Dont let vinjay see such a welcome.

That is the argument of someone with little to nothing constructive to say. The team you suggested had 3 or 4 different players, in a different formation and with a few of those players in different positions. So you quite blatantly didnt agree with the team selected. Many of these changes were things highlighted by those critical of last night which saw us slip to a third successive defeat and concede 2 more goals against a very poor side. You suggested Brereton central and Armstrong wide prior to the game. They played in the opposite positions yet youve still defended the manager on it. You didnt have Smallwood and Conway in your team yet have defended Mowbray for it. Smacks of hypocricsy. If when that happens, you just resort back to full defence mode of the manager even though you would have selected a different team and formation, instead putting any differences down to Mowbray having "inside info." Its nonsense. Just admit he got it wrong last night, or admit that there are flaws in the team that he has struggled to fix thus far. Doesnt mean you want him sacked or that he hasnt brought plenty of good things to the club.

Most arent saying Mowbray out but that he needs to address our woeful defensive record. His recent comments suggest he doesnt see it as a concern but it bloody well is. If they are fit to come on they are fit to start but Ive suggested a far more balanced team above even if they were out rather than the shite he put out yesterday. Brereton clearly wanted to come central, but he left a midfielder playing right back exposed by coming inside. He is not a wide man. End of. Defending the indefensible.

The thing is as well, just say Dack and Graham werent fit enough to start. That doesnt excuse the selection. Would have made more sense to start Williams and Nyambe full back, Reed instead of Smallwood to add some dynamism to the middle 3, Brereton central and Rothwell and Armstrong either side. That would have been far more balanced even assuming Dack and Graham couldnt play.

Moved enough to score 11 goals which is a decent tally. And thats before his hold up play etc which is subjective but for me top drawer.

Not at all. With at times very limited service, his leading of the line added by a healthy goal contribution tally has been very impressive. You are seemingly on your own in thinking he isnt up to it.

Hes played 3 games a week a few times this season. Giving our player of the season so far an extra year was the easiest decision all year.

Seems the common line at the moment. Look at the defence first Tony!

Even if they were both deemed unfit to start, which I dont really buy but anyway. Why is Rothwell not given a start, not 15 minutes? Why is Brereton out wide? Even assuming selection limitations, he didnt do the best from what he had. Side note, why was Brereton standing waiting for a short corner at one point? 6 foot odd striker so little threat that he doesnt bother getting in the box.

It hasnt really. Its not blind loyalty continiously picking 2 players who have scored double figures. Especially when we have been so poor and toothless when they have missed games. It is blind loyalty continiously playing Bell despite being incompetent. Constantly shoehorning Bennett in, too often finding a place for Smallwood and Conway. Your attitude towards our inconsistency is seemingly as relaxed as Mowbray, possibly part of your refusal to ever criticise him. Our defensive record is shocking because he hs neglected it, and a minority of his money and signings have been on defensive reinforcements. We have the luxury of a 7m striker to make only 2 starts yet have to make do with a wide man at right back, a central midfielder at centre back, and of the 2 signings he paid nominal fees for to improve the defence, one has left and one is the worst player in the team. Judging by his comments in the media our defensive vulnerability doesnt seem to concern Mowbray. Conceding late goals and throwing away leads isnt a case of oh well, we are inconsistent. It wont go away by itself. Is Mowbray capable of fixing it? We will see.

Can i ask: Does our defensive record worry you at all? Does our continued throwing away points, often from winning positions worry you? Does the fact that Mowbray is fiercely loyal to a number of players of limited ability worry you? Does our inability to pick points up away from home worry you? Does our total reliance on 2 players for goals worry you?

His point was clearly that we had the 2 players most likely to put away chances on the bench, due to the manager. Our 7m striker had one of our best chances and put it into orbit sadly. People will continue to question the manager for as long as we continue to lose games and for as long as we continue to neglect any attempts to stop conceding so many goals. People are "over reacting" because we lost to a shite team in really poor fashion. Natural reaction is to be pissed off when we throw points away all the time due to a weak underbelly that the manager seems fairly relaxed about.

