LondonBristolian

I think it is a bit unfair to speculatively name players as we don’t know what goes on behind the scenes. I also think it may be a misnomer to pick out who is not playing and assume it must be them. It could as easily be that players we are having to rely on week in and week out are not showing the leadership needed from senior players. Like anyone I’ve got five or six names in my head I think it could be but we will learn in January or beyond if we are right or wrong. One thing I would say is Wells’ name seems to be coming up a bit but, whilst I do not think he suits how we play or we suit how he plays, I don’t feel his application has been a major issue when he has been selected.

I don't think it's an epiphany we need but a balanced side. The return of Massengo, Williams and Semenyo moves us towards that, although James' absence is a bit of a worry. I don't think we're about to suddenly become the best team in the division but I do think our best eleven is good enough to scrape enough points here and there to move us toward mid-table.

Thank Christ. If Kalas is out and Atkinson or Baker missing, we might need him in central defence...

I agree with all that but, nonetheless, there are way easier ways to make more money than a twenty year-plus long game in football. I think you are right that he is doing nothing for free and will come out in profit but, even so, the the flats, houses and land all feel like ways to make the business of owning a football club profitable rather than his ultimate motive for owning a football club at all...

I think this is a very underrated point. Bottom line is Lansdown's never invested in the club to make money so what he wants out of it must be something else. My guess is local kudos from developing sport in Bristol plus the enjoyment of doing something "fun" with the money he has made. If he gets as much criticism as kudos and the club isn't much fun to run at the moment, I'm sure there's a point where he would step away. Going back to @Kid in the Riot's opening post, I think he is right that the appetite is no longer there to take us further. I think from our point of view, it puts us in an interesting situation. There is no doubt that other owners - such as Tony Bloom or Matthew Benham - have achieved more than Lansdown has with clubs that started at similar or worse points. However there are also the examples of new owners running clubs into the ground. A sale would end the sense of stagnation and treading water around the club but there are two directions we could go from there. It reminds me of when we sacked Lee Johnson. Essentially we gave up a guarantee of mildly underachieving in the top half of the table. That might get us somewhere worse or might get us somewhere better and it is uncertain where the cards will ultimately fall.

Do we know how Baker's recovery is going and whether Atkison is fit? An Atkinson-Baker pairing isn't that much of a downgrade on Kalas and Atkinson in my view. But I think, if we are missing two of those three, that's where we start to look pretty vulnerable.

I'm certainly not mocking the thread title. The EFL sat in their hands for years whilst everyone knew Derby were spending recklessly. I'm glad this action has finally been taken but the thread title certainly made sense at the time and, as @supercidered says above, it's a real shame this came too late for Wycombe. And too late for the man actually responsible for the mess Derby are in to still be at the helm...

In fairness, it is now really hard to accuse the football league of being too lenient with Derby...

That was indeed an inept spelling of inept!

It's clearly a terrible decision but I'm not at all convinced that South Africa will succeed in their bid to get the game replayed. It's an appalling decision and there is precedent (in a game that also involved South Africa, Ghana and Senegal, albeit with a Ghanain referee and Senegal as the opponents - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/41182108) but proving that the referee made a corrupt decision rather than an in-ept one will be incredibly tough based on the video evidence alone.

Thing is though, much as we romanticise about football, it is like any job in some respects. Managers and coaches are doubtless well made but they will have bills and outgoings and no guarantee they will be working forever. It must be tough to move on after being sacked but ultimately anyone who doesn’t dust themselves down and start again when an opportunity arises risks being forgotten or football moving on without them.

For me the issue is also how we use Martin and Wells. I think it is fine picking Martin as long as you’ve got players in the team who will run beyond him and he can use his intelligence to create space for them. And I think it is fine to pick Wells if you have creative players around him who can get the ball to his feet in the box. But neither of them have had the players around them and system to give them the opportunity to do what they do best and both end up isolated and ineffective as a result. Both players are ultimately Championship players rather than top flight players due to limitations to their game. But both can be very effective Championship players if teams set up to utilise their strengths and negate their weaknesses. We seem to do the opposite.

