Letter to Craig

[Thracian]

Well, we played the unchanged team and got beaten. Another 1-0 mugging. Another goalless game at home.

Another tactical humiliation. Are you willing to listen yet?

You may not believe this but I actually quite like 4-4-2. Sadly it only works when you play two wingers. You named two "wingers" but they were a disguise cos they didn't play as wingers. They worked on a pivot and operated fundamentally as midfield players.

Not once, even in a first half we dominated, did our "wingers" take on defenders, get around the back and put in telling crosses.

If wingers don't take men on and therefore force the central defenders to move out of position there is no point in playing them.

Two wingers such at this at Leicester is impossible (without Goal-Smith) because we don't have such people. Hammill, as I've said many times is not strong enough or fast enough. Sylla just doesn't have the inclination to go by people generally.

With me so far?.

Sadly too, our wingers are not good enough as alternative midfield players. Hammill quite often picks the right passes, tries to keep the ball low but rarely hits them with enough pace. Sylla, well I'll come to him later.

The point is whether you like 4-4-2 or not the system has to fit the players available.

So, let's start at the back.

Nils played left back and was, again, a disaster. In the first half he was positionally good, made some excellent interceptions but he flattered to deceive. On one occasion (just as at Watford) he was completely skinned and the resulting cross could easily have cost us a goal.

Furthermore his distribution was always a second or so too slow because he had to turn onto his right foot...and infield thus cramping play. A final problem was that most of his forward passes were floated in the air. Hard to control and easy for defenders to counter. No good.

In the second half he was awful. Skinned once as a warning and then again for the goal. Conclusion (as I told you so many times my fingers ached) he is not a left back. Sadly after tonights evidence I wouldn't play him at centre-back either. He is easily beaten if a fast forward runs at him and turns him. It is a fatal weakness.

McCarthy has a bit of the City spirit about him and with Dublin looked generally okay tonight. Perfectly adequate.

Stearman wasn't at his best (seemed to misjudge headers in the floodlights) but, again, okay and was usually fast enough and combative enough to cover his errors. Maybury could play (it matters not to the system) but the only change that HAS to be made is at left back where Sheehan MUST to come in because otherwise we simply give ourselves an unnecessary handicap.

If Hammill is left out (which he should be) we need width on the left, we need passing ability there too but there is the vital third point... We NEED Sheehan as a dead ball specialist. We could easily have won the game in the first half. We had three close-to-goal free kicks which were taken by various players and all from positions which Sheehan would have relished.

Result: one was blasted against a nearby defender and two were lifted far too high and well over the target. All utterly wasted because the people who took them should never be entrusted with free kicks.

It was three good chances squandered - and none on target. Potentially Sheehan had the ability to score from all of em.

Next midfield. Having Hughes and Kisnorbo in midfield with two supplementaries (Sylla and Hammill) just wasn't sufficient in the second half last night. We were unable to apply our full press for long enough (tiredness from Saturday?) and were overwhelmed by the tactical decision of Cotterill to swamp midfield and pass.

We needed another specialist midfielder. Tiatto was the man I wanted and what happened tonight suggested I was right. It was only after he came on (and other things were changed) that we rained attacks on Burnley during the closing stages.

But we don't want him at left back (for lots of reasons I won't explain). He is safer and more effective as a DISCIPLINED left midfielder...if he plays fairly and if he is willing to help Sheehan provide width and penetration.

That gives us a middle three.

Finally comes the front three...and there are options.

First though it is a cardinal sin to waste Hume's talents and use him for 25 minutes or so. This guy is talented, energetic, skillful, threatening and a good team player. Furthermore he can play wide or in the centre. He needs to be in the team.

With Hammill out some width would come from Sheehan/Tiatto on the left. As yet there is no rightside width.

But Sylla DID last the pace tonight and he did make some penetration along with Hume when the two were in tandem.

So the options are there. You CAN play Sylla right midfield and two up front. You could also play the three main strikers and leave Hume to make the rightside width. Or you can play Sylla plus two up front.

