Sickening? Talk about hyperbole. He chose a regular place at a club he professes to be his boyhood team, rather than a move to potentially be a squad player at a club wracked with history but very much a shadow of the club they used to be, albeit they have signed Higuain. How on earth can you enforce such a rule? As much as I appreciate @speeeeeeedie and his point about experiencing different cultures, mainly tactical for me, the situation has to be right, the club, the player. They need to be playing, the club needs to really want them and the player needs to believe in what he is doing too. From our 4 Champions League teams, but just like the big clubs across Europe, only the very best young talent will get a chance. City have Stones and Sterling playing regularly, Liverpool have Joe Gomez and Alexander-Arnold, and Chamberlain pre-injury, Tottenham have Kane, Trippier, Alli, and they had Winks semi-regular before his injuries, United have Shaw and Lingard, Rashford does need a move but I'm still unconvinced by him. Regarding tomorrow, I think Gomez and Shaw should come in, Walker to play v Spain and Trippier against Switzerland. Sterling's absence is a blow, and with an absence of other quality attackers, I would play Alli and/Lingard just off Kane, further forward than at the World Cup, and bring in another central midfielder. That would have been Will Hughes if he had been picked.

I imagine him, Maguire and Stones will be the central 3 which begs the question; Walker or Trippier?

Whilst i get that it can makes a refreshing change, im unconvinced that the players who have moved abroad have been the success stories as portrayed in the media. For all the hype surrounding Sancho and Lookman for example, in particular Sancho, they have failed to start very many games. Similar with Reece Oxford, his career has stagnated, and wasnt Nathaniel Chalaboh at Napoli in an unsuccessful spell without barely featuring, before signing for Watford and playing regularly pre injury.

Think he signed a 3 year deal.

Bennett and Rothwell seem to be the 2 most likely that people think should be chosen to replace Smallwood centrally alongside Evans but I think Harrison Reed should start v Aston Villa. Played plenty of games there which is his natural position last season for Norwich, and both tidy in possession and full of energy and tenacity from what ive seen and heard.

As boring as the squad is, most of the squad deserved to be called up again following the World Cup. Theres no need for 4 keepers, and the likes of Lallana before his injury, Rose, Delph and Welbeck could justify a call up. Even Rashford but for a total absence of strikers, making Vardys situation even more puzzling. Im not sure who could have been included. There are plenty of calls for the likes of Foden, Lookman and Sancho but none of them are playing much senior football. For all the praise Sancho gets for joining Dortmund, he doesnt play very often, nor will Lookman this season, and Foden needed a loan spell, he will barely kick a ball in anger this at City. Sessegnon could maybe deserve a shout for that left wing back role behind Shaw but hes not a guaranteed starter at Fulham anymore and has had form issues. Maddison and Demarai Gray have impressed in the first few games but im unsure if theyve either done enough to get an England call, or if theyd fit into the formation and way Southgate plays. Mason Mount as a wildcard shout following his form at Vitesse? Lewis Cook would certainly be more deserving than Fabian Delph but again, like Sessegnon, this season hes seemingly fallen out of favour. Ben Chilwell? Maybe. The one who for me hasnt been mentioned but deserved a place is Will Hughes. I think the pool is so small. But i wouldnt have called up Bettenelli, Delph, Rose, Lallana, Welbeck. And I would have called up Dunk, Chilwell/Sessegnon, Hughes, Mount and Ive literally no clue on another striker. A choice of Welbeck, Deeney and Wilson shows exactly how weak we are in that area. Danny Ings maybe?!

Raya definitely should be at least dissapointing/poor play for the first as it was at his side. And the third was horrendous keeping (as well as defending) Mulgrew on 22 minutes was pushed in the back hence the whistle being blown so unfair to put down as terrible play. @Bigdoggsteel whilst I get what you are saying to an extent I feel that Mulgrews defensive capabilities, including aerielly are overlooked due to him being so capable on the ball as well. The Boro defence you quote (although Randolph is keeper) is very much an extreme case in that Pulis always plays centre backs or tall players at full back. There are plenty of natural full backs under 6 foot in this league. At centre back, Mulgrew is 6ft3 and Lenihan 6ft1 and a half. And the latter is very much an old fashioned type of centre back. On Sunday we failed to protect them, 1 on 1 repeatedly they may struggle but they shouldnt be left in that situation. 3 clean sheets in 6 games is a healthy record. Theres more than one way to skin a cat even if you dont share my view that both are pretty good in the air. Leeds are joint top and theyve played a full back in Berardi at centre back (Bielsa often picks other positions at centre back to add composure) ahead of man mountain Pontus Jansson.

