Supersonic Robin

Is there a meltdown? Or are fans just expressing their concerns and frustrations about us looking poor against a team no higher than us in the table (again)? That's true, but in fairness it depends where you are in the season. Big difference between prioritising performances over results in the middle of the season, and prioritising performances at the end of the season with nothing to play for.

Assuming we plan to continue with the 3-4-2-1, this is how I currently see the squad for next season. Players that I've omitted are either those who I feel don't really have a role to play in the system (e.g. Bell), those who are out of contract and looking unlikely to be extended (e.g. Naismith), or those who I don't think are ready to be relied upon as a regular starter (e.g. Murphy). I'm wanting 2 players we can rely upon per position. A "?" essentially means "We're lacking someone to fill this role". IMO, there are 2 big holes to fill in the starting 11: An attacking/creative midfielder A new striker, assuming Conway will leave I'd like to see us spend the vast majority of our budget for the summer on getting these 2 signings right. Outside of that, I think there are a number of positions in which we need to add depth (i.e. a "second choice"). I'm happy for us to be shrewd with this, relying on young players we already have at the club (if they're ready), players who are out of contract, or lower league players who we feel can make a step up. Those positions are: Another attacking midfielder (is Stokes/Benarous ready to fill this role?) A RWB A LWB A CB A GK Obviously, this assumes no one (bar Conway) in the above squad is sold. Naturally, if other players were to be sold then they would need replacing too.

Dickie has been a long way ahead of O'Leary this season. O'Leary has improved as of late and is currently performing well, but I think that's leading to some revisionist thinking about his less impressive performances earlier in the season.

True, though by the same logic Sunderland probably could have scored about 4. On balance of chances, I don't think we can feel hard done by today.

Decent result, but poor performance. We're fortunate not to have lost that one.

It's a bit misleading to sum up that 1st half using only the last 5 minutes of it

This again

Double save from O'Leary. Granted, 2 saves he'd expect to make. MOL far busier than I'd like so far

A very simple save, but yes, he's been busier than I'd like so far

Slightly harsh. He put the ball into a decent area with no easy pass availabe. Just because something doesn't come off, it doesn't mean it's awful.

I'm in Frankfurt with no issues.

As nice as that sounds, there is something slightly tinpot about us rallying to enjoy the fact that, errr......we no longer have to worry about the pressure of achieving anything

As with most population estimates, it depends which source you look at. My understanding is that when you include the surrounding urban area, Liverpool is quite a bit bigger.

Not saying I specifically like this kit - it looks badly made. But the general pinstripe theme is a good one IMO. Doncaster play in red and white hoops, but in fairness not many others do in the UK. That's not really the point though, the point is that the pinstripes are relatively unique to us.

I quite like the pinstripes. Given how many teams play in red shirts (or red shirts with thick white stripes), it's nice to have something that differentiates us a little bit. It feels like quite a Bristol City thing for me. Same goes for the purple and lime away kit.

It's a clear trend across almost every football league in the world that the biggest teams are from the biggest cities. Granted, I agree it would be more accurate to say that *technically* it gives you the potential to be big, but nevertheless, the biggest and most successful teams are almost exclusively from the biggest cities. Firstly: Re your point on the size of different cities in the UK, this is my source - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_primary_urban_areas_in_England_by_population In fairness, you can probably find 20 different answers to which cities are the biggest depending on how exactly the size of the city is being measured and where you're drawing your boundaries. I'm not bothering to include Glasgow since they don't play in the English football league system, but Glasgow serves as an example of this being true for Scotland. Secondly: Of course, I'm referring to the most dominant team in each of these cities, since they're the main beneficiary of that city's size. For clubs who aren't the biggest team in their city, you'd need to analyse it a bit differently. In the case of these clubs, an assessment of their "geographical dominance" might be a suitable way to amend the point being made. Fortunately, we're not a club who have to worry about not being the biggest team in our city As noted, you'd be right to suggest that "potential to be big" would be a slightly more accurate statement. I think this is fairly obvious though - I'm not suggesting that I could move to London and start a Sunday League team who would suddenly become the biggest team in the country, simply because I happened to be stood in Westminster when I founded them

I always find that argument flawed in these discussions....... Person 1: Why have WBA achieved more than us? Person 2: Becuase they're a bigger club. Person 1: But how/why are they a bigger club? Person 2: Because they've achieved more than us.

In the long term, the biggest off-field metric is the size of the city the club is based in. If you look throughout any football league system in the world, there's a strong trend that the biggest/best teams are those based in the biggest cities. For instance, in the UK, the 4 biggest cities are responsible for 8 of the 10 biggest teams in the country: London (Arsenal, Tottenham, Chelsea) Manchester (Man U, Man C) Liverpool (Liverpool, Everton) Birmingham (Aston VIlla)

Really? Is there evidence to support this view? Which numbers are you referring to - is it simply save percentage? Agree MOL has improved in recent times and that he's fine for where we are, but to say he's one of the best goalkeepers in the league feels like a bit of a stretch.

Agreed. Mehmeti is primarily in the team to provide threat, creativity, and goal contributions. He's been doing exactly that recently. Naturally, performing such a role means he's also liable to giving the ball away more than other players. If he 'got it right' every time then he'd be playing for Real Madrid. I think Mehmeti is looking really promising in that '2' behind the striker at the moment.

Good performance (bar first 30 mins) and a good result. IMO, a more meaningful win than the victory over Leicester. Our form against bottom half sides has been awful under Manning - these are the games in which we need to see big improvements. Much better today in fairness.

Think Conway is fine, and has received quite a bit of unfair criticism recently. Biggest issue with Conway in recent times has simply been our inability to get the ball to him and to create chances for him.

Great ball from James

Especially strange given that this combination of kits has both teams playing in green shorts. Somehow, our yellow and green kit looks even more disgusting today.

Agreed, when I look at the 3-4-2-1 (which seems to be Manning's preference when all are fit), I don't see any role for Bell at all. I'd suggest the most appropriate role for him might be as a RWB, but it still feels like a square peg in a round hole. I have similar views on Cornick - I don't see where he fits into that system either. He could potentially do a job in one of the attacking midfield roles, but isn't really the style of player you'd want in there.