Its not about the individuals in question. Thats the main point. You let the footballing people (manager and if you have one a director of football) make the decisions and the owners job is to provide the budget. They are better placed to make those decisions. If you dont trust them, get rid. If you do and their decisions are wrong, you get rid. The decision turned out to be the wrong one. It was compounded because if you go with the approach of keeping Rothwell, you provide reasonable funds without having to sell him. They didnt do that either. So we couldnt really strengthen, as we couldnt in the subsequent 2 winter windows, and each time our results dipped.

He backed the owners so he had the quite opposite reaction regarding Rothwell. At least now Mowbray has gone and like with Tomasson he went from agreeing with them to suddenly blaming them for many things. I suspect he would back Eustace if the Dolan scenario happened. Until Eustace left when he would look back and decide to point the finger. Hes linked us a few times to him I think in recent years and it didnt happen.

I cant believe that all of that has just been taken as fact.

Waggott and Pasha have both been here for ages, including when Mowbray was here. Makes no sense. And doesnt benefit them, why would they do that? Venkys have in the past couple of years in particular started slashing the budget beyond reasonable levels. Theyve become embroiled in self inflicted legal disputes and their interest seems to wane further every year.

What does "it says everything about him" even mean in this context? Due to your dislike of him going well beyond unhealthy levels, you often suggest things about his integrity beyond his competence as a football manager. Im guessing this is similar but im struggling to work out the logic. Selling Rothwell for a fee as opposed to letting him go for free and signing a couple of players on long contracts with the money would have not only potentially benefitted the team for the rest of the season (a wantaway player who then went on to play poorly and a couple of new signings to help to strengthen a shallow squad) but also whoever was to take over after him, leaving him with a couple of extra players to build around. We needed some reasonable money to strengthen. Not only did they not provide it, but they wouldnt even allow him to trade to generate the funds we neeeed. We then had similarly a lack of budget in the following 2 winter windows. In all 3 seasons our form dipped as our small squad caught up on us. Youve even started suggesting that the blame lies with Waggott for not asking in an attempt to again not blame the owners.

100%. If they get it wrong they fall on their sword.

Middlesbrough come in for Dolan in this window, offering £3-4m. Eustace wants to sell and buy a couple of players, knowing he has a minimal budget otherwise, bur the owners refuse. Dolan stays, we arent selling him to a rival, he will leave for free in the summer instead. Eustace then admits to the media that he is annoyed that he wasnt allowed to do it. Would you agree with the owners and think that Eustace is wrong?

If we play Garrett and O'Riordan, 2 players who clearly arent up to Championship standard as the former has already shown and as both failing to get game time in League 1 highlights. We block them from getting a loan in the second half of the season.

The Portsmouth game being a few days after makes this selection a bit harder. I always favour going for it in the cup and can never get my head around people who say they dont care about cup games. Our play off push is unlikely to be maintained but a win could also help to boost confidence after a very poor run of form. That being said, a small squad and a game so soon after mean that 2 or 3 definitely need resting. Tronstad is the obvious one, the centre backs need a rest and we need to protect Beck. The problem is, we lack depth in a number of areas. Buckley is crap, McFadzean is our only centre back cover and he will struggle in a back 4 so we will have to play at least 1 of the main centre backs and in other areas we dont have any good cover. We also know that signings wont be here in time. Toth JRC Hyam McFadzean Brittain Buckley Baker Hedges Weimann Dolan Leonard Beck, Pears, Batth, Tronstad, ACD and Cantwell can all come back to start v Pompey.

Even at his peak, Schlupp was more of a utility man than the type of winger that we are crying out for. One that will offer us a goal threat and provide some individuality. We would (if it happens, which is up in the air) be getting a jack of all trades who will do his hard work but wont add many goals, will only be here temporarily and will be on a physical decline.

The MAIN reason why we failed to sustain our promotion push, and why we have also seen dips in results in the following 2 seasons during the second half of the season. Is due to budget cuts from the owners and an inability to really strengthen in January with any sort of reasonable budget. Our squads lack of depth and quality caught up with us, and probably will again this year. The squad is a bit stretched at the moment and the cracks are already starting to apear. There are tactical reasons etc across those seasons that can be questioned, but that is the main reason.

I never said either of those things. Who Eustace wants is obviously most important. Although according to you on the topic of Rothwell, the owners should just sign whoever they want... But if Eustace does want Schlupp or at least thinks he is the best option. That would probably be indicative of a very poor list of players due to budget restrictions. And also, I would disagree with him signing. Just because Eustace picks him doesnt mean I need to agree. And also, my point was it is hard to be enthusiastic when so much money has vanished without reinvestment to be potentially signing players in the bargain basement of limited ability. Because these arent the sort of signings that will either get us into the top 6 or benefit us beyond this season. They may be the best we can afford, and better than nothing.

