If Ruddy was genuinely an actual target, you would think we would have known that he wanted a side closer to home. Probably was never a target. We dont need an old keeper in as cover. We need a first choice.

Yes, Carsley. No senior experience.

Why should we close off loads of potential options out of principle? You are twisting my words by saying that Herdman's spell as a womens manager is an issue. Obviously it isnt. But hes a total randomer who nobody has heard of because his CV is so limited. I dont know who I would appoint, your point wasnt about individuals. I merely said that closing off potential managers who arent English is massively reducing the options available, proven by the sorry list of potential applicants that you mustered up. But someone like Thomas Tuchel for example would be a far better shout than an MLS no mark, a total novice or Gary O'Neil.

Thats fair enough. As long as there is an acceptance that you arent going to necessarily get the best man by refusing to consider most managers.

Certainly not a guarantee, as with any appointment. But much more likely to find someone good if we widen the net and dont rule out anyone foreign.

But its implied when you are saying that weve never got to a final with a foreign manager. There are 2 seperate arguments. The one about preferring one out of principle, I sort of get. But its when people start suggesting that that an Englishman would be superior in terms of results that I am not having.

If someone comes on to boast about getting something right, as a way of saying I know my stuff, surely if they post something thats clear bullshit, its fair game to bring that up.

I dont get this warped argument as if because 2 specific individuals failed, they represent the potential success/failure of anyone who is foreign. As if foreign managers are all robots who dont differ from manager to manager. We have only had 2 foreign managers out of god knows how many and is it only 2 finals weve been to, so probability wise, they are almost certain to be English. If you had 15-20 raffle tickets and I had 2, and there were only 2 prizes, you would likely win them both. If you dont want to consider anyone foreign out of principle, fine. But dont use a warped argument to suggest that opening the door to managers of any nationality would automatically lead to failures. The 2 that underachieved did so as Eriksson and Capello, not as foreign manager 1 and foreign manager 2. What do you mean always? Weve done it twice. I never said he has to be foreign but if we are more open minded we have more selection to choose from. You tried your best to muster up the best possible list of English coaches. One has never managed senior football, one failed badly in his last job, one has a very strange CV including 2 jobs in womens football, the Canada job and an MLS job, and I cant imagine you are an expert on him. That leaves Howe who maybe could do ok but currently has a big Premier League job, and O'Neil who has done ok but the England job, really?!

I acknowledge the correct information on the shirt. That Ndidi/O'Hare link is laughable. Its not unknown.

That will be the case as most nations are managed by people of the same nationality. Thats not why Capello failed. Seemingly his old fashioned man management style caused issues. Not his nationality.

The novice who chose to represent Republic of Ireland is the funniest choice. Followed by a man who has never managed domestically, just the New Zealand womens team, the Canada womens and then mens team and now a job in the MLS. Bizarre.

You also said that we are interested in and have looked at Callum O'Hare and Wilfried Ndidi. So even if you want to boast about this, fine, it was correct so fair play but it doesnt mean that everything you share is credible and indeed that post was still as laughable now as it was then.

If you dont want a foreign manager, I sort of get it. Its an archaic view in my opinion, and some of your choices including some random MLS manager and someone who has no senior experience are totally perplexing. And perhaps suggests the fact that English managers worthy of the top job are few and far between. The argument that "we have tried it twice" is absolutely nonsensical. You are implying that because 2 specific individuals who didnt do very well, that is representative of every non English manager. Those 2 failed because they as individuals failed, they arent representative of some sort of agenda that EVERY non English manager would fail. It goes without saying that if you opened the field to all managers, you would naturally not even have to mention random MLS no marks and novices in the conversation. If you would rather narrow the field, you would naturally be eliminating a lot of quality names. If you are prepared to do that to maintain the idea of an English manager, fair enough, but dont pretend that any foreign manager would fail as if 2 individuals prove that. They dont.

There is also an imbalance in midfield. Rice doesn't need a technically limited runner beside him who runs all over the shop and gives away fouls. He needs someone who will sit in and at least try and dictate. That list of managers is depressing. The Canada manager is a particularly bizarre choice, Carsley is probably likely as he is another FA puppet but has never been a senior manager and chose to represent Ireland yet that seemingly doesnt infringe on your warped view.

He cant pass a ball. And he again leaves us imbalanced. We need someone beside Rice who can sit in and who can pass. From limited options, Wharton stands out or even Mainoo. We have no left backs (Shaw was a waste of a plane ticket) in the squad. Thats our weakest position. Central midfield is weak too. In attack we have loads of quality but most want to do the same thing.

In terms of big names, we are comparable to anyone. But in terms of the balance of our squads and what is available across each position, we arent as good as the top countries. Take left back. We only have one and we have taken him even though he clearly isnt fit. Look at France, their first choice was also injured, but you look at the quality of the 2 left backs they still are able to take. France, Spain and Germany all have squads whereby in every position, you take one player out and they have someone else waiting to come in. Our squads looks ok on paper but when you drill down, we are overcrowded in some positions and light in other.

I think he will go for the same team with the hapless Gallagher in for Trent. Still the same imbalance otherwise.

There are definitely similiarites to the Sven days. That squad had better players and certainly not the same level of blatant weaknesses in certain areas, but then we had loads of great centre backs and in particular central midfielders so just tried to squeze them all in.

You look at the best teams in the tournament, the likes of France and Spain. They have squads with excellent balance to them. They have settled teams but if you take 1 or 2 out, you can put a similar player in and the shape is unaffected. Spain were really impressive again tonight, full backs on the correct side, solid at the back, Rodri controlling the game with 2 technically gifted but athletic players either side, two brilliant quick wingers and then Morata who will never be a top class striker but provides a good balance.