I am not altogether sure it would matter which option you choose but my initial preference would be to have Kisnorbo, Hughes and Tiatto in midfield; Hume in front of them and Hammond (or Chambers) and MDV up front. Sylla would be a tactical option from the bench.

This would have Hume providing the rightside width but would leave us with three strikers on the field.

This, I think is important because our strikers are not potent enough in pairs.

So there you are: 4-3-3 with Hume in the hole and more potential width than ever you were getting from two phantom wingers. Just I suggested weeks ago

This team would have little chance of defeat because it would hardly ever concede more than a goal and having three strikers would virtually guarantee at least one goal and therefore one point.

Once Goal-Smith is back I'd play Hume in midfield ahead of two from Kisnorbo/Hughes/Tiatto and Goal-Smith in a free-role up front with Hammond/MDV.

I'm sorry to have been so long winded about this but we need to get our team right BEFORE we start considering the tactics.

And there are lessons galore to be learned in that department.

Saturday's team:

Douglas;

Stearman or Maybury, McCarthy, Dion, Sheehan;

Kisnorbo, Hughes, Tiatto;

Hume;

Hammond/or Chambers, MDV

Subs: Sylla, Joey, Gerrbrand, Williams, Hammond or Chambers (cos I think he's allowed).

Why Chambers? He may be young but he would have taken a couple of those chances tonight - especially the first half one that fell to Hammond when he had only the keeper to beat. Meat and drink that to Chambers. He is the most natural striker at the club.

Please have the good grace to listen because another defeat to no goals for us would not go down well Sunday.

[Hitesh]

send it!

[Jimmy]

thrac why do you call him "goal-smith"

[Jonbluefox9]

Just a hint, we're not playing on Saturday but on Sunday.

I'm glad someone agrees with me regarding Nils-Eric Johansson. He is not actually as solid as people say imo. He's not a rock he's actually a bit of a jelly.

[Thracian]

Just a hint, we're not playing on Saturday but on Sunday.

I'm glad someone agrees with me regarding Nils-Eric Johansson. He is not actually as solid as people say imo. He's not a rock he's actually a bit of a jelly.

Thanks.

[Thracian]

thrac why do you call him "goal-smith"

You'll see. Play on the word goldsmith and that's what I think he is. 24 carat pure gold. We had the ball in the net three times the only half he's played for the club. That doesn't happen often. Hence Goal-Smith.

[Thracian]

send it!

I don't live near the ground but anyone is welcome to get this to him with my compliments.

[Gené and Tonic]

Are you going to send it? Remember to proof read

And it might be better to refer to Smith as Smith. Also, tell him that we should sign him on till the rest of the season.

[Ric Flair]

Well, we played the unchanged team and got beaten. Another 1-0 mugging. Another goalless game at home.

Another tactical humiliation. Are you willing to listen yet?

You may not believe this but I actually quite like 4-4-2. Sadly it only works when you play two wingers. You named two "wingers" but they were a disguise cos they didn't play as wingers. They worked on a pivot and operated fundamentally as midfield players.

Not once, even in a first half we dominated, did our "wingers" take on defenders, get around the back and put in telling crosses.

If wingers don't take men on and therefore force the central defenders to move out of position there is no point in playing them.

Two wingers such at this at Leicester is impossible (without Goal-Smith) because we don't have such people. Hammill, as I've said many times is not strong enough or fast enough. Sylla just doesn't have the inclination to go by people generally.

With me so far?.

Sadly too, our wingers are not good enough as alternative midfield players. Hammill quite often picks the right passes, tries to keep the ball low but rarely hits them with enough pace. Sylla, well I'll come to him later.

The point is whether you like 4-4-2 or not the system has to fit the players available.

So, let's start at the back.

Nils played left back and was, again, a disaster. In the first half he was positionally good, made some excellent interceptions but he flattered to deceive. On one occasion (just as at Watford) he was completely skinned and the resulting cross could easily have cost us a goal.

Furthermore his distribution was always a second or so too slow because he had to turn onto his right foot...and infield thus cramping play. A final problem was that most of his forward passes were floated in the air. Hard to control and easy for defenders to counter. No good.

