Another very pleasing result today with a comfortable win over a truly shocking Hull side another example of the lack of quality in this league, to not have a shot on target (like us at Wigan) is shocking. Performance wise, Kaminski could have stayed at home, Hyam again excellent, Scott Wharton was more convincing than he has been recently, Pickering was totally comfortable and continues to be an underrated part of our team who seldom lets us down and Travis was solid in both positions. Morton and Adam Wharton were both really good, the former is really into his stride and the latter is a top talent. Szmodics was our brightest attacker, he did have a couple of poor finishes before his excellent goal and also was let down by his touch in the box before pulling the ball back in the second half but he was full of running and a constant threat, the polar opposite to Dolan who was very sluggish and ineffective. Brereton looks shattered and Gallagher wasn't at his best, missing a sitter. The subs also played their part, Ayala is such a good defender, Carter was fine, Vale gave it away through inexperience twice but also was a regular out ball and did well and Dack barely had a kick but his pressing was really impressive and caused mistakes, usually he would be needed to get a goal but he belied the recent narrative that he can't fit in.

They did a couple of years ago and most people said they didn't want it, so why they have brought it back is beyond me.

But we are paying his wages either way, and he would surely rather be on the bench than left at home.

It's nobodies fault. Dack it seems chatted to a manager who did lots for his career and said he felt good, which Mowbray mentioned when specifically asked in an interview.

Would be pretty poor to name a bar after him considering what he has done for the club. Surely rename the Riverside.

Hirst has not got long left now to prove you correct in having faith in him. You consider Dack to have had ample time this season, Hirst is probably about 100 minutes away from running out of time if this example is anything to go by... You are obsessing over a style of play, what is that style of play that we play that you imply that Dack wouldn't fit in with? And why does it matter that Dack isn't a striker, if we needed a goal he would likely come on in addition to the striker(s)?

In the grand scheme of things, not really, but I find it irritating, its tacky, it is counter productive to the natural atmosphere that spikes following a goal, so I would prefer it to be removed For what its worth, the club once did a poll on goal music and the general consensus was a considerable majority in favour of not having it. Why it has been reinstated midway into a season is beyond me. What is your opinion, ie to engage in discussion rather than just shutting people down. Do you prefer goal music or is this a case of dismissing anyone who disagrees with anything from within the club?

But we have been paying his wages either way, and this "way of playing" nonsense is repeated as if we are this high intensity, pressing machine and Dack is a 40 yard old target man. And I am sure he would prefer half an hour over not being involved at all or being given 5 minutes as the 5th sub.

He was a terrible manager, but I believe him on his stuff about the sudden cut backs and the failed promises, not even necessarily to him. Their tenure has been full of that.

One thing that they definitely need to do is get rid of the goal music. Tacky and unnecessary.

Doesn't fit the style of play is a nonsense. We dont have a particularly noticeable identity but even if he doesnt start, at the moment he wojld be the first man to turn to as a sub if we went a goal down.

Obviously copying the view of what is actually being done to ensure that every decision made by the club is correct. Not sure why it comes down to anyone owing anybody else. Many seemingly share the view that Dack is a big asset and better than some of the alternatives we have, if so it is in everyones benefit to not jettison him.

I cant believe that any fan would actively prefer being in a lower league.

If I thought that then I would apply for the managers job every time it became available. I am well aware that I am not as educated but equally I am at least in an opinion to be validating in having my own opinions, hence why I (and many others) come onto this messageboard to share them.

Phillips will be a £25m defender inside 12-18 months? That is one hell of a statement and based on the Buckley £10m stuff, whichever staff member you know that keep divulging this seems to be prone to a spot of hyperbole! Our fans were brilliant with Brereton but his rise was somewhat sudden, it is not a problem if people give their opinion on here, it makes no difference. If everyone just shrugged and said "they know better than me" then this messageboard wouldn't exist.

I don't think I worded it well but I agree, I meant that away games shouldn't out rank season ticket holders.

I have got mine so I am personally ok. But I do think really that the away ticket situation should have been the first phase, on top of having a season ticket. Otherwise you could have a fan who lives near London who goes to 5 or 6 local games to him in a season getting priority over a season ticket holder who goes to 1 or 2 aways. The 1875 bit should have been scrapped.

I never specifically said that appearances are a benchmark for better players. I have seen Burnley a fair few times this season and Cullen has always stood out, dictating the game from deep. Brownhill is stand out at this level albeit limited (but still capable) at Premier League level and earnt a move previously based on standing out at this level and Cork is a canny operator too. Those 3 have proven themselves over many appearances but are not just good players because theyve played a lot of games. That us Burnley's strong point and they tend to dominate games in midfield but their attacking players hage blown hot and cold. I do feel though that we lack experience in our midfield ranks and have said so all season, we have undoubted talent there but you look at Wharton, he either cant or Tomasson wont play over an hour or back to back games if we play midweek. The Burnley 3 are used to the grind.

Was that ever happening? I don't remember that.

I think we will likely be very reliant on especially Brereton on the day, Burnley have Rodriguez who is a very good player but is aging, they do have plenty of options in attacking areas in Tella, Gudmundsson, Benson, Zaoury, Churlinov etc but none provide the goal threat that Brereton does.

Yes, I think it would. 3 canny, seasoned pros who are capable of playing higher, 3 good players at this moment a level above our young lads, who have put in some good performances without dominating a midfield.

The midfield will be a worry, not much experience against Cullen, Cork and Brownhill.

That would surely not necessarily mean that. Also, some players might lean into someone who is a clear favourite in the air to gain an advantage by reducing/removing his ability to win that header cleanly.

Much of my point though was about how it is commonly used (not within football clubs) and how the idea that teams will fall in line with their xG is massively flawed.

That Varney/Brown comment was clearly not totally serious. But much of my point has been about the key to data being who uses it, how it is us and accepting its considerable limitations and how I feel that the media often uses it (underpinned by this notion that everything must revert to the mean, see my 15th v 2nd example below) poorly in the absence of a more rounded view. Another thing about xG that is a limitation unless I am wrong. A striker is put through on goal, he takes the chance normally, that has say 0.6xG. Equally, say he takes a bad touch at the end and the keeper smothers it, the xG is 0. If he rounds the keeper and rolls it in from a yard, it is probably 0.99 xG. All 3 are the same chance created. I totally agree on game state, and don't think we are favourites for the league but not due to xG. We had the 2nd best xG when we came 15th.