To be fair, we wouldn't be narrowing things down much if the benchmark was better than Pears. Of course, but that doesnt have to be someone in his late 30s. Someone like Johansson would have been ideal, a good keeper not only now but for a few years. Sadly, our skint and slow club was never in contention. Hladky is on the older side but would certainly be a lot more preferable coming off the back of such a good season and not being quite as old. I just personally wouldnt want Krul, it isnt about writing him off. I dont want a 36 year old who has been collecting dust for a year. Ill judge anyone on how they play here, but I dont want us to sign him personally.

I think it is harsh to say that Reijnders isnt up to it, he has looked good during the tournament driving through midfield with Schouten next to him. They obviously miss De Jong and Koopemeiners but it should be an equal midfield battle. Walker is the best at dealing one on one with pace out wide but he can switch off as we saw for the Swiss goal. Gakpo running at Walker isnt necessarily the worry but Gakpo is really clever at popping up at the back post to score so we need to hope that Walker doesnt switch off. I almost feel like Walker would prefer to be up against a Vinicius or an Mbappe because he can neutralise their speed.

I dont think we specifically need a really experienced keeper as in one at the very end of his career. Its not as if we have a really promising keeper that can take over after a year or 2. The Ruddy rumour thankfully turned out to be a load of rubbish. Krul is not an inspiring link either, 36 and didnt play a league minute last season. Why cant we sign someone at a good age whereby he isnt too young but equally he has a good few years in him as our number 1.

Its just lowering and lowering of standards. Can we only specifically sign players that have already moved in the window? And excluding a considerable chunk who I hadnt heard of who might be good but I dont know either way. If my argument was that our snail like speed has seen us miss out on potentially good signings, fair enough but it isnt. Our club always seems to have changes behind the scenes, never a good sign to have such high staff turnover. But either way, budget meetings shouldnt be happening 6 weeks after the season has ended. It should have long since been sorted regardless of staff turnover. We have a manager, we have a CEO and the staff we brought in could have been doing workm I wasnt the one who predicted players in before pre season. I just find it strange that Eustace (IMO wrongly) wants McFadzean, a deal was agreed in principle and based on his quotes from the weekend he doesnt even know where its at.

The likes of Yates, Longstaff, Murphy and Jackson fall into a similar category for me. Would I consider any of them to be considerable upgrades on our starting 11? No. Would I rather us be more ambitious? Certainly. But would they all be strongly pushing for a starting spot here amidst our below average Championship attack? Yes. Are they considerable improvements on the dross we have below Gallagher/Hedges/Dolan (none of whom are that good at his level themselves) in the likes of Markanday, Sigurdsson and Vale? Undoubtedly. And do I predict us getting anyone better? Not with any confidence. So I dont see these players as ones that I am sad that we missed out on, but equally, they would definitely have improved the squad. My issues arent around individuals. They are around how poorly we are run as a club. Budgets being decided so late, gaps in communication to the manager leaving him as a clueless as anyone, no scope to reinvest considerable sales proceeds, a constant churn in staff off the field.

Yes we would all like to have a functional club that doesnt wait 6 weeks to start discussing budgets but we dont so oh well. These bastard owners continue to be a massive hindrance around our neck.

I think your natural bias is making you think that the current crop is better comparative to that generation than it actually is. You have pin pointed areas of perceived weakness. I think Rice is very good at what he does (especially for his club, the way he is needed for England hinders him to an extent) but what we lacked then could have been resolved by using one of 2 excellent holding midfielders. Michael Carrick would have compliment both that squad and the current squad perfectly, a top player at the highest level for many years. Hargreaves was also a very good holding midfielder although injuries meant it wasnt for as long. The midfield options we had then were incredible. We also had strength in depth at centre back then as strong as any country. Rio Ferdinand, Sol Campbell and John Terry were all top class. Stones is below all of them and there is no shame in that. The likes of King, Carragher and Woodgate would all walk into the current side, top players. You mention players like Gordon, good players who have had a good season and would provide good balance but is there much difference between him and say Shaun Wright Phillips? Both squads have some excellent players in there, with notable issues in certain areas.

I listed a number of (on paper) good Championship signings that I know of, explained how what we need will differ and then listed a number of further signings made that I cant comment Im not saying that Suhail the snake should have been accompanied to India for the annual arse kissing convention. Im saying that our budget should not have remained unfinalised 6 weeks after the season had finished. It should have been finalised before the season had finished pending division or at least very shortly after. I do know where the Wharton money has gone yes, and the timing is irrelevant. The owners sole focus is on clawing back every penny possible and that is at the cost of any emphasis on bettering the football club. Both McFadzean and Eustace want a deal to be signed and a deal is agreed in principle according to the LT. "Still in talks" and "no paperwork has been signed." Such a simple renewal not done such is our club under Venkys.

The market has become much more active recently. Lets be frank, the biggest factors that slow us down are internal. The usual delays sorting budgets being a primary one, we shouldnt have Pasha the snake flying out only 2 weeks ago to India, yet we arent surprised. Limited funds again play a part, in a way that considering recent incoming fees, it shouldnt be quite so restrictive. The Euros is a factor but that should primarily be affecting loans from the big clubs which should just be a couple of cherrys on top of an already formed cake. Mind you, some Championship loans have already been done.

Its probably a bit far to say he doesnt have a clue how to manage a football team.