In the second half he was awful. Skinned once as a warning and then again for the goal. Conclusion (as I told you so many times my fingers ached) he is not a left back. Sadly after tonights evidence I wouldn't play him at centre-back either. He is easily beaten if a fast forward runs at him and turns him. It is a fatal weakness.

McCarthy has a bit of the City spirit about him and with Dublin looked generally okay tonight. Perfectly adequate.

Stearman wasn't at his best (seemed to misjudge headers in the floodlights) but, again, okay and was usually fast enough and combative enough to cover his errors. Maybury could play (it matters not to the system) but the only change that HAS to be made is at left back where Sheehan MUST to come in because otherwise we simply give ourselves an unnecessary handicap.

If Hammill is left out (which he should be) we need width on the left, we need passing ability there too but there is the vital third point... We NEED Sheehan as a dead ball specialist. We could easily have won the game in the first half. We had three close-to-goal free kicks which were taken by various players and all from positions which Sheehan would have relished.

Result: one was blasted against a nearby defender and two were lifted far too high and well over the target. All utterly wasted because the people who took them should never be entrusted with free kicks.

It was three good chances squandered - and none on target. Potentially Sheehan had the ability to score from all of em.

Next midfield. Having Hughes and Kisnorbo in midfield with two supplementaries (Sylla and Hammill) just wasn't sufficient in the second half last night. We were unable to apply our full press for long enough (tiredness from Saturday?) and were overwhelmed by the tactical decision of Cotterill to swamp midfield and pass.

We needed another specialist midfielder. Tiatto was the man I wanted and what happened tonight suggested I was right. It was only after he came on (and other things were changed) that we rained attacks on Burnley during the closing stages.

But we don't want him at left back (for lots of reasons I won't explain). He is safer and more effective as a DISCIPLINED left midfielder...if he plays fairly and if he is willing to help Sheehan provide width and penetration.

That gives us a middle three.

Finally comes the front three...and there are options.

First though it is a cardinal sin to waste Hume's talents and use him for 25 minutes or so. This guy is talented, energetic, skillful, threatening and a good team player. Furthermore he can play wide or in the centre. He needs to be in the team.

With Hammill out some width would come from Sheehan/Tiatto on the left. As yet there is no rightside width.

But Sylla DID last the pace tonight and he did make some penetration along with Hume when the two were in tandem.

So the options are there. You CAN play Sylla right midfield and two up front. You could also play the three main strikers and leave Hume to make the rightside width. Or you can play Sylla plus two up front.

I am not altogether sure it would matter which option you choose but my initial preference would be to have Kisnorbo, Hughes and Tiatto in midfield; Hume in front of them and Hammond (or Chambers) and MDV up front. Sylla would be a tactical option from the bench.

This would have Hume providing the rightside width but would leave us with three strikers on the field.

This, I think is important because our strikers are not potent enough in pairs.

So there you are: 4-3-3 with Hume in the hole and more potential width than ever you were getting from two phantom wingers. Just I suggested weeks ago

This team would have little chance of defeat because it would hardly ever concede more than a goal and having three strikers would virtually guarantee at least one goal and therefore one point.

Once Goal-Smith is back I'd play Hume in midfield ahead of two from Kisnorbo/Hughes/Tiatto and Goal-Smith in a free-role up front with Hammond/MDV.

I'm sorry to have been so long winded about this but we need to get our team right BEFORE we start considering the tactics.

And there are lessons galore to be learned in that department.

Saturday's team:

Douglas;

Stearman or Maybury, McCarthy, Dion, Sheehan;

Kisnorbo, Hughes, Tiatto;

Hume;

Hammond/or Chambers, MDV

Subs: Sylla, Joey, Gerrbrand, Williams, Hammond or Chambers (cos I think he's allowed).

Why Chambers? He may be young but he would have taken a couple of those chances tonight - especially the first half one that fell to Hammond when he had only the keeper to beat. Meat and drink that to Chambers. He is the most natural striker at the club.

Please have the good grace to listen because another defeat to no goals for us would not go down well Sunday.

