Consistency - Not the answer. We need someone who is Pragmatic.

[Grewks]

Many on here will point to the fact that we have had X amount of managers in the last X amount of years etc, and will state that we need consistency to be successful. But we have only found one win in eleven, whilst almost consistently picking the same 11/18, and playing 4-4-2.

Nigel has had an extremely successful time here at the club, he brought us back from our darkest hour, simplified our game, and has had arguably the most successful recruitment policy of any leicester boss with the exception of O'Neill. But how much of this is down to NP, or is it just Steve Walsh?

We have a brilliant squad for this level, to suggest otherwise would be foolish. Teams with weaker squads than ours have gone up before, look at Blackpool for instance.

However, in this league where there is so little difference between the teams at the top of the league and those at the bottom, it is vital to have a manager who has knowledge of Pragmatism. With NP sadly, we don't.

4-4-2 almost every week, yes some will point here to the fact that we have used a 4-3-3, but that was only out of desperation and a lack of tactical knowledge. I have not once seen us adapt to the way the opposition play. For example when we played Peterboro, i didn't see us playing a more defensive midfielder to combat the threat of Tomlin an Boyd.

We are too arrogant. For all the criticism we give Alan Young, he is quite right. You have to earn the right to play your football, by preventing the opposition exposing your weaknesses whilst you exploit theirs. We think that just because we win one game, we can pick the same 11 in the next and it will just work. This is why my opinions have drastically changed of NP, from one who had a balanced view, his reaction to our recent form has led me to believe he is a dreadful manager, yes....Dreadful.

1 win in 11, and you still pick the same front 2 who have struggled to score in 11 games, the same formation and tactics which have failed to create chances in these 11 games.

The only positive to NP as a manager is his recruitment policy, and it is not even he who is responsible for this.

We desperately need someone who can adapt our game.

I want someone to come in who is willing to mix up their approach, set up to play for a point away from home in some games, or to play with attacking intent from the outset. Not just play 4-4-2 every game and expect a result.

[Harry - LCFC]

4-4-2 almost every week, yes some will point here to the fact that we have used a 4-3-3, but that was only out of desperation and a lack of tactical knowledge. I have not once seen us adapt to the way the opposition play. For example when we played Peterboro, i didn't see us playing a more defensive midfielder to combat the threat of Tomlin an Boyd.

Hull both times, Boro at home. Ipswich at home (exploiting Orr). They're just the games off the top of my head.

[Grewks]

Hull both times, Boro at home. Ipswich at home (exploiting Orr). They're just the games off the top of my head.

We did not adapt to hull, they always play a 3-5-2. We played our usual 4-4-2 in the home game, and played 4-3-3 away to stop our losing run.

Against Ipswich we were fortunate to play against such a weak full back who Dyer tears apart every time he play against him, we lined up 4-4-2, we did not adapt.

Against Boro, 4-4-2, just like usual.

We do not adapt to the opposition, we only change the game depending on how we play.

[Kitchandro]

Pragmatism isn't our problem. I think Pearson has attempted an old fashioned, pragmatic approach since February and that's what has cost us.

Our problem is playing shit football amongst other things.

Yes, it is true we need to find a way of winning and keeping hold of the ball better in certain games. But this is not the major problem that has derailed our season.

[Harry - LCFC]

We did not adapt to hull, they always play a 3-5-2. We played our usual 4-4-2 in the home game, and played 4-3-3 away to stop our losing run.

Against Ipswich we were fortunate to play against such a weak full back who Dyer tears apart every time he play against him, we lined up 4-4-2, we did not adapt.

Against Boro, 4-4-2, just like usual.

We do not adapt to the opposition, we only change the game depending on how we play.

Deliberately played the ball out wide against Hull and deliberately played a more narrow midfield to counter their numbers in the middle.

Deliberately played the ball out to Dyer against Ipswich - This was very visible by the way, I could tell how much we were focusing on the left wing.

Pearson explicitly said he had to counter Boro's withdrawn striker game plan in his interview, I admit I can't remember what exactly he did (Dyer switched wings with Knockaert for defensive cover maybe) but I can't imagine he just lied to the interviewer.