LondonBristolian

I find Come Fly With ME particularly weird in that it was 2010 it came out and, even by the time of Fantasy Football in the 1990s, it was widely accepted that blacking up was no longer acceptable. There was just somehow become this idea that, if you said you were an alternative comedian, overt racism was okay - as long as you said you were being ironic when you were doing it.

I saw Wilko Johnson at Glastonbury in 2015 or 2016. He was utterly brilliant. RIP.

Yeah - I would have been fine with us taking Pack if King had decided to not sign (or if we had decided not to make an offer) but it was definitely an either/or for me.

My guess is that the argument would be that publicly stating that the owners of the club don't care about the club and are in it for the money brings the reputation of the club into disrepute. There also might be clauses within his contract related to promoting and marketing the club commercially which they would argue would be broken if he started trashing the club. I've not seen his contract but I can certainly see why - whether you agree with his comments or not - United would see it as a breach of contract.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/63601765 Feel he may be on a bit of a hiding to nothing. Nathan Jones probably got the absolute maximum out of their players and resources and even a good manager will struggle to replicate his work. Plus the Watford connection possibly isn't going to go down well...

As far as I understand it, It depends if he has broken FA rules or FIFA rules. I imagine - unless what he has allegedly done is an obscure technicality - a ban would be upheld globally. In terms of whether he had his contract terminated, that would be at Brentford’s discretion and would likely come down to the length of the ban vs the length of time on his contract.

We released him. The reason why isn't entirely clear. https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/newcastle-united-star-rolando-aarons-7738632

Real pity. Hope they are there and he is in the frame for them come 2026.

I don't know exactly whose it idea it was at Man City that made Man Utd think Ronaldo was about to go there at the beginning of last season but, in hindsight, whoever it was an evil genius...

Overall, I think Bentley is a better goalkeeper. But he wasn't in form when he got dropped and I don't think any manager would command on a rule that everyone gets picked on merit except one player who gets picked irrespective of how he plays. I wouldn't be surprised if Bentley got back in before the end of the season but I don't think there's anything wrong or embarrassing about that. So far, Bentley has lost the shirt because he was out of form and O'Leary has kept the shirt because he has played well since he came in. Regardless of who is "better", O'Leary has the shirt because he is putting better performances in at the moment. To be honest, that's how I feel team selections should work.

I for one am relieved we finally have a thread about whether Pearson is the right manager.

It's okay this time. Harry Maguire will be in the squad.

I think the key thing with this is - whilst I don't think we should read anything into it in terms of Pearson's position - it is a move towards continuity in tactics, strategy and recruitment at all levels, even in the case of a change in manager. I think that is a really important thing as we need to move away from getting a new manager in, tearing everything up from scratch and being perpetually in transition.

True of many of our centre-backs, though. To my mind, the main argument for Tomori is that - with the exception of Walker (who is primarily a full-back and also recovering from injury - most of our centre-back options lack pace. In that sense, Tomori presents a different tactical option in the squad whereas I feel Maguire is both out of form and a relatively similar defender to some of our other defenders who have a stronger argument based on form.

If it was my picks: Goalkeepers: Pickford, Pope, Ramsdale Defenders: Tripper, Walker, Shaw, Sessegnon, Stones, Dier, Tomori, White, Coady, Gomez Midfield Bellingham, Rice, Phillips, Loftus-Cheek, Mount, Forwards Kane, Wilson, Rashford, Sterling, Foden, Saka, Maddison, Grealish

I imagine it might not be representative. Surely logic dictates that people who want a change of manager are more likely to respond?

I think "who would people want?" focuses on the wrong question. I think the key question is "what do we want a new manager to do?" I'd hope the answer would be to continue to develop and support young talent, to develop and get the best out of our existing players rather than tear the squad up from scratch and to build upon the playing style which we've embedded from the first team to the youth team rather than ripping everything up and starting again, plus working within the financial constraints of the club. Once the board know what they want from a manager, they can then work out if Pearson best meets the criteria or whether they need to make a change and get someone else in. But picking a manager from a list and hoping he fits in at the club without considering the actual job we need them to do is a strategy that deserves to fail.

I agree one game will ultimately be the tipping point but that usually happens organically and I find it ridiculous to allocate a game as the tipping point in advance. If you have decided you want to sack the manager if he does not win the next game, then that suggests the tipping point has already happened and you have essentially decided you want to sack the manager. Throwing in “ah, but I won’t do it if he wins the game” just suggests to me the decision maker is weak and lacks courage in their own decision.

I am not happy about tonight but I always find the whole “one game to turn it around” concept utterly ridiculous. Either the board* have confidence in the manager or they don’t. If they do then the manager should stay. If they don’t, the manager should go. But I don’t really buy into the idea of a board that “don’t have confidence in the manager but suddenly will if he wins the next game”, especially when there is then a prolonged wait for our next fixture. I’m not calling for Pearson’s head but, if a board are thinking the manager should go, then he should go and they shouldn’t be arbitrarily changing their minds based off one fixture. I absolutely understand why a horrific defeat might hasten a decision to sack a manager who is already struggling but any board that is planning to sack a manager but arbitrarily sets a single game as a test of that decision is weak and spineless and deserves everything it gets. *I realise this whole “decide after Saturday’s result” nonsense is the view of the OP and not the board but, as the board would make any decision, I’m referring to them as the decision makers.

That looks like when you let a six year old score in a game of FIFA…

Interesting selection conundrum tonight. It's a midweek game in a run of 4 midweek games in 5 weeks but with only one more game to go until an extended break. It's a winnable fixture that could get us into the latter states of the tournament but it's also a chance to use squad players. At the same time, our squad is heavily depleted. There's a pretty much equal case for putting out the strongest line-up possible or rotating the squad so it'll be interesting to see what team Pearson sends out.

In fairness, Adkins got them two promotions and wasn't doing atrociously for a newly promoted side when Saints sacked him. It's not the worst possible territory for them to stray into. Not convinced on Jones but we'll see.

He's taking his chance for sure. He needs to keep it up but, assuming Bentley is not around next season, I imagine it would reduce a significant headache for the management and recruitment teams if they feel they can trust O'Leary and Bajic as our two goalkeepers with one of the youngsters in reserve...

I feel something like this as a balance between giving squad/young players a start and putting out a team that could win... -------------------------------Bajic --------------Vyner-----------Klose-----------Low Sykes------------------------------------------------------Pring ----------------Kadji--------------------------James -----------------------------Weimann ---------------Semenyo-----------------------Martin

It’s an interesting one. He’s about 27 so he needs to be ready for that step up soon if he is ever going to take it. But he is obviously untested. I strongly doubt he will go but virtually all England’s first choice central defenders are unfit, out of form, out of the team or a combination of all three. But very few replacements have been tried. Webster won’t go, and I don’t think I think he should go, but I suspect I will rate some of those that do go far less than I rate Webster.