Another cracking post Thracian, please get that sent in to Levein, title it for the boss and the address is on the website, trust me he'll enjoy it.

I said at the time that I wasn't impressed with the team that was picked at Watford, it lacked creativity and fluency but when you win a game these fundamentals get covered up. Levein has got to start picking our best players and play them in their best position. The problem is we have quite a small squad and still Levein has trouble picking his best side from it, imagine if we had 25 players to pick from it would be horrendous.

Chambers can't play in the league until he's 16, Macca confirmed that who is the same age and obviously is aware of this as he's an up and coming footballer. But if we could play him i'd be joining the bandwagon to get him in as de Vries and Elvis were disgraceful last night, Hume is talented but Levein isn't using him correctly.

Smudger will carry this team but without him we are in serious trouble, Hughes has looked even poorer in the centre and that worries me. Kisnorbo was back to his poor self and other than Sylla and McCarthy everyone else was pretty crap. It's time for Gerrbrand in the centre of defence alongside Paddy with Sheehan and Stearman/Maybury at full back. That is a solid platform at the back with pace and players playing in their correct positions.

Midfield is anyone's guess they are so inconsistent it's untrue but if our defence and attack can be solid the midfield can have their ****in off days. Wesolowski will add us the steel we need on a regular basis when he comes back, I am firmly confident of this. I would be tempted to try and steel Liam Miller off Man United on loan for a month or so, he's not getting a sniff at United and unless he's injured i'm sure we could get him. Hughes and Williams should be summonsed to Levein's office and they should be torn to shreds and built back up exactly how Levein wants them. Everyone keeps banging on about how good Stephen Hughes is but to be honest he's been absolutely shocking this season other than a nice 60 minutes against Sheffield Wednesday. I would lay the law down with thse two as they are both talented and are crucial to our team, they need to play with conviction in their eyes and passion for this club.

Elvis Hammond and Mark de Vries should be put in a cage together for a week and see if that can make them bond any better, they were awful last night individually and as a partnership. They never looked like hitting the target, infact they only ever do about once every 3 or 4 games. I think it's time Louis Dodds was given a chance perhaps from off the bench if Chambers is unavailable until he's 16. de Vries or Elvis has got to be binned and the former would be my choice as he is too inconsistent.

My formation against the scum on sunday would be the same formation that Chelsea use and I definately think this could work well especially when Smudger gets back.

Douglas

Maybury

McCarthy

Gerrbrand

Sheehan

Sylla

Gudjonsson

Hughes

Elvis

Dodds

Hume

Subs: MDV, Nissa, Stearman, Tiatto, Williams/Kisnorbo

I would completely drop Dublin from the 16, he might pull the wool over the commentators eyes but his lack of pace has got us in to too much trouble and means we defend too deep when the pressures on. Gerrbrand can play the ball out of defence even under the utmost of pressure and has pace to enable us to play further up the park. If the 3 strikers aren't working then Dodds could come off for Tiatto and if Sylla isn't pulling his weight then MDV could come on and Elvis could move out to the right wing where I think he's dangerous.

[lenny06]

I think people are getting a little too carried away with Smith, ok he was awesome againist Derby but he wasn't on for very long was he!

He soon could get stuck in a rut whilst playing with our team and who could blame him.... And he's on loan so he doesn't really contribute to the long term future of the club.

[Gené and Tonic]

Ric, agree with everything you said there, apart from the p[art about Sylla playing well. It might be a good idea to send that in along with Thracians post. Both make excellent points.

[Ric Flair]

I think people are getting a little too carried away with Smith, ok he was awesome againist Derby but he wasn't on for very long was he!

He soon could get stuck in a rut whilst playing with our team and who could blame him.... And he's on loan so he doesn't really contribute to the long term future of the club.

Trust me son, i'll bet everything I won that Smudger tears this league apart when he plays for us. He'll be the best player on the park in almost every game he plays. Read Wenger's comments about him, he's mustard. Did you go to Derby? It was the best 45 minutes i've seen a player put in since Collymore.

[Ric Flair]

Ric, agree with everything you said there, apart from the p[art about Sylla playing well. It might be a good idea to send that in along with Thracians post. Both make excellent points.