You are fixated on the Giles situation as if he was a special talent who we wasted. Hes proven since that he isnt particularly good. He was used strangely but I dont think he suited the team anyway, his sole strength is crossing and we had a counter attacking side that didnt have the same attackers that Cardiff did where he had that bit of success. You fixate on people who have left and put all the blame on them, same with Tomasson who you again didnt say a bad word about until he went. I think you are trying to convince yourself that the people who messed up previous seasons have gone, the owners are still here so you deflect blame away and think this is the year everything changes. £20m of sale proceeds has gone, oh well, which QPR striker can we sign on the cheap to fire us to promotion. I dont understand how anything other than this can be correct. Footballing people decide footballing matters. Owners provide money and communicate to CEO.

Yes, full autonomy to the manager and if applicable the director of football. Ie the people specifically employed to deal with football matters. It doesnt require hindsight to see that replacing a want away player with 6 months left and replacing with 2 or 3 long term aasets to improve the side short and long term is a wise move. Although hindsight does prove we made the wrong call.

It could have made us stronger though, short term and long term. Wouldnt have been hard considering how Rothwell chucked in the towel. But either way, the issue is the owners shouldnt block it AND then refuse to provide reasonable funds. We fell away and as has been the case in the 2 seasons since the blame falls on the owners.

Its one of them. I cant personally get excited about which Palace veteran utility man we might sign or which QPR squad player we could sign. Because fundamentally, I know that working under such meagre resources will see us fall away, I know it isnt enough. History backs up that suggestion, the squad is already buckling. And longer term, it leaves us with big issues in the summer. Do I think Schlupp solves one of the problems we have at the moment? No.

You are defending them on this matter then.

It shouldnt be decided to the owners. Thats the issue. Not about the individuals or even the choice made. And it didnt work out. We could have strengthened, added quality in other positions both short and long term. We could have become better and sustained our push for longer. As it was, we kept an unhappy player who stunk the place out for the rest of the season. We then lost him for free and remained in the Championship. How can people defend that, defend these bastard owners, not even at the time but looking back and seeing how it played out. If it was about ambition, keep him AND provide a few million to help to sustain the promotion push.

As ive said, the players we were linked to are an irrelevance to my point. The manager wasnt backed either through the autonomy of selling to buy or with a reasonable transfer budget. That was the primary reason for the extent of our collapse, obviously Mowbray made choices which played a part but its the main reason. A similar thing (not to the same extent) happened in the following 2 seasons, a thin squad dying for reinforcements ran out of steam and suffered a dip in results in the second half of the season. If you want to defend the owners then thats fine, they clearly DIDNT make the right decision hence an unhappy player left for free after stinking the place out in a season where promotion didnt happen. But it happens at other clubs so its ok.

The above is the perfect example of my point, misinformation, speculation used to discredit him purely out of dislike well beyond what he warrants. At the end of the day, he did deserve criticism for his share of how that season finished and we were all glad to see him go. The Reece James stuff is at best speculation regarding tattoos and music. And Wigan werent in our division when we had Giles.

Again, its beside the point that Mowbray had no interest in pushing on.

So you are just picking and choosing which rumours that suit your narrative. The rumoured names are an irrelevance to the point im making. The owners shouldnt be blocking sales, especially when they are unwilling to provide reasonable funds otherwise to push us forwards. And it clearly didnt work. We lost out on £4m, and subsequently the potential to reinvest in longer term assets who would also have improved the quality and depth of the squad which was small. We were left with an unhappy player who massively declined in form before leaving for free.

He did sign players, we got 7. What he says in the media is obviously done to keep people happy.

I dont know. Jed Wallace and Dembele were the 2 linked but either way, its not about the individuals. The owners shouldnt be deciding on such matters. As it was, it didnt work out. What Reading player? The links were Wallace and Dembele but its besides the point. Why are the owners deciding who to keep and who to sell? Especially when we needed reinforcements and selling someone with 6 months on his deal could have generated funds to sign 2 or 3 players. Plus Rothwell was clearly unhappy and didnt perform to the samr levels afterwards. End result, no promotion, and no assets. If they were so insistent on not selling him to a rival, then provide that money on top of keeping him.

Even if the prophet Nixon says so, we dont know if they agree. But either way, it might be a case of we dont have much money, only loans, will Schlupp do? Rather than is this the player youd want if we had a reasonable budget. Might be a case of best of a bad job. I dont get why versatility is so important. We need a winger that can score goals and has some pace and the ability to take players on and make a different in the final third. Hes more of a steady eddie utility player. If we need left back cover aswell, then sign a second player for that. Dont sign someone who can sort of do both but doesnt really help to solve the issues we have with a lack of quality, pace and goals in the final third. If we sign Schlupp to cover 2 positions and Beck gets injured, Schlupp goes to left back. We then have no new winger. Purely as a winger, do you think Schlupp gives us what we are missing? 1. Its not about Gestede's plan. Its all down to the owners and how much money they should be making available. 2. Im not saying that. The manager should have final say. But then equally, if he turns out to not be what we need, he gets the criticism. I dont think Schlupp is what we need. 3. We have made over £40m in sales in the last few years. There should be £15m easily to spend on new permanent additions (well it should have already been spent) but there wont be. Regarding names, havent a clue. Im not a scout. I think Kent could be a useful pick up though. 3 loans would not be acceptable under any circumstances. We shouldnt be scrambling around like this. There is no desire from the owners to grow the footbal club. And crucially, its not a case of spending x amount and thats lost. You then have assets to profit on in the future.