STM

Yeah it's the, getting absolutely raped by pace, which is the issue. Burn knows exactly what he supposed to do. It's like shifting a giant redwood on a double decker bus when he's on the back foot which is the problem.... And the lack of protection from the 17 year old in front of him.

Well OK, you've made your point, it's a fair one. Let's hope the injury situation improves, so that we don't need this discussion again.

Burn will start. Would it be the choice I made? Nope. Will I be disappointed? Slightly. It won't stop me adoring the manager and getting behind the players. We are well capable of winning, Burn or not.

While this a perfectly sensible take... If its a game where we are drawing or winning and the result goes south because we've brought on some young kid... presumably everyone would give Howe loads of leeway? There are quite a few disingenuous fans trying the old "I would have understood if we lost" patter. No they wouldn't, they would have destroyed him post match.

Putting up with absolute weapons on message boards trying to tell him how to do a job which he knows much more about is a downside though.

Here lies the problem. Again, I mean this in the most respectful way possible but if Howe takes your reccomended course and loses on the back of it, you are the first person to be critical post match. You won't make any mitigation for having players missing. You would hammer him for losing and so would plenty of others.

Yeah fair enough, perhaps a bit of frustration creeping out. Just does my head in that we have 2 belting strikers and one is a permanent crock and the other is his fucking apprentice.

One last thing on injuries. Callum Wilson has absolutely zero leg to stand on (metaphor intended). Howe hasn't to take any responsibility on that one. Wilson is a crock and has been from day one. I love him as a player but I'd argue that his injury record has caused us more problems than his goals have done good. It's time to let him go and get someone who, we think, we can rely on.

Basically. Howe has been put in a ridiculous situation with injuries. Has he rushed players back? Yes. Is it what alot of managers would have done? Yes. Are there lessons to be learned as a management and medical team? Yes. Will we ever likely have an injury crisis like this? Fuck, I hope not.

This is it in a nutshell. Howe is being given a couple of shit options and getting hammered either way.

It does make sense though. Don't take this the wrong way TCD, I agree with plenty of your posts and i like alot of them (I hope you notice) but you seem to have a real issue with the idea of risk and gambling in football. You seem to be under the impression that everything is a black and white, clear cut decision or that everything should be obvious without hindsight. On transfers, you think that it's possible to find transfers with zero risk attached to them and now with injuries you think no manager should ever risk a player coming back early? It's just not the real world man. Here's a hypothetical scenario: A striker is coming back from injury, he's a week away from the scheduled time out. Bam, the teams other striker breaks his leg. The manager goes to his medical team and asks if the other striker is ready to play yet. The medical team would NEVER talk in absolutes, they say that x player is close and there's no signs that a reoccurrence is likely but there's a small chance he might hurt himself again. Your the manager, what do you do? Option 1: You don't play the striker, you go into the game without your main goal threat, you have to move one of your creative players out of position to cover and you massively decrease the likelihood of winning the game. On the other hand, you might get a slightly fitter version of your currently injured striker next week. Option 2: You take the risk, you try and get 60 minutes out of the striker, try and win the game and you hope that he doesn't pull up injured. What I'm saying here is that neither option above are correct or incorrect ones, it's a question of risk, weighing up the pros and cons and making the best decision possible. You are absolutely correct to say that those risks haven't paid off but to say the manager (management team), should get some big criticism is overboard IMO. They zigged when they should have tagged. I'd certainly be questioning the advice of the medical department. It's the same decisions every management team the world over, some times they get it right, sometimes they get it wrong.

I don't think there's any doubt we've rushed players back. It would have to be one helluva coincidence that Isak and Wilson are miraculously back when the other gets crocked. However.... For years players have played through pain barriers or have come back early because of injury crisis. Its a gamble and a gamble that has failed for us. I'm not sure it's a stick to beat Howe with mind. He's almost certainly taking advice from his medical team on this. Also, alot of our injuries have been freak ones. Pope (shoulder), Burn (back), Anderson (back), Barnes (toe) and then Tonalis suspension (we won't go over old ground). There's 5 missing before a medical decision has been made. That puts us on the back foot from the start. I think we certainly could have dealt with Isak and Willock better. Wilson we only have ourselves to blame. He's a crock, always has been. We need to learn our lesson.

You are correct, I hope we haven't paid a flat fee of 30m. Obviously it's just guesswork but I'd be surprised if we have.