I thought Momo was excellent for the first 45 minutes, well he was compared to the previous performances he's put in.

[lenny06]

Trust me son, i'll bet everything I won that Smudger tears this league apart when he plays for us. He'll be the best player on the park in almost every game he plays. Read Wenger's comments about him, he's mustard. Did you go to Derby? It was the best 45 minutes i've seen a player put in since Collymore.

I do like what your saying Ric but he's still a kid, once the other teams in this physical division get wind of what he's about they'll kick him all over the park. And I don't think its too healthy to rest all our hopes on a loan signing.

The lad obviously has great ability and don't think anyone will doubt that and I really do hope your right mate.

[Ric Flair]

I do like what your saying Ric but he's still a kid, once the other teams in this physical division get wind of what he's about they'll kick him all over the park. And I don't think its too healthy to rest all our hopes on a loan signing.

The lad obviously has great ability and don't think anyone will doubt that and I really do hope your right mate.

I think your underestimating Smudger's ability, defenders struggle to get near him. I have managed to get highlights of some of his Carling Cup games for Arsenal and he was exactly the same in those games, nothing fazes him. Even if they kick him, he'll get back up and shit in their pocket.

I guarantee that when he plays we'll be a better team and when he goes back to Arsenal we'll be back in the shit again unless he can teach the other players to play. I'm only pinning my hopes on him because I know how good he is.

[Collymore]

Well, we played the unchanged team and got beaten. Another 1-0 mugging. Another goalless game at home.

Another tactical humiliation. Are you willing to listen yet?

You may not believe this but I actually quite like 4-4-2. Sadly it only works when you play two wingers. You named two "wingers" but they were a disguise cos they didn't play as wingers. They worked on a pivot and operated fundamentally as midfield players.

Not once, even in a first half we dominated, did our "wingers" take on defenders, get around the back and put in telling crosses.

If wingers don't take men on and therefore force the central defenders to move out of position there is no point in playing them.

Two wingers such at this at Leicester is impossible (without Goal-Smith) because we don't have such people. Hammill, as I've said many times is not strong enough or fast enough. Sylla just doesn't have the inclination to go by people generally.

With me so far?.

Sadly too, our wingers are not good enough as alternative midfield players. Hammill quite often picks the right passes, tries to keep the ball low but rarely hits them with enough pace. Sylla, well I'll come to him later.

The point is whether you like 4-4-2 or not the system has to fit the players available.

So, let's start at the back.

Nils played left back and was, again, a disaster. In the first half he was positionally good, made some excellent interceptions but he flattered to deceive. On one occasion (just as at Watford) he was completely skinned and the resulting cross could easily have cost us a goal.

Furthermore his distribution was always a second or so too slow because he had to turn onto his right foot...and infield thus cramping play. A final problem was that most of his forward passes were floated in the air. Hard to control and easy for defenders to counter. No good.

In the second half he was awful. Skinned once as a warning and then again for the goal. Conclusion (as I told you so many times my fingers ached) he is not a left back. Sadly after tonights evidence I wouldn't play him at centre-back either. He is easily beaten if a fast forward runs at him and turns him. It is a fatal weakness.

McCarthy has a bit of the City spirit about him and with Dublin looked generally okay tonight. Perfectly adequate.

Stearman wasn't at his best (seemed to misjudge headers in the floodlights) but, again, okay and was usually fast enough and combative enough to cover his errors. Maybury could play (it matters not to the system) but the only change that HAS to be made is at left back where Sheehan MUST to come in because otherwise we simply give ourselves an unnecessary handicap.

If Hammill is left out (which he should be) we need width on the left, we need passing ability there too but there is the vital third point... We NEED Sheehan as a dead ball specialist. We could easily have won the game in the first half. We had three close-to-goal free kicks which were taken by various players and all from positions which Sheehan would have relished.

Result: one was blasted against a nearby defender and two were lifted far too high and well over the target. All utterly wasted because the people who took them should never be entrusted with free kicks.

It was three good chances squandered - and none on target. Potentially Sheehan had the ability to score from all of em.