He seems totally in the dark and not willing to put on any pressure in public. Him, Kayden Jackson and to a lesser extent Josh Murphy all come into one category for me. None are great nor am I gutted to miss out on, all have gone to promoted sides, although all 3 would make our starting 11 most likely and at the very least give us stronger options off the bench than we have. But when the window ends and we likely have not even brought in players at that level and start the season with Vale and Markanday in the squad, we will look back thinking we could have done with them.

Its not as simple as saying who have others signed that you would want here. We want different positions to other teams. Players like Ben Osborn, Max Lowe, Yann Valery, Shackleton and Shandon Baptiste look like clever pick ups but they arent priority positions for us. Viktor Johansson is the obvious one in a position we need but we hadnt even sorted a budget to act on that. There are also players signed from abroad that I have never heard of so I couldnt possibly say that I want them here because I dont know them. Tijani, Kobacki, Vata, Diakhate, Heggem, Cordoba, Ingelsson, I wouldnt know any of these if they walked past me in the street. So I cant say we should sign them, doesnt mean that they might not be good signings. Point being, if we cant even sign a contract with McFadzean, who we shouldnt be keeping, same with Fleck. Thats a concern. Why did Pasha only go to sort the budgets You yourself talked about getting players in early for pre season. Now the Euros excuse comes in. Its not even that we havent signed anyone, why is our club run so poorly? Why are budgets only being discussed half way through the off season? Why does a trip to India have to happen? Why cant we even give a player who was here last season a new deal if the manager (wrongly IMO) wants him?

The season finished 2 months ago and we still seemingly are not in a position to sign players.

Eustace quoted in the Lancashire Telegraph as being open minded about McFadzean and Fleck and wanting the former to sign in particular. We should sign neither, so I question Eustace's judgement. But it is pretty indicative of our problems that we cant get either signed. The easiest deals ever to do and we could at least get them fit in pre season so it highlights the mess stemming from the owners.

Lets be honest, its unlikely that these changes will suddenly create an efficient recruitment structure especially on a Venkys "budget."

Holland arent one of the very elite teams but they are a strong side. If we beat them then although it wont change the fact that we have had favourable draws overall, it would change the narrative a bit that Southgate comes up short when he plays the better sides. They have been favourable draws. And id prefer favourable draws.

I havent had a shirt for a long while, no. The point isnt about me. A lot less than £48 for a shirt that will be outgrown before the season is out.

It could be perceived as lucky, yes. The draw has transpired to be less difficult than it potentially could have been. I know we dont control the draw, and thats why it is luck based. Factors out of our control determine who we get in each round. Ive said before, a league campaign is less reliant on luck because every team plays every other team home and away. There is no chance that you can have a favourable draw. The Worthington Cup was more comparable because again you are reliant on the draw. We played a non Premier League side in the Semi Finals, that helped for example. If you can win the cup then it doesnt make it any less enjoyable and you are muddying the water by suggesting that me saying hes had favourable draws would make it unenjoyable. Id rather have the easiest draw possible and I never said I wasnt happy.

Still crazy.

£48 for an infant shirt. Disgusting really.

Why do neither of you seem to grasp that results outside of our control falling in a way whereby the better sides have consistently ended up playing one another on the opposite side of the draw is lucky. France not winning their (much harder) group might be a failing on their part, but to England it is lucky. Its good for us, we would rather be lucky with draws than not. But equally, as much as Sven struggled, he got very difficult knockout draws and was unlucky to face Brazil and then Portugal twice. Colombia, Ukraine, Denmark, Sweden, Switzerland, Slovakia, Senegal, they are some very favourable ties to get deep into knockout football. Obviously most of them are at least decent, and you still have to beat them, but there are no big hitters and when we did meet one, bar a Germany in transition, we came up short. The tactical plan was flawed. We had no balance on the left, we had no runners in behind, we again struggled to create chances and we again thankfully had a moment of individual quality to get us into extra time. We then struggled in extra time with Southgate not redressing the imbalances caused by the necessity to stick loads of attackers on to get the equaliser. I dont think the performance was good or the tactics were good, Southgate would say they are, but although we went through, there are some big concerns. Yes we won, and yes that is all that is important. And no one is saying dont enjoy it, we were all delighted when Trent scored the winning penalty. But this is a messageboard where we discuss beyond the binary win or lose outcome. Chaddy, I recall you showering Rovers with praise when we lost to Burnley but "played well." Surely all that mattered then was that we had lost? Lampard 😂 Lineker just bigging up his BBC mate. Do you agree with him?

We all enjoyed it, it was brilliant. But this is a forum where after the game you have more detailed discussions about the performance, and lets face it, it wasnt good. If it was purely to say whether we won or not, it wouldnt be much of a forum.

If that is immeasurable improvement then it merely shows how poor we were v Slovakia. We did not really create much. Of course it only matters who goes through but you surely cant disagree that today was anywhere near how you would want us to play, or that the draws we have had in tournaments under Southgate has been anything but extremely favourable.

Beside the last 16 game where winning the group deserves a favourable tie. It is total luck from there on in as to who you get. The only time we havent had a favourable tie at that point, it was the last world cup and we went out. You clearly are totally blinkered on England similar to how chaddy is with Rovers. Alcohol may play a part as you had us down to lose v Holland before a few drinks. We hardly had a shot on goal. We had more of the ball but it again was slow, meaningless passing that Switzerland were happy to defend. As extra time went on they looked most likely to win again down to the imbalances in our team.

Is it true that even a shirt for a baby/toddler is £48?