FoxyLeon

How many teams can you name in the Championship that have replaced 20 players in their squad over the Summer and been promoted? It ends badly far often than it ends well. The fact we're lauding the return of Albrighton, who can't get in the West Brom side, Choudhury, who has been at a bang average Watford side and Souttar's experience, at a poor Stoke side fighting relegation, tells you all about our mess.

Schmeichel 100%. Albrighton was let go about 4 years too late, a microcosm of why we're in this situation.

Most dominant performance in the UCL i've seen since against a major side since Bayern dismantled Barcelona 7-0 under Jupp Heynckes over two legs.

Really? The top managers play the same way every week. Fergie always went 442, Giggs, Scholes, Neville etc.... Klopp always goes 433 with 3 workers in midfield.... Guardiola always buys the best talent out there.... The idea that successful sides are so because they have tactical geniuses that make a significant alteration every game is just wrong. The reason all the above 3 were/are so succesful, as with Pearson here, was because they understood the importance of continuity, delegation and leadership. The only real 'Tactical master' who won tournaments based on making big tactical decisions game after game was Mourinho, with his European successes at Porto, Inter and Roma. Yet he's somehow labelled as a 'dinosaur'. Our turnaround doesn't require a tactician. It requires a leader.

Iversen, Thomas, Kristiansen, Souttar, KDH.

The Belgian contingent are an embarrassment.

Because as I keep trying to explain, the success came from the foundations Pearson put in place. Even after the recruitment policies we put in place were removed by Rodgers, the Medical team put in place were removed by Rodgers and the decision to remove all leadership from the Club by Rodgers, we still had a small number of players who had been directly recruited under that regime, or by regimes afterwards which were in the same mould. But since we lost Kasper and with Vardy being in decline, Morgan/Fuchs/King/James no longer around the Club, they're the last pillars of that era. The ones who embodied and understood why we were successful. They were perhaps the Nicky Butt/Phil Neville/John O'Shea etc, not the players with the most quality in the squad, but the ones who glue everything together. The irony about the 'Hubris' remark is that Maddison and Rodgers are media darlings, yet they're the perfect example of why we're where we are. Contrast to Pearson and Okazaki, and I know and all City fans know which the better coach/manager and player is.

That's why Bostock never made it, terrible attitude.

Amazing what having some physicality in the team can do with regards to preventing and creating chances.

If that was true, then why did we hire Congerton, when Rudkin was already undertaking that role? It's not true, and this Rudkin hate is getting out of hand. Rodgers was given the same backing/support as Pearson, meaning he was allowed to make adjustments to the Club as he saw fit. So he changed the medical staff that was excellent, to one that has given us nothing but problems. How do I know Rudkin isn't identifyng targets? There is no correlation of our recruitment between Ranieri, Puel and Rodgers, despite Rudkin supposedly heading up a head of recruitment as you're suggesting. The key signings of Lookman and Bertrand further show that Rodgers had full charge, as well as Castagne and others who were on Congerton's list at Celtic. Rodgers's assistant was one he worked with at Celtic. The head of recruitment that arrived was one he worked with at Celtic. His signings were players he had worked with before or were identified at Celtic. Even the doctor we brought in, no doubt on Rodgers's guidance, was in Scotland when Rodgers was. Ever since Vichai/Top owned the Club, they've given full responsibility to the Manager. Hence Pearson brought Walsh as Head of Recruitment. Rodgers's job, as with every manager under this regime, involved free reigns of the Club. If Rudkin was doing what you say, why on earth would we employ Congerton?

If you want to argue that Vichai's 'ruthlessness' is missing, then that's fine, but you then also have to argue that Top's foresight and willingness to give Pearson more time, kept our Premier League status and led us to the impossible of a domestic league title. My answer, although I despise the bloke, is not Rodgers. I'm going to say that actually our demise is a result of Pearson, Walsh and Shakespeare (Even Powell, Kev Phillips etc) not being employed by the Club. I don't buy that the 'ruthless' Vichai was some kind of genius with his decision making....He appointed Sven and Claudio Ranieri! The truth is that since Pearson left, our standards have declined and our lack of footballing experience at the Club has dwindled. I think actually under Puel we managed to get some of that back. Contrast to Rodgers, and Puel was superior in every aspect. He was beginning to put together a very exciting young side, which looked fit and well coached. Why Pearson excelled, was because he wasn't arrogant...That's right! Despite some fans who didn't like him, I'll point out one simple area which shows he was not the arrogant man some claimed....DELEGATION. Whether it be the Coaching side that he brought in Shakespeare/Powell/Phillips to help with, the Recruitment side that he brought Walsh in to run, or the Leadership in the dressing room that he was constantly bringing in the right players to help with Wes/Huth/Was/Cambiasso etc etc. Our demise is because Vichai and Top took over the running of the Club after Pearson left. I'd argue it's very similar to SAF and the Glazers at Man United. Despite record levels of spending, both by Top/Vichai and by the Glazers, they're simply poor decision makers in the Football world, and once the true captains of the ship in Pearson and SAF left, decline began. I guess you could also make a case that Whelan and Rudkin are our Ed Woodward.

