last Saturday, we didn't win or lose, so its much more mixed. Dack and Brereton weren't fit enough to start, the way we played in the second half with Dack central in essentially a 4-3-3 really wrestled back the initiative after a crap first half. I certainly don't think that Mowbray is a genius either.

But any illogical tactics only conspire to make it more difficult for Mowbray to get a positive result, as you touch on. If we give a team a "headstart" and fail to win or indeed lose the game, then he deserves criticism. If we come back and win, he deserves praise, because his overall tactics across the course of 90 minutes have led to victory. Take the Reading game, his tactics and management overall ended up with us losing the game, he didn't play the exact same tactics (for example Johnson wasn't a false 9) and he was limited to an extent due to unavailability but his use of tactics especially after Khadra went off early was strange, we played shit, lost and he got lots of deserved criticism. You don't have anyone saying that must be the players or the assistant that chose them strange tactics, the manager is responsible for the tactics whether we win, draw or lose and should be judged accordingly. Unfortunately, we are well past that point of neutrality. What a strange comparison. If that was the case, I presume that Travis would be praised for his ability to intercept, but heavily criticised for his terrible passing. You've just highlighted a perfect example of how someone can be praised when they get something right/when the end result is positive, and criticised when not. Ultimately that will level out, Travis would be seen as having a very specialist skill but overall would be very limited due to his poor passing, the analysis of Mowbray will or should be judged on where we are after 46 games.

I have never defended the first half tactics, in the quoted post I said "the first half tactics were totally bizarre." I said at the time that against a team that plays the ball out from the back, having an ageing central midfielder as a false 9 couldn't have been more illogical. There have been games this season in which we have been competitive, perhaps missing penalties or whatever and I have been critical of the manager because of the result, which is ultimately the bedrock to any post match analysis. Conversely, when we win a game, that fact can't be totally ignored and/or made out to be something that the manager has contributed to. It seems that with Mowbray, he has gone well past the point of being judged from a neutral standpoint. Mowbray (not Venus or the players) chose to bring on Gallagher and Dack and go 4-2-3-1, high pressing, at half time and we won as a result. We have not won enough games in the last few months to criticise the manager fairly over without needing to refuse to credit him on one of the occasions when we did win. "Caused the players to be on the verge of revolt" is a hyperbolic and speculative stance with nothing to back it up. Johnson's tweet could easily be interpreted as tongue in cheek. The players are still playing for the manager, I think it would be a struggle to suggest otherwise.

The Derby second half changes do have to be credited to Mowbray, no matter how reluctant people are. A big deal is made of supposed arguments at half time, but im sure players often argue when things arent going well. The first half tactics were totally bizarre but rectified quickly enough to go on to win. Mowbray definitely showed a lack of flexibility regarding the Buckley false 9 system though this season. It DID work for months but it was reliant on Brereton running in behind, meaning that Buckley not offering a goal threat wasn't half as much of an issue. Giles has also been used strangely, him on the right is bizarre. I don't necessarily think that Gallagher wide v central is the disparity many make out, he is almost equally poor in either position, and relying on him as our main goal threat was always going to be costly. When he plays central, he doesn't offer more of a goal threat than when wide to be honest, and his inability to bring others into play causes attacks to break down.

Mowbray's cup record is terrible and is somewhat of a curiosity. Take this season, v Morecambe we only made 2 changes if I remember correctly, and v Wigan we went stronger than most of us expected.

I don't see why anyone takes random wages published online seriously, they have probably been taken from Football Manager or similar. Ultimately, even if they were true, there is no way that we won't have been willing to put Nyambe and Rothwell on a much higher wage than they are at the moment, problem being that the raise put forward isn't enough to get them to sign, therefore they remain on terms agreed years and years ago until expiry.

The red carpet being laid out for this Renzo seems to be rubbing people up the wrong way. It seems the Chile novelty has worn off. In 6 games time when Brereton goes elsewhere he will be seeking out another team.

Obviously it is not a literal point but Mowbray being here next season would not cause the majority of the current ST base to not go, leaving a few hundred.

Dolan? Hedges? Could have Giles left, Brereton central, Dolan right and drop Gallagher

The owners should not under any circumstances be interfering with things like that. They deserve all of the blame for that, and it will cost us in the summer when Rothwell leaves for free and we dont have the 2 new players that Mowbray needed the Rothwell money to bring in in January. This bonus too, its commonplace for a team to receive bonuses upon success, surely. What relevance does that have?

That annoying Chilean fan is coming over apparently and singing at the fanzone about Brereton on Saturday.

Giles on the right wing, even considering how ill suited he is to being on that side?

My point was more about the way the club is run under Venkys. It certainly wont be a smooth, quick process whereby a list of managers is already ready for Venkys to make an informed and quick decision.

That would be a worrying team, a right back playing his first game of professional football and that clown up front. I didn't take from Mowbray's press conference that those 3 are likely to be out, especially Lenihan. This would be my team assuming both Lenihan and Nyambe are fit: Kaminski Lenihan Van Hecke Wharton Nyambe Travis Rothwell Pickering Dolan Dack Brereton If either Nyambe or Lenihan don't make it, go to a back 4 and stick Buckley in a 4-3-3. I certainly wouldn't start Gallagher no matter what, if Dack doesn't start, have Brereton up top.

Best form of the season according to expected goals!

I don't think Dack will be starting anytime soon.

What is this "understanding on how they view the future of the club?" You and RevidgeBlue were waxing lyrical about these cryptic plans months ago. Is there any meat to be put on the bones yet?

Lampard is a horrendous appointment. Bet there is a lot of regret in the boardroom.

He's not going to say that he's been shit in training is he. He looked out of his depth for 2 years, thats why he didnt warrant more game time.

Lets not recreate history and make out that Brereton was underused and messed about in those first 2 years, when he played he was miles off it, he couldn't use his body at all and he wasn't ready to play more. After some time out of the team he seemingly bulked up and started to resemble the player we see today.