Or integrated into the Nations League?

Both of those countries have won major tournaments in the last 5 years. I wasnt remotely impressed by us winning 10 nil or indeed 5 nil last time we played them, it is a waste of time playing against a team who had to use their annual leave from their random jobs to play tonight, 5 or 10 goals is an irrelevance. Obviously our team full of players playing at the highest level were going to batter them, if we could only use Conference players and below we would still win comfortably. Literally nothing can be learnt from tonights game.

I think those who have been given loan spells both in the case of the Chelsea players and Magloire are at an advantage, playing mens football in games that matter rather than sanitised kids football. Magloire apparently has been dealing with a personal issue lately according to Mowbray. Maybe that is why he has not featured for the under 23s although again it is blatantly obvious that he will never make it here, he should have been let go in the summer if he would have agreed. I dont really think that the thing that our first team is calling out for is more academy graduates to be rushed through. Our team is already very young and Mowbray has made a fair few academy graduates into key members of the squad.

San Marino have only won one game in their entire history, a 1 nil friendly win over Lichenstein. Had we won 20 nil it still wouldnt have been impressive. I do wonder if next time we play such opposition, whether Southgate should pick a team of League 2 and Conference players. Wed still batter them but it would send a message to UEFA, these games shouldnt be taking place without pre qualification.

Playing against opposition who arent close to even being competitive.

Totally pointless.

It does seem unethical if we are holding on to young players just to pad out the under 23s, but it is perhaps the symptom of modern day reserve football which in general doesn't perhaps prepare young players for senior football.

There is a lot of assumptions present. Ultimately until any of these players sign on the dotted line, there is a large degree of uncertainty It also seems to be taken as a fact that we have a strong interest in Souttar. When you see a club linked with other clubs in the paper, you have to take it with a pinch of salt, not assume it to be a fact.

Jack Walker was one in a million. I never said that Venkys will put us into administration, I was merely pointing out that this myth that is often peddled by Venkys apologists that we would become like Bury without them is absolute horse shit.

Why does it at all matter whether any new owner supports us?! Did Abramovic support Chelsea as a kid? I agree with what has been said regarding this constant comparison to Bury that has been repeated as nauseum and many who defend Venkys love to pull it out. Bury is a one off, specific example and not the guaranteed outcome if an owner is no longer willing to offset losses with share capital issues via other companies. Under Venkys we spend more money than we bring in, people mention the money being "pumped in" as if it is anything other than a necessity. The 20m a year figure is often banded around too which is not accurate. But if they stop being willing to fund their self inflicted losses, then there may be a period of turbulence whilst the club is passed over perhaps to administration etc but it isnt terminal if that happens.

I suspect that a million is well beyond our budget. Ogbene has only 1 goal in 51 for Rotherham too.

How have "getting behind the lads" on a matchday and (justifiably) moaning about the owners on on an internet messageboard become mutually exclusive in your head?

In general? Definitely 4 at the back, and 100% with Phil Foden in the team, he is the player miles above the rest of our (talented) attacking midfielders. The question is where do you play him because he is so good in so many position, but I like him further forward because he tends to score and assist so much. We are in a bit of a strange situation with many of our attacking players out of form at the moment, Grealish I think has yet to convince that he can be as effective without being the big fish in a small pond having not yet ever replicated his Villa form, Mount needs to do more in the final third for me, Sterling has been anonymous at club level for about 18 months, Rashford is only just back from injury and didn't seem to want to be part of the squad as is the case with Greenwood, Sancho is rotting under Solskjaer (as much as I love him ruining United, it is negatively effecting many England players too) and Saka and Smith Rowe are really coming to the surface now at Arenal. Happy with 4231 but I do wonder if a slightly more flexible 433 would allow us better control over games and perhaps to get Bellingham in. Connor Gallagher could also come into the equation as a central midfielder with the likes of Mount, with Rice sitting. Foden, Kane and one other as the front 3. A team of Pickford / James Stones Maguire Shaw / Rice Bellingham Mount / Foden Kane Sterling for example, with many of those positions up for grabs. Ramsdale in net, Alexander Arnold and Chilwell at full back, White at centre back, Phillips, Henderson and Gallagher can come into the centre of midfield and a whole host of players could alternate with Sterling.

The state of some of the replies to this.