Next midfield. Having Hughes and Kisnorbo in midfield with two supplementaries (Sylla and Hammill) just wasn't sufficient in the second half last night. We were unable to apply our full press for long enough (tiredness from Saturday?) and were overwhelmed by the tactical decision of Cotterill to swamp midfield and pass.

We needed another specialist midfielder. Tiatto was the man I wanted and what happened tonight suggested I was right. It was only after he came on (and other things were changed) that we rained attacks on Burnley during the closing stages.

But we don't want him at left back (for lots of reasons I won't explain). He is safer and more effective as a DISCIPLINED left midfielder...if he plays fairly and if he is willing to help Sheehan provide width and penetration.

That gives us a middle three.

Finally comes the front three...and there are options.

First though it is a cardinal sin to waste Hume's talents and use him for 25 minutes or so. This guy is talented, energetic, skillful, threatening and a good team player. Furthermore he can play wide or in the centre. He needs to be in the team.

With Hammill out some width would come from Sheehan/Tiatto on the left. As yet there is no rightside width.

But Sylla DID last the pace tonight and he did make some penetration along with Hume when the two were in tandem.

So the options are there. You CAN play Sylla right midfield and two up front. You could also play the three main strikers and leave Hume to make the rightside width. Or you can play Sylla plus two up front.

I am not altogether sure it would matter which option you choose but my initial preference would be to have Kisnorbo, Hughes and Tiatto in midfield; Hume in front of them and Hammond (or Chambers) and MDV up front. Sylla would be a tactical option from the bench.

This would have Hume providing the rightside width but would leave us with three strikers on the field.

This, I think is important because our strikers are not potent enough in pairs.

So there you are: 4-3-3 with Hume in the hole and more potential width than ever you were getting from two phantom wingers. Just I suggested weeks ago

This team would have little chance of defeat because it would hardly ever concede more than a goal and having three strikers would virtually guarantee at least one goal and therefore one point.

Once Goal-Smith is back I'd play Hume in midfield ahead of two from Kisnorbo/Hughes/Tiatto and Goal-Smith in a free-role up front with Hammond/MDV.

I'm sorry to have been so long winded about this but we need to get our team right BEFORE we start considering the tactics.

And there are lessons galore to be learned in that department.

Saturday's team:

Douglas;

Stearman or Maybury, McCarthy, Dion, Sheehan;

Kisnorbo, Hughes, Tiatto;

Hume;

Hammond/or Chambers, MDV

Subs: Sylla, Joey, Gerrbrand, Williams, Hammond or Chambers (cos I think he's allowed).

Why Chambers? He may be young but he would have taken a couple of those chances tonight - especially the first half one that fell to Hammond when he had only the keeper to beat. Meat and drink that to Chambers. He is the most natural striker at the club.

Please have the good grace to listen because another defeat to no goals for us would not go down well Sunday.

Ha, CL would hate that, its like the biggest insult ever! I rememeber I sent a letter to MON once (when we were after a new striker) telling him he should sign bonaventure kalou (who was a young hungry striker at feyenoord at the time) I watched him over and over again on late night channel 5 and loved the guy! MON was like, Thanks for the interest but I have scouts and I can do my own job thanks!! MON went to hero status in my eyes with his witty reply! Or it could have been the club secatery just make sure you include a little personal statement about yourself Thracian, because it will end up in the shredder before its even got to CL If someone thinks its gonna piss him off!

[IDEA OR IKEA]

I think your underestimating Smudger's ability, defenders struggle to get near him. I have managed to get highlights of some of his Carling Cup games for Arsenal and he was exactly the same in those games, nothing fazes him. Even if they kick him, he'll get back up and shit in their pocket.

I guarantee that when he plays we'll be a better team and when he goes back to Arsenal we'll be back in the shit again unless he can teach the other players to play. I'm only pinning my hopes on him because I know how good he is.

Smith, oh smith, oh smith, oh smith, oh smith

[Janx]

Sorry Craig, you have got to go.. I have spent ages deciding but I went to the game on Saturday and sat in the Watford end and watched the game through less biased eyes.