This is exactly it. I don't think he's one of our "best" eleven players but I do think that, with a team that have really lacked pace and unpredictability, there is a strong argument for having someone with pace and unpredictability on the bench.

After eighteen months of lockdown, both the Euros in Germany and Olympics in France in 2024 are really appealing to me. That could be a great year. Defo wouldn't go to Qatar though. Tempted to boycott even watching it on tv.

I really like what I've seen of Janneh. He's possibly not our most technical player but he seems fast, direct, a bit unpredictable and appears to have the knack of coming away from a less than brilliant performance with a goal or two. Not sure how close he is to the team and there may be valid reasons for not picking him but I really think he could offer something - even if just as an option off the bench - that we've been missing in recent weeks.

I just find it weird you only focus on that. The premier league also allow poppies on kits, which is surely the more relevant example - especially today. To be clear, they should allow poppies, kneeling and away kits at home.

I think the context is important too. Spending £8 million on a defender to make a statement of intent towards promotion makes no sense at all when a) we flogged his defensive partner at almost the last minute and could not get a replacement in b) we flogged a key midfielder at the even more last minute and signed two very different midfielders and then had no balance in the team c) we spent the summer arseing around failing to sign a striker and then scrambled at the absolute last second for someone with an unlucky injury record who got an unlucky injury. d) we flogged our key midfielder in the January transfer window and failed to replace him with a loan from Hull I get some of the above could not be foreseen. There was guarantee Nketiah was coming and there was always a risk we might get offers for Webster and Brownhill but nonetheless it is really hard to justify signing a defender for £8 million as part of a sustained bid for promotion if every other action the club took contradicted the idea it was a sustained bid for promotion

I don't think Kalas is any sense the problem. But I do think, if you compare Kalas & Atkinson as a pairing to Baker & Atkinson as a pairing, the difference in quality between the two partnerships isn't anywhere near as great as what I suspect the difference in combined wages for the pairing is. For me, it's not that I want to lose Kalas or think the signing was a terrible mistake but - given we are now feeling the after-effects of a pandemic and that finances will likely be hit for some time - it is really hard to justify a case to extend his contract on the same or higher wages, even if the alternative was losing our record signing for nothing.

I’m wondering about Kalas. Very good defender but - partnership with Webster aside - he has rarely been part of a solid defensive unit. I think he is a good player but imagine he is on a hefty wage and am open minded as to whether he is value for money on that.

Congratulations on your successful attempt to clumsily insert a complaint about an utterly unrelated subject into this thread. Please accept your Golden Shoehorn.

I for one am relieved that, for once, the rules have triumphed over common sense...

I think Gerrard could do well but it is a gamble to replace Smith with him and see it as an upgrade. Rodgers was already an ex-Liverpool manager when he went to Celtic so Leicester were taking less of a gamble. Ultimately this will be the making or breaking of Gerrard. If he does well, he might well be destined to get the Liverpool job and his crack at the top. If results don't work out, he might well end up in a similar place to Lampard, getting linked to but not getting middling Premier League jobs...

I think it must be that. Eastleigh are in the same division as Grimsby so presumably so the same rules of recall would apply to Towler and I struggle to see why we would recall Low ahead of Towler in terms of first team cover.

No idea who will be fit but, if everyone was, I think my first choice XI would be GK Bentley RB Tanner RCB Kalas LCB Atkinson LB Pring RCM Williams CM James LCM Massengo RF Weimann CF Martin LF Semenyo I’d play Weimann and Semenyo quite narrow so it would allow Martin to drop deep to get the ball with players running on ahead of him. I’d also rotate the formation enough that Weimann and Martin were rested enough to not be constantly knackered.

I had high hopes for Geifer and Lucic. They were not fulfilled. Thanks @Fordy62 for a trip down memory lane. I'll hold those memories closer to me that any of the three keepers could hold a football...