We've lost 8 in 15. We've conceded the most goals in the league away from home. Only 3 teams have conceded more than us this season. We have thrown away one of if not the most points in the league from winning positions. Our manager has said he is not worried about our defensive record this week. We have signed a 7 million striker who is yet to score for the club. We lost to 3rd bottom after our manager chose to make wholesale changes that were almost universally disagreed with pre-match. What did you expect?

Another frustrating, gutting defeat for a team I am constantly told is progressing in the right direction, but am unsure, we've lost 8 in 15 in a period where Mowbray has got manager of the month, an incredible stat, and we have I think conceded the most away goals in the league. Last season, we seemed to have gained a resolute nature to our team and an ability to grind out results most weeks even with poor performances at times, seemingly that was just down to poor opposition. We have now returned to being flimsy, easy to beat, mentally weak, defensively woeful and disorganised. Firstly, lets pull no punches, Mowbray got his team selection wrong. Like at Sheffield United, we have ended up losing on the back of "resting" half of our team only to need to bring on our 2 best players anyway due to being behind. He has to stop these random team selections, if Allardyce had have picked a team like that he would have been accused of throwing a game. We will not push forward and ever challenge for promotion under Mowbray whilst he continues to neglect and based on his quotes this week not worry about our defensive solidity and organisation. Our defensive record is embarrassing, especially conceding late and conceding when sitting on leads, we have such a weak underbelly which has not been addressed. The perfect symbol of our defence is one of Mowbrays only signings in defence; Amarii Bell. He is an absolute coward of a defender, he is so easy to beat and get a cross in for a winger, and I know he scored (aided by woeful keeping) but usually going forward he is terrible too. He is a perfect example of our defence, and has all the symptoms of it in abundance, he is weak, he is quite the opposite of brave, he is unintelligent in terms of his positioning, he cant tackle and any competent wide man will have a field day against him. Our full back area in general has been horribly neglected, Bennett is never a full back in a million years either, yet Mowbray doesnt even seem interested in fixing those key areas. Raya is a liability too, they should have scored a header when he went walkabouts and his kicking is a joke. Our central defenders dont have any help to the sides or behind them but for all their composure, they dont inspire you with confidence either. The frustrating part was that some of our ball retention and some of our pressing was good, but ultimately it is all undone by our weak underbelly. We can say we are about where we should be and perhaps thats right but until the manager looks to fix this major problem, and give us firm foundations, we will continue to be inconsistent and continue to concede goals by the bucket load. Brereton I actually thought had his best game in a Rovers shirt, and that included a decent spell in the first half where he was hopeless and gave the ball away numerous times. I felt that Mowbray playing him wide left him out to dry, his good work came when he drove inside which ultimately exposes the full back behind him. But his ability to carry the ball and run with it between the lines meant he showed far more in 60 or 70 minutes than he has prior overall. Ultimately though, the main thing he did was miss an absolute sitter and by a considerable distance, and as a striker his terrible finishing will continue to undermine him, although at least it didnt go out for a throw in, his usual destination. There was no reason to include Conway and there was no reason to include Smallwood. Neither are of any significance to us if we want to progress and the former in particular is a busted flush, his legs have totally gone. Evans was arguably our best player, Travis was better than on Saturday but his initial few performances seem a long time ago now, and Armstrong missed a couple of big chances and didnt really impress having changed positions. As for the subs, Graham and Dack are not impact subs, they should have started. Rothwell showed plenty of energy and did well for the goal, he beats players with ease but he tends to run in whatever direction hes facing, often going on mazy dribbles towards his own goal. Needs to be more intelligent.

Do we? Last one I remember was at Sheff United. Got battered.

That comment sums up what we are all thinking!

Id love to be wrong but thats a shite, negative line up. 3 defensive midfielders, Conway, Brereton and our best 2 players dropped. Rubbish.