My instinct is that it's done. I might be wrong but as I've said in the two posts above, I suspect we've realised he's either not good enough or not ready. FWIW, I also don't think for a second we have paid 30m for him. I suspect that it's probably half of that with a shit load of add ons. However, as I've also said, just because he's not ready now, doesn't mean that it will always be the case. That's why I suggested a loan. A year with Kompanys Burnley in the championship for example, would do him wonders. Loans aren't our strong suit though.

What I'm saying is that we signed him thinking he was ready for the first team and have realised that we got it wrong. What do you think we should do? Play him more? Despite not being ready? The only scenario where he gets more games next year, is if he shows he's ready in training and in friendlies etc, which is possible. It won't protect our investment having him sitting on the bench for another season, that is for certain. I have this horrible feeling some of our fans think that Howe is just going to start playing him and he's going to be class. I'm certain that this won't happen. In short, he has until the start of next season to prove his worth. Edit: Also worth bearing in mind we have ALREADY spent the money on him (albeit in this summers accounts), it just hasn't been ratified yet. The transfer is done. I'm surprised that anyone still thinks that there is any chance that he goes back to Chelsea.

What you are essentially saying is that every transfer is successful? I'm suggesting they thought Hall was further along in his development. Does it mean they made an error, yes... like every other side in the league, we may have made an error in our scouting assessment. However, he's very young and has big potential, so all is not lost. If they thought he was good enough.. he would have played far more, its as easy as that IMO.

It much, much more likely that Howe doesn't think he's ready. It won't take long on training to see whether someone is up to standard, not least when they have so much data at their disposal. What if they know his stamina isn't up to scratch or he's not keeping the ball well enough in training? We can't JUST play him. Howe has to be convinced he will do the job correctly... or at least better than those competing in his position and while Burn has his flaws, he's also got some serious tactical strong points. I think we may sign him permanently but I'd get him shipped straight out on loan in order to get some experience knocked into him. Target sell Hall loan Sign a new left back. Livramento will get loads of games either side and push BDB into back up CB.

Bayern.

Still blaming Ashworth for not having access to Tonalis phone I see. Fuck me. They should know though.... they should just know... somehow.

Hall isn't a better option that Burn. Unless you've just imagined Hall being ready in your head. Again, massively over the top view on Burn. Yes Livramento should be starting. Yes Burn has flaws. That's it.

Fuck me, I wrote all the bullshit and it looks as though Gordon is available. Good news though. Get him AND Barnes in the team.

I think our problem recently (apart from Burns pace which is dependent on who his opponent is) is this: Defence (This area) Longstaff Bruno Miley Right now, Howes tactic is that they play in a straight line and the individual presses whoever is in front of them, including Bruno (who's actually a good presser). But what the opposition is doing, is allowing Bruno to step out of that space and the threading balls between the lines. Countless teams have exploited us in this area and it's certainly ironic that the one team that didn't (Villa) is the side who is particularly good at playing in these spaces. The other problem we have had, is when losing the ball we normally have two athletic, tactically aware players either side of Bruno, who can sense and deal with the danger. Longstaff is capable of doing this, in fact its his best trait (let's not get into his flaws) but on the other side Miley seems like he's getting caught out regularly. Whether that it is because of age or stamina, who knows but its a key weakness for me. It's not a snipe on Miley, he's got twice the potential of Longstaff and we should rightly be excited about him. We need a short term fix, just while we wait on bodies coming back. With what's currently available (shudder): Dubravka Trippier Schar Botman Livramento Longstaff Bruno Miggy Murphy Barnes Wilson Murphy in the number 10 sounds like a ridiculous idea (until Gordon returns) but in effect he'd be the 3rd midfielder as much as a number 10. He'd harass their midfield or defence with his energy and running, preventing them from picking those passes. Longstaff and Bruno could still press aggressively behind him and there would be fewer gaps. Our counter attacking would be lighting quick with Murphy (until Gordon is back), Miggy and Barnes. In short, don't worry about goals, we've never struggled for goals, we need to find a way to protect our defence better and having a triangle in midfield will help us avoid a flat line. P.S Howe won't do any of this.

Must have thought he was still playing for us.

Reet, time for some positivity... Wilson looked very bright. If can play every game that Isak misses, he will score goals. He's a different player, sure but he will score. Barnes looked ace. If he can get through Forest unscathed, we've now got real options in wide areas. We have never stopped scoring, even in our worst moments we've looked good for a goal or two. Scored 7 in 2 games. Forest aren't in the greatest of form. It looks as though Gordon has just twisted his ankle. Once the pain has gone he will be back. He might only miss forest but don't rule out him making it.

Totally disagree. Miggy looked way better from the right. That said, bit of a problem because Murphy also looked shite from the left. If Barnes isn't ready, I suppose your option is the lesser of two evils.