That as maybe, but whats the rush to get a practically untested into the side/squad, in the last 6 pressure cooker games of a promotion push, when the team is winning games? Surely let him finish what hes doing for the u23s, then integrate him over pre season.

To be fair, theres an element of truth in that, hes failed both times hes played in the league above it. Hope he proves it wrong with us next season.

Going back to that article, at the end of the day a manager can be doing one of 3 things: - Exceed expectations - Hit expectations - Fail to hit expectations Carry on as we are and he will be doing the middle one, Hirst deserves the manager of the year as hes in the top category, Mowbray and Cook deserve credit for doing the second. I know a few people are seemingly set on spreading the notion that the angry mob are constantly criticising him, but the vast majority of things I see are positive, that doesnt mean people shouldnt criticise minor things ie team selections, subs, all part of being a football fan but I feel like he gets alot of praise and backing which he deserves. Crowds home and away are healthy, and are certainly behind him. Hes not underappreciated in my opinion. Even from last year when he failed to keep us up, the fans backing throughout the summer and at the start was constant, there was a period of understandable doubt after wed lost 4 in 11 because we looked destined for more underachievement but hes turned it around.

No idea. For me the worst part is the lack of notice, maybe theyll announce it the day before.

To be fair they have moved some of ours recently to stupid times.

How much of a joke is it that Sky have put on Sunderland away at Fulham on a Friday night with 3 weeks notice?

The point was absolutely nothing to do with that. It was simply that you are discounting McCarthys previous achievements, whereas you are basing Lamberts promotions from 7 years ago as reason as to why he is the best man to get Stoke back if he takes them down.

No I never. Im not saying that McCarthy has done the 2, it was other posters. I said its hypocritical to discount the point that McCarthy has had success in the past playing attractive football, because as you argued, that "Football has change so much in the past 5 years let alone 16 years" Then in the same breath suggest that Lambert should be trusted even if Stoke go down because hes had promotion in the past, which was 7 years ago. What has Paul Lambert done anytime recently to suggest that he would be capable of achieving promotion?

You're missing the point. What you think of why Lambert hasnt achieved what hes set out at his last 4 clubs is irrelevant. You suggested that @Bigdoggsteels point was a moot one because McCarthys success with Ireland was a long time ago and football has changed, even in the last 5 years. So surely Lamberts success or lack of in recent times means that hes possibly not the man youd want to be spearheading a promotion push, was he to relegate them?

Point being, whether there were mitigating circumstances in any of them, hes not achieved what he set out to achieve at any club hes managed in recent years. Therefore, how is that different to peoples points, most pertinently @Bigdoggsteel that McCarthy has proven in the past with other teams that he can have success AND play attractive football, as he did for Ireland? Which was also well in the past, as was Lamberts success. (also unconvined that after spending what they did on Helder Costa and Cavaleiro that he couldnt have done better last year, but thats beside the point)

Can I ask why you rate Lambert so much? You mention the hypothetical scenario of relegation, if that happened hed have failed to bring to success to Villa, Rovers, Wolves and then Stoke in succession. You are basing his job therefore on past success; how would that be any different from others defending McCarthy in a similar way? McCarthy has no money and a team full of grafters but no real flair or quality, and they are comfortably mid table, I do understand why fans might get itchy feet but id not be remotely surprised if a more "exciting" appointment followed and then they started to fall as a result.

Thought you preferred Rashford to Sterling?

Thought Sterling was a class apart, 2nd name on the teamsheet, so clever between the lines. Stones was awful, all for passing out from the back but theres a line. Does that in the world cup like he did tonight and we will soon be going home. Dier again very little use, in contrast to henderson the other night whose limited but fitted the style of play much better.

I personally wasnt convinced last season either.

Think its just his loan that ends. Besides, had a poor season.

I don't understand the point of the discussion if rather than picking the team you'd play, you are just discussing what team you think Southgate will play and agreeing with that. You also said the other day that you wouldnt pick Smalling. If people would prefer a different formation, or players that are unfavoured by Southgate, it still doesnt change peoples opinions that theyd prefer someone else.

No it doesnt! You are picking the squad that YOU would take, so you dont consider it at all. I wouldnt have him anywhere near, and if he does IN MY OPINION itd be a mistake.

My point was that history suggest that the likelihood is that he will be unable to reach expectations as a manager, hence why people are so dubious of him, no idea how he got the job. Your point on Livermore is crazy. It suggests that all of your opinions are not your own, you are second guessing Southgate. If you dont rate Livermore then why do you think he should be in the squad?!