Kane looks like he is struggling with the back injury he had at the end of the season to me. Foden since the last tournament has developed into a brilliant player, the best in the league. We do need a left footed left back and it is a big problem that he hasnt picked a single one. The whole squad lacks balance, 3 right backs and no fit left backs and too many number 10s. You could ask 5 different people and they would all have wildly different teams, that shouldnt be the case 2 games into a tournament. With the imbalance at left back, it is important that we bring in some width I think on the left wing. Gordon should be given a start in the next game. It might suit Foden more coming in from the right knowing that the width on that side can come from Walker. Wharton should play next to Rice, Wharton can sit and dictate. Bellingham has basically played as a striker all season. He does not have the positional discipline to play that deep especially when we face better teams and his main attribute is his ability to score goals and make a difference in the final third. Mind you, all of our attacking players are being hindered by our shit manager. The tactics are terrible. No signs of any work on pressing, endless long balls from Pickford, wide men retreating really deep and no out ball.

Are you suggesting playing Kane and Watkins because Shearer mentioned how Bobby Robson played him with Bellamy and suggested similar? Bellingham is an attacking midfielder, not a deep lying one. He has practically played up front for Real Madrid in the season when he has gone from very good to world class. He has to play in his natural position. So that leaves the Foden and Kane dilemma. I dont think you can have all 3 in there in a balanced side, wanting to go into the same spaces. If Kane plays, you need pace running in behind, so Foden cant play. Eze is similar, Palmer is similar, even Bowen, not that quick. Gordon is the standout candidate. Alternatively, you keep Foden in, you play Watkins who isnt a top level striker but he stretches the play and allows more space for Foden and Bellingham. The main 2 problems are left back and central midfield, and are hard to rectify with the current squad. Gallagher is really bad on the ball and really rash, he is not good enough. So it has to be either Mainoo or Wharton, for me the latter, to give us composure and a better foil for Rice. Left back is harder because Southgate took a stupid risk and put all of his eggs in the Shaw basket. He can not possibly be fit enough to be taken seriously. Trippier is finished at this level especially at left back where he is like a fish up a tree. I would try Gomez reluctantly just because he has at least played some games this season in that position. I think our pre tournament favourites tag is because we have maybe 5 or 6 players who are considered at the very top level, those names grab peoples attention. But there are huge issues both in fitting those players together and with huge glaring weaknesses around them. Chuck in a shit manager too. The issues run beyond personnel, the tactics are terrible.

Against Serbia we was so pedestrian, dull, playing at testimonial pace and regularly just getting Pickford to hoof it long. The attacking players didnt press and we sat really deep. Some put it down to easing our way into the tournament, but today we were miles worse. So frustrating. The onus has to fall on the terrible manager as to why players who thrive for their clubs are a shadow of theirselves for their country. Southgate is such a negative manager and that is proven by how despite boos our players seemed keen to waste time and protect the point at the end. I dont agree that we are an attacking player light, you cant put Bellingham deep in midfield, we would get overrun even more. But its the instructions, we dont look like we have trained how to press as a team, we sit really deep, Pickford keeps lumping it long. Mind you, our squad is overhyped based on names. If you put the calibre of the 11 names today on paper, it compares to most in the tournament. But thats not factoring in the total lack of balance. It is similar to when we had a "golden generation" albeit not as much quality. We keep playing 3 right backs, one as a ridiculous experiment in midfield which has to be stopped and one is 33 and toiling on the wrong side on the left. We have absolutely no left backs, taking Shaw was crazy and I get why the unfit and crap Chilwell was left out but surely Tyrick Mitchell deserved a call up. In midfield we have Rice doing a job he doesnt do for his club and then such a problem beside him. Gallagher is shocking at this level and our other 2 options have barely a seasons worth of top level games under their belts between them. I think Wharton would be as good a choice as any but fear we as Rovers fans are biased in that it would be a huge step up at this stage to expect him to dictate games at the top level. Foden, Bellingham and Kane cant really all co-exist because they all want to be in the same area, and its those 3 why people think our squad is too good. Never will a pre tournament favourite have less chance of winning the tournament.

There is always the odd good player from relegated clubs who could potentially prove to be good signings. Victor Johansson is a good signing for Stoke. But John Ruddy is not one of those potentially good signings and I dont need an alternative list of potential targets to know that.

I am over the fact that he did what are pretty common tactics to get a move to a club in a higher league. We had failed to even make the top 6, Villa were in the Prem, a potential once in a lifetime opportunity to play there, do I like that players do that? No. But I dont hold a grudge a decade on. The sole issue with the appointment is that he has absolutely no experience in such a job and has got it because he was a former player.

@chaddyrovers It is crazy that you cannot suggest that a well known player would be a poor signing unless you can delve into your expert scouting knowledge of world football and of availability/finances to offer up a shortlist of potential alternatives. You mentioned Iversen. He was very good at Preston but has spent 2 seasons in which he hasnt played that much, and didnt impress that much at Stoke. And crucially, I imagine any fee (I dont want a loan, we have brought in loads of money so I would suggest any normal club would be able to facilitate spending a couple of million on a keeper of a decent age, mind you we arent normal so I dont expect that) and potential wages at Leicester might prove difficult to hit. Perhaps there is better value either domestically or abroad, ideally not in a poor league like Wahlstedt. I am not a scout so I couldnt possibly comment. But in terms of type of signing, ie his age, the fact that he has shown capability at this level, the fact he wont be on the decline, spending a bit of money on a number 1 for the short and long term. That would be the type of signing if permanent that would make much more sense as opposed to a nearly 38 year old declining player recently released by a relegated club.