Soumare has looked strong in recent weeks when allowed to play quickly. But since Maddison has come into the side he slows us down to a standstill and then we all moan at Soumare when he's pressed quickly. Leeds away highlighted this well, I thought Soumare was really good, always looking to play one touch....But you've got Maddison and Tielemans who can't play at a high pace because athletically they're awful, so slow us down all the time. Tielemans has been a dead loss since we signed him permanently. His average performances have been dreadful.

Oh sure, because we were flying high with Souttar and Rodgers. What a load of rubbish. The defence has nothing in front of them, nothing. The back 4 is not the cause of our defensive problems as I say time and time again.

We've been poor every 1st half under him, doesn't get his team right. How Daka doesn't get a start when he's been the most threatening forward under him is crazy.

Agreed. The fans lethargy for over 2 years is as much to blame.

Can't believe people thought the selection was strong. Zero energy, pace or aggression with Barnes/Maddison/Praet.

There's multiple ways to create chances. Okazaki would create more chances than Maddison or Tielemans, albeit very differently. Our main issue is that we never get the ball back until our opponents create a chance, because Maddison/Tielemans/Barnes just get walked past defensively. I'd like to see KDH play behind Vardy because he will join the press unlike the others.

We should desperately avoid anyone referred to as the 'Next Brendan Rodgers', the same way those wonderful street corner ladies down highfields should avoid the bloke named the 'Next Ted Bundy'.

Nah. We want Liverpool out of top 4 race and Newcastle guaranteed top 4 by time we play either. Away win for me.

He's right in what he says, but he's the opposite of Rodgers with regards to how the media treat him. Who can point out a job done by Pep, Klopp or Rodgers that was similar to what he did at Bolton? Or the teams he saved year after year after year? Imagine thinking you can only be a 'Great manager' by having success with the greatest player(s) of that generation. Allardyce's job a Bolton was better than Pep's achievements anywhere.

I don't buy this 'West Ham are safe' argument. 4 defeats, which is a possibility and they get relegated.

Unlike Maddison and Barnes he does join Vardy/Daka/KDH and now even Soumare, in the press. He and Daka should start against Fulham.

I think Tete has been crap, but when he played alongside Daka, Vardy and Iheanacho we actually had players willing to press. Bringing back Maddison and Barnes into the team after Wolves have retuned us to this side that gets overrun because we don't press cohesively. Iversen Castagne Faes Soyuncu Kristiansen Tielemans Soumare Tete KDH Daka Vardy It's the most cohesive team we have, as was showed against Wolves. Play Barnes and Maddison and we just get run over again and again. KDH will join the press with the front 3, in an Okazaki type role. Iheanacho is a big miss.

Don't see it. I can forego many of his flaws, especially under Rodgers when he was our only attacking outlet. But what I can't forgive is him not putting in the effort. I saw a lot of criticism for Iwobi from non match going fans on Twitter, but even with poor end product before the goal, he was everywhere defensively. Contrast to Barnes who left Thomas and the rest of the team out to dry the whole game. I've not been disgusted in an individual performance like I was with Barnes last night for a while. He let 34 year old Seamus Coleman go time and time again, and didn't help the team at all. If you can't get in the game going forward then you have to do your job defensively. No surprise that another poor defensive displays occurs with him being in the side.

I don't know why there's an expectation that turning the music off will improve the support, it's off for 90 minutes + every game and it's often a morgue. It would be even more embarrassing without it. It's the same with the argument with the clappers....We've not had them for months/years, where was the raucous atmosphere then? It's the same with away games really. No clappers, no control over the music, yet our following compared to many others is poor vocally.