Stability and patience are only worthwhile and only work if the manager is any good to begin with. Based on the example being discussed, Lambert may have suggested that x, y and z was wrong when he was appointed (he does that at every club he turns up to) and that may be seen as a man who knows the problems and is saying exactly what the fans are thinking. But ultimately, results show that he is incapable of doing anything to halt the slide. And you look at the way at hes going about his job to maybe find glimmers that hes thinking longer term, that hes doing things that may not prove instantly fruitful but give them hope for the future. Signing 7 players on short term deals and playing them is quite the opposite. When Mowbray came in, results improved. The main thing that has caused us to progress as we have under Mowbray is Mowbray himself, not the fact that we kept a manager for x amount of time. If we had offered Coyle the courtesy of a full season, being patient, do we think results would have improved? No because hes a poor manager. Kean did get plenty of time, did things ever improve? No. Ironically, they had the very definition of stability under Mick McCarthy, didnt appreciate it, drove him out and are seemingly craving it again as the answer to their problems. Stability is a good thing for a while, up until the point it becomes stagnant. You mentioned Arsenal and things stagnated terribly for a number of years. At Chelsea, the manager is still crucial even with the money he has, former managers like Mourinho and Conte have been incredibly successful but their managerial style has caused a quick burn out of player manager relations and requires a more short term approach. But stability is only useful if the manager is good and shows sign of improvement. Lambert hasnt and doesnt meet that requirement.

The fact that Hurst had fallen out with and alienated the players and staff and presumably Lambert has not done that yet his results are ever so slightly worse surely is all the judgement that is needed! Lambert is a politician as you say rather than a football manager. Totally agree on McCarthy playing how he did due to restricted resouces and quality, the only way he could play and the most effective way

They do need a clearout and a rebuild but they need a competent man to do it. I am judging a manager on results, I know the squad is poor but there was no point changing from Hurst to Lambert as his results with the same set of players (plus hes been able to add 7 more) has been no better. (in fact moderately worse) Lambert has done nothing to earn that trust. The best example is when we had Coyle, surely by your above logic we should have stayed patient and kept with Coyle rather than appoint Mowbray. No, because Coyle hadnt earnt any trust. Mowbray then managed to get a significant IMPROVEMENT IN RESULTS WITH THE SAME PLAYERS even though the squad was crap because he is a better manager than Coyle. As a direct comparison. Lambert has not got any improvement in results with the same players. Simple as that. What the fans think, what sort of bloke he is, its irrelevant, judge a manager on results.

Ive not seen one person suggest that Venkys were anything other than villains. Lambert may have been promised finances the owners didnt keep, thats one thing we will never know. His actual spell here was the definition of underwhelming, bringing in plenty of loans, the football was pretty dull, and his results were average, which is admittedly far better than horrendous which his record has been in his last 2 jobs. His cleverest move was his timing of departure and the way he went about it; Venkys were undoubtedly the primary villains and activating a very curiously placed release clause in his contract when the club was lingering in the bottom half and perhaps justifiably criticising the owners in the media was a PR masterstroke, with fans chanting his name not because he was Paul Lambert, or a competent manager, but because he went publically against the villains of the piece, Venkys. The way he left aside, his brief spell here was neither successful or a failure, it was instantly forgettable. The job he has done in his last 2 roles is subject to most debate. To be unable to coax any improvement at all from managers who had either started to go stale and stagnate (Hughes at Stoke) or managers who were out of their depth from the start and rumoured to have fallen out with key players already (Hurst at Ipswich) is really poor. Look at Mowbray, he took over a limited squad running at a rate of less than a point per game following a woeful manager. With the same squad he caused a considerable improvement.