Frankly we looked frail, both in attack, going forward and some haphazzard at times ridiculous defending,

I am amazed that people thought we were great, Watford made us look good by being so appallingly bad themselves.

I listened to last nights game, turgid, dull completely eventless and painful

We will NOT get better, trust me, we are now seeing the league panning out where it is likely to finish with a few teams going for it and winning games after 20 mins, and then us NEVER looking like winning a game by a few goals,

What happened to the pacey, going forward ideal, sitting back far too much, AS EVER nothing has improved in either results, playing style and ability to win or kill off games from when Adams was here.

I am sorry, this is not a kneejerk reaction, Iam not a knee jerk person, I have Bigged up Craig for long enough, but NOTHING ever changes, he STILL doesnt know his best 11 and Ryan Smith will not be a saviour as he wont be around long enough,

We need a motivator and tactical genius, which Craig clearly isnt.

SORRY GUYS... Craig you've gotta go!

[The People's Hero]

I'm actually with Janx here.

I really want CL to do well and he's done well in many many ways, just not in the most important one of all, good performances and good results on the pitch.

He hasn't got enough bottle to play attacking football, which also irks me somewhat.

Having said that, can we afford to sack him? Will he walk?

[Thracian]

Another cracking post Thracian, please get that sent in to Levein, title it for the boss and the address is on the website, trust me he'll enjoy it.

I said at the time that I wasn't impressed with the team that was picked at Watford, it lacked creativity and fluency but when you win a game these fundamentals get covered up. Levein has got to start picking our best players and play them in their best position. The problem is we have quite a small squad and still Levein has trouble picking his best side from it, imagine if we had 25 players to pick from it would be horrendous.

Chambers can't play in the league until he's 16, Macca confirmed that who is the same age and obviously is aware of this as he's an up and coming footballer. But if we could play him i'd be joining the bandwagon to get him in as de Vries and Elvis were disgraceful last night, Hume is talented but Levein isn't using him correctly.

Smudger will carry this team but without him we are in serious trouble, Hughes has looked even poorer in the centre and that worries me. Kisnorbo was back to his poor self and other than Sylla and McCarthy everyone else was pretty crap. It's time for Gerrbrand in the centre of defence alongside Paddy with Sheehan and Stearman/Maybury at full back. That is a solid platform at the back with pace and players playing in their correct positions.

Midfield is anyone's guess they are so inconsistent it's untrue but if our defence and attack can be solid the midfield can have their ****in off days. Wesolowski will add us the steel we need on a regular basis when he comes back, I am firmly confident of this. I would be tempted to try and steel Liam Miller off Man United on loan for a month or so, he's not getting a sniff at United and unless he's injured i'm sure we could get him. Hughes and Williams should be summonsed to Levein's office and they should be torn to shreds and built back up exactly how Levein wants them. Everyone keeps banging on about how good Stephen Hughes is but to be honest he's been absolutely shocking this season other than a nice 60 minutes against Sheffield Wednesday. I would lay the law down with thse two as they are both talented and are crucial to our team, they need to play with conviction in their eyes and passion for this club.

Elvis Hammond and Mark de Vries should be put in a cage together for a week and see if that can make them bond any better, they were awful last night individually and as a partnership. They never looked like hitting the target, infact they only ever do about once every 3 or 4 games. I think it's time Louis Dodds was given a chance perhaps from off the bench if Chambers is unavailable until he's 16. de Vries or Elvis has got to be binned and the former would be my choice as he is too inconsistent.

My formation against the scum on sunday would be the same formation that Chelsea use and I definately think this could work well especially when Smudger gets back.

Douglas

Maybury

McCarthy

Gerrbrand

Sheehan

Sylla

Gudjonsson

Hughes

Elvis

Dodds

Hume

Subs: MDV, Nissa, Stearman, Tiatto, Williams/Kisnorbo

I would completely drop Dublin from the 16, he might pull the wool over the commentators eyes but his lack of pace has got us in to too much trouble and means we defend too deep when the pressures on. Gerrbrand can play the ball out of defence even under the utmost of pressure and has pace to enable us to play further up the park. If the 3 strikers aren't working then Dodds could come off for Tiatto and if Sylla isn't pulling his weight then MDV could come on and Elvis could move out to the right wing where I think he's dangerous.