Because I was commenting (and not alone in doing so) on what I perceived to be an overly cautious line up against poor opposition, and reverting back to a formation that I am less keen on compared to one that gets 4 attacking players in it, especially as England have such an array of talent in that area at the moment. I do think that we would have battered a very naive, high pressing and poor quality Albanian side regardless of formation but still, I have acknowledged that I was incorrect so I am unsure why you are so desperate to go over it. As a neutral obviously but that is a totally different question. When watching Rovers (and England) my concern is the result. That doesn't mean that I cannot comment if it is boring but my main focus is the result, how we get there is not the issue.

I would totaly disagree that Gallagher is a good outlet, in fact I would say he is as poor as I can remember a striker being at that side of the game in a Rovers shirt. His first touch, hold up play and his ability to back into defenders and bring others into play is so poor it is untrue, and has never shown signs of improving, and that brings further pressure on us. He often over runs the ball or mis controls the ball too which hands possession back to our opponents and can lead to a seige on our penalty box when we are holding onto a lead, and often causes us to throw unnecessary points away. The 2 perfect examples would be the Luton and Coventry games in which we threw 2 nil leads away in both, not overlooking the fact that he was key in us getting that 2 nil lead in the latter. I am not saying that he is useless, I think when we are pressing high early in games his physicality and his running power can be very useful, he never will be prolific but he does chip in with a reasonable number of goals and he is useful at the front post from defensive corners but as an outlet, I think that he is piss poor.

Football being boring or not is totally subjective, tonight England got the result and had the performance. All I did was make a throwaway comment about what I (wrongly) perceived and predicted to be an overly cautious lineup within the international break which is always boring anyway, watching England thrash crap teams. Those 2 managers deserved to be sacked because of poor results, not "boring" football. And I have never said or implied that Southgate needs to be sacked because of boring football so your comparison is not a valid one anyway. Unsure why you seem keen to quote and question every post I make at the moment by the way. Hungary are crap too. England are comfortably better than both.

I never said or implied otherwise in the post you quoted, nor have I ever. I think me and you could beat Albania but it has been very good.

Southgate boring everyone further in the international break with 2 holding midfielders in front of a back 5 against Albania.

I very much doubt that those players "would be nothing" without Lampard.

That would be good news for us. Get him a bit of rest and in the country well ahead of the Bristol City game.

Dyche's tactics and lack of plan B i can only presume are a huge bug bear for Burnley fans who have seen their side promoted and become Premier League mainstays under him.

I'd be amazed if we made 4 signings in January. Seems like misguided optimism.

Chaddy, we don't need to repeatedly go over it, you and @islander200 quote me every time I put something even remotely related to transfer spend and reiterate your opinions on FFP. Can you both please stop constantly telling me what you believe and assume and just accept that I do not share your assumption that the lack of spend this season is solely down to FFP, there are I believe flaws about your assumptions which I have previously pointed out, but I am fed up of going round in circles about it. My view is simply that Venkys have turned off the taps as they have done previously more than once, and probably further instigated this time by the pandemic. Nobody knows for sure either way, so the point to which I will agree with or as you put it "accept" both of your opinions (not facts) on the matter will be when someone at the club, either Mowbray, Waggott or the owners come out and say implicitly that we haven't spent this season solely down to being on the brink of FFP regulations even after selling Armstrong and the training ground transfer. So please stop trying, you are both wasting your own time. I would agree with you though that we cannot put a halt to recruitment simply out of the uncertainty or even if it has been pre-arranged that this will be Mowbray's last season. (Which is a huge assumption but if true, would be bizarre as he should be sacked now if that is the case) I would further suggest that the signings of Pickering and Edun and the contract extensions to the likes of Wharton, Buckley, Dolan, Dack, Rankin Costello etc all beyond the end of this season prove that this is almost certainly not the reason to which recruitment has been put on hold. A new manager would need a semblance of a squad to build around, not just a total clean slate.

I meant let go. The idea that we arent signing permanent players beyond the managers contract because it is set in stone that he will leave then and there is a fear of burdening any new manager is a series of wild assumptions married together that also fly in the face of the numerous examples of things that have happened in the last year that do go beyond the end of this season. Venkys have turned the taps off, theyve done it before and there is no need for elaborate assumed theories to try and explain it all. I very much doubt that any decision has been made to be honest.