I dont know if you are being purposely obtuse or just ignorant. I know Ipswichs squad isnt very good, but Lambert has done even worse than Hurst with it, just as he did worse thn Hughes at Stoke. The "general play" is objectively not better because its churning out slightly worse results. The fact that rumours of squad morale issues and player-manager fall outs or whatever under Hurst only add additional context to how bad Lambert is doing, you would think a fresh face with no bad blood with his players would lead to better results, not worse! If Ipswich fans are happy with him, fooled by his gimmicks, his interviews, his personality or whatever, then good for them, but im just glad that he is not our manager anymore because he isnt a very good one. The difference is, my argument is based on results and facts, yours is based on personal bias, supporter opinion, baseless predictions, and a total ignorance of results.

Hes obviously not inherited good situations in particular in his last 2 jobs, my point is based around how he has not caused even a minor improvement at either club, in fact he has overseen a very slight reduction in points per game. Last season at Stoke, Mark Hughes was understandably sacked after a shocking run of 20 points from 22 games, 0.91 points per game. With such a low benchmark, even with not the best squad in the world, you'd expect a new manager to oversee even a slight improvement, fresh ideas, new manager bounce etc. Following a game with Lambert in the stands and a caretaker on the touchline, Lambert oversaw 13 points from 15 games (3 of which came in a dead rubber on the last day) accumulating 0.87 points per game. Same at Ipswich. Hurst undoubtedly did a woeful job, picking up 9 points from 15 games, 0.6 points per game. Lambert has picked up the same squad, added to it, and picked up 9 points from 16 games, 0.56 points per game. Piss poor.

I hate to speak like Rafa Benitez but I am dealing with facts here. Hurst got sacked after 9 points from 15 points, an embarrassingly low number of points, and was deservedly sacked. Lambert has since taken the same squad that Hurst had, presumably expecting at least some sort of improvement on Hursts sorry points total. He has since gone on and accumulated 9 points from 16 games. Why does he deserve any longer in the job? On top of the squad that Hurst had, which he has got even less from than Hurst got, he has been able to bring in 7 players (two thirds of a team essentially) on short term deals. Losses in their last 4 games suggests that his work in the transfer market has not improved them at all. Further to this, the work he is doing is very short term. Judge seemed a good signing before he stuck him out wide every week. Will Keane is dog shit, Callum Elder is dog shit, Dawkins is dog shit, and any minutes they play are done neither to the benefit of the short term or the long term, which they wont be around for, Neither will Collins, Quaner or Bree next season. I have no care for Ipswich fans opinions, their opinions have proved to be meaningless with how they see McCarthy. I only care about results. Lambert might talk a good game, he did here, banging on about what hes learnt in Germany etc, slagging off the job that previous managers or owners have done to curry favour, paying for coach travel as a gimmick to take the spotlight slightly away from the fact that his team is losing every week by showing what a lovely man he is. I am giving you why I think Paul Lambert is very lucky to still be in a job, in cold, hard, black and white facts. Talking to biased supporters would not make a difference to my opinion. My opinion is solely based on point accumulation, and it is pretty water tight based on what I have said above. The fact of the matter is, you are refusing to acknowledge that Lamberts record with the same players Hurst add with some of his own players on top is even worse than his predecessor. For me, if Hursts record warranted dismissal, and it did, so equally does Lamberts. End of.

Nyambe, Travis and Armstrong (21) and Raya (23) are all regulars, as are Lenihan and Bell (24) so lets not make out that we dont give any of the kids a chance. As much as a play off push and equally a relegation scrap seem miles off at the moment, there are far too many games to go to just solely focus on the future. I do suspect that your expectations are unrealistic, and constantly namedropping world class players like Mbappe and Rashford does nothing to help your cause, yes they are young but they have obvious masses of ability. For example, suggesting that Butterworth should be in the 18 would be a fairly reasonable suggestion. Suggesting that he should be chucked in ahead of our best player is a laughable suggestion. I would be open to potentially giving a couple of the academy players a go in the squad if with 3 or 4 games to go the play offs are mathematically out of reach and we are safe but im not for making wholesale changes yet. The 2 youngsters not currently with the first team squad that I suspect are first in line are Chapman and Davenport, 2 prospects as of yet not able to play due to fitness issues.