I don't have a single serious problem with that side. Seems exactly the same concept as my own. It eliminates some glaring weaknesses and the only difference seems to be in choice of exact personel and on emphasis.

I preferred Tiatto on left midfield cos he would compliment Sheehan who might have a bit too much to handle on his own, having to make the width coming forward.

Dodds is a good idea. I'd forgotten about him, to be honest. Another natural striker if Chambers can't play.

But the approach is the same and seems to have a bit of football in it. There wasn't much football last night and the more I reflect on it the worse it seems to have been.

[Thracian]

Ha, CL would hate that, its like the biggest insult ever! I rememeber I sent a letter to MON once (when we were after a new striker) telling him he should sign bonaventure kalou (who was a young hungry striker at feyenoord at the time) I watched him over and over again on late night channel 5 and loved the guy! MON was like, Thanks for the interest but I have scouts and I can do my own job thanks!! MON went to hero status in my eyes with his witty reply! Or it could have been the club secatery just make sure you include a little personal statement about yourself Thracian, because it will end up in the shredder before its even got to CL If someone thinks its gonna piss him off!

Like I say, the letter is on the forum and if someone wants to get it into CL's hands then by all means do so. Levein will have the choice then about whether he listens or not but, as you all know by now, it is meant to be helpful not destructive.

Even had I posted it I wouldn't include any statement about myself in any case. This isn't about me it's about Leicester City and trying to do something about some of the dreadful excuse for football that is currently being dished up. RicFlair has posted his own properly reasoned views and, quite independently, they seem remarkably parallel.

That being the case, and considering our dire underperformance (three goals in six home games and any number of other grim statistics) would a wise man not at least consider what is being said. I know I would.

He might not realise it but as far as I am aware, both Ric and I are on his side. We want him to succeed. We see no point in another change of manager. We understand he has done some good.

I still have faith in the boss but he is trying that faith to the limits just now.

This team is not good enough to carry passengers. We have to pick our best players the ones most likely to have positive effects. People who can score, people who can capitalise on free kicks and corners, people who can dominate, people who create things, people who can concentrate, people who can read the game, people who can pass, people who can tackle, people fast enough to cover, people with stamina and people who want to win enough.

Stop being a politician Craig. Pick specialists, people who can do their particular job. Then blend them into a system that suits those players (we've tried to help you there), work in training on the detail and then motivate those players to make it work.

Seems to me you've got five days to show some progress.

[Thracian]

I'm actually with Janx here.

I really want CL to do well and he's done well in many many ways, just not in the most important one of all, good performances and good results on the pitch.

He hasn't got enough bottle to play attacking football, which also irks me somewhat.

Having said that, can we afford to sack him? Will he walk?

I don't want him to walk. Another upheaval will be utterly counter productive. He's gotta think his way through this. He seems at war with his defensive instincts/expertise and his knowledge that the Leicester crowd want to see some proper attacking football.

And £1-for-kids or not, he had the biggest crowd of all in the Championship last night to see his "product" - and it turned out the worst possible advertisement for bringing em all back next time.

[Guest]

Is a year long enough? A few days ago, I would have said no. However today, having seen the same mistakes being played out in front of me, I'm erring towards a yes.

The improvements in the squad are being negated by tactical naivety. As a manager you should find a system that fits your best players, not the other way round. It was one of my main criticisms with MA, and CL is doing the same. We don't have a squad big enough, or good enough to be honest, to do that.

[Ric Flair]

Is a year long enough? A few days ago, I would have said no. However today, having seen the same mistakes being played out in front of me, I'm erring towards a yes.

The improvements in the squad are being negated by tactical naivety. As a manager you should find a system that fits your best players, not the other way round. It was one of my main criticisms with ML, and CL is doing the same. We don't have a squad big enough, or good enough to be honest, to do that.

McLintock?

[Guest]

McLintock?

Don't start that again!