Id love to know how different decent and competence are in your mind. My doubts on Southgate are not based on yesterday, please dont take my comments out of context. Hes not a good manager based on his CV. I dont feel he knows his best 11 either, I think thats a valid criticism, theres so much uncertainty. Hes also got faith in some players such as Livermore who ill come onto which is crazy. I do give him credit for attempting to create some sort of identity, the 3 at the back at the passing it out, whether we have the players to do it v the big teams, id certainly doubt but to be fair it is brave. How can you argue against the lack of fluidity in attack. We dont create many clear cut chances, weve scored I think 3 in 5, and in attack we have many players, Kane, Vardy, Rahford, Sterling, Alli, Lingard etc all have such good numbers, goals and assists for their clubs that youd think we could get plenty of goals for England. If Eric Dier is 2nd on your team sheet then id hate to see the 9 after that, definitely have him in the squad but hes so average. Lack of depth point, I think wing back and front 3, we look strong even beyond first choice. Goalkeeper theres a big problem as none of them have made the shirt their own, I'd go with Pickford and not even consider taking Hart, that said I dont feel that Southgate knows his best keeper. Centre back, only Stones (whose in poor form and out of Citys team) and Maguire I am 100% on, Ive no idea what Joe Gomez has done to become first choice, and many of the others you mention are steady Prem players at low clubs, but they are a step down from the first 2. The most obvious lack of depth is in central midfield. Henderson and Wilshire are the best 2, both flawed and injury prone. Beneath that, theres Dier, and then the well runs dry. Chamberlain is out of position playing in a central 2, dont remember him playing there for his club, Cook again id probably take but hes a big step down in quality, then theres nothing really. You suggest taking Livermore, can you please tell me what he offers to England?

Decent performance from what I saw that owed as much to Hollands incompetence I think. Dont think Southgate knows his best team which is a major worry, I do feel that when we get to Russia, his managerial incompetence coupled with an obvious lack of playing experience, and the lack of depth that may well be exposed with any injuries, they are 3 major reasons why we are limited in how far we can go, with what is actually a first team containing players that are perhaps slightly better than most give them credit for. Henderson played well last night, I do feel in general hes a very flawed player but hes a step up from the massively overrated Eric Dier. That centre of midfield looks the weakest out of all positions really, and for me our best bet is a massively injury prone Wilshire and a limited Henderson, which tells you everything. Got big problems both there and at centre back. I don't think we look anywhere near fluent enough going forward considering thats where our obvious strengths are, changing from 2 playing either side of a number 9, to a number 10 playing behind 2, I'd hope that maybe Kane and Sterling with Alli in support, and Rashford and Vardy on the bench. Think our best team overall is, assuming hes stuck with 3 at the back, Pickford / Jones Stones Maguire / Walker Henderson Wilshire Rose (or Young) / Alli / Sterling Kane Under a competent manager, and with no injuries, thats still not an elite team like Spain, Germany or Brazil, but potentially part of the bracket underneath.

Not many, solely used as back up there, appearances tend to be 10 minutes at the end. Akpan, probably the worst of the lot was signed by penniless Burton, amidst the likes of Varney in a squad scrambled together, Lowe not getting a sniff at Birmingham in what was a signing of desperation by Redknapp and Mahoney likewise at Barnsley, very strange loan deal. None of the 4 players would make our 18 now.

Incredible how Mahoney, Akpan, Lowe and Feeney have all been taken a chance on by Championship sides. That said, based on the gametime and success they are having, it suggests their current managers have seen what we have all seen.

If Southgate is picking solely on clubs, please explain the following: Joe Hart - One of a needlessly high number of keepers, has been in terrible form for years now, and dropped for the average Adrian, given a chance at the weekend and made a big error again. Shouldnt even be considered for the World Cup. Jake Livermore - Performances particularly poor even in a woeful team, dropped as a result and also recent shenanigans in Barcelona suggest hes not the best professional either. No idea why he Adam Lallana - barely played in months. Talented but not playing games. Danny Welbeck - ravaged by injury, and very poor goal record, granted he got a couple last night after the squad announcement (after a clear dive for the first) but not good enough. Chris Smalling - Not a big fan, but not sure how you can justify leaving out a regular starter for the 2nd highest team in the Premier League, yet can justify players like Joe Gomez being in. I appreciate that you can say hes not the best on the ball but you cant pick defenders solely on that. Not sure with the lack of depth that we can rule anyone out solely on lack of appearances, assuming they offer something extra, for example Lallana and Rose. Dont agree with Loftus-Cheek, Hart, Gomez or Welbeck being in the squad, Ashley Young in with a shout of left wing back over Bertrand on form, Lewis Cook maybe in there too, and Henderson. Youve only included 2 central midfielders that can play in a 2. One being injury prone and one being Eric Dier. Otherwise in the main its a pretty small pool to choose from but agree with most of the others. Harry Kane point is nonsense, look at his goal record in all competitions. Eric Dier is very lucky that England are bereft of depth in central midfield. Massively overrated, Id suggest even Hendersons a better bet.

Starting 12 you mean? Haha Squads been announced. A massive worry that Hart, Welbeck and in particular Livermore are all in, no idea what Southgates thinking is with any of them. Surprised Cahills not in, glad Keane isnt near the squad, think Lewis Cook and Alfie Mawson could be good picks though. I know its only a friendly but we are at the stage now where anyone being picked could go to Russia.

Wonder if that will end any chance of Chapman making the squad at he weekend.