Saying that Lenihan is a converted midfielder is doing him a slight disservice as much as it is true. Hes never a central midfielder and looked out of his depth when played there. His main weakness is on the ball, hes pretty good in the air, hes brave, hes definitely a centre back and should never be used in midfield again. He struggled to hold a place over the likes of Lowe and Akpan, it was when he was moved back (something that isnt alien to him coming through the ranks) that he stepped up a notch or 2. Mulgrews ball playing style takes away from the fact that hes a very capable defender, and physically on numerous occasions came to the forefront last season. He obviously was far more versatile when younger at Celtic but I'm sure Celtic fans said when he can here that hes a good signing but only as a centre back. Apparently had some shockers in Europe and for Scotland in midfield. Pulis likes having essentially 4 centre backs as a back 4. Always has done. Mowbray showed a lot of loyalty in the summer handing out contracts and never straying from saying that new signings were to help the players who got us promoted. That said, I do hope over the season that loyalty alone doesnt hold much weight. Smallwood has for me already ran out of credit in terms of starting, Reed and Davenport potentially both deserve a chance before Smallwood is obviously given another start. Bennett still has some credit in the bank and has had a couple of impressive performances, especially v Brentford but I do expect him to improve in an attacking sense.

My point was, I would imagine many viewers of foreign football in England are casual, hence the lack of take up now that we have to pay extra to access it. Hardcore fans or fans of specific Italian and Spanish teams will end up subscribing to Eleven Sports, and if necessary, finance permitting at the expense of Sky Sports and BT. Your problem is an inability to show empathy to anyone with different needs or from a different perspective, as shown by your views on the Darwen End Closure, IMO. If English football was moved to Eleven Sports and Spanish had remained on Sky, we would both have probably had to bite the bullet and get Eleven Sports, and if it was too costly, remove Sky Sports or BT to make way. I share your skepticism towards streaming games and am not a fan of it. I hope @J*B is wrong in his prediction that within 5 to 10 years we will all be streaming matches as most if you gave them the choice would watch on tv as they do now. But sadly if thats the only place where its available then that id what will happen.

Agreed. I think in terms of summer recruitment, all 3 of the 7 players to have started a game since signing (Palmer, Rothwell and Armstrong) have shown signs that they can contribute, and on paper, I think in terms of individual quality, most should be able to have an impact on our season. But it isnt quality I have potential doubts over, it is the balance of the recruitment. Going into the summer, we needed a centre back to push the main 2 we have, we needed width, we needed a couple of attackers, we needed someone to come into central midfield, and we needed someone to take the creative burden off Dack. In signing 7 players, 3 of whom are defensive midfielders, 2 of whom are natural centrally attacking players and 2 of whom are forwards, we have addressed quite a few of the above needs, but not all of them, suggesting a slight imbalance in our dealings. Ideally we could have signed a winger and a centre back aswell as the above, giving us a very healthy squad, something which I presume wasnt beyond the realms of possibility if we was chasing Chapman on deadline day. If not, then surely at least one of the 3 defensive midfielders could have been sacrificed. I personally think that Mulgrew and Lenihan are better in the air than you have given them credit for, and I wouldn't be in any rush to replace them in the starting 11, fitness permitting, anytime soon. That said, we certainly need more options in that area than we currently have.

Why would they? And if you are a supporter of a team in them leagues, which we arent, we are casual viewers, then youd pay for the rights regardless. Why would they choose a lower deal to allow fans who support English clubs to watch it casually and infrequently without having to pay any extra?

I dont necessarily think that Mowbray is at all too attacking in terms of his set up, 2 defensive midfielders and one winger whose in the team primarily to defend could be seen as very cautious. When we look organised, as we have done 3 times, we seem to keep clean sheets. In the other 3 games, weve conceded 8 goals. We seem to be either well drilled or all over the show.

To be fair, you could say that about anyone on Sunday. That said, the one thing you know about the Graham, Dack and Armstrong axis is that it works well in tandem. I hope that Armstrong as a 10 isnt something we do again as it didnt work. We have more than enough natural number 10s to play that role.

Sadly only Lyons! (Nothing against him, never heard of him, but Chapman would have been nice)

As much as that is true in terms of individuals, im not sure that it is necessarily totally accurate. We had Jason Steele, the worst keeper that I can remember, in goal for the majority of that season. Whilst I think that David Raya makes considerably more than an average amount of mistakes, he is definitely an upgrade on Steele. Ryan Nyambe has developed considerably on the incredibly raw and nervy full back that emerged half way through that season. Derrick Williams remains at a similar level but we do have Amari'i Bell to give him a bit of competition. Charlie Mulgrew and Darragh Lenihan had significant issues with injuries, albeit they are very prone to them and we would be lucky to see them both avoid injury throughout the season. They were also often wasted in midfield with the poor stand ins mentioned below asked to fill in at centre back. We also have potentially better options that Jason Lowe, Danny Guthrie and Hope Akpan in central midfield, not that its difficult. Corry Evans has always shown quality in spells around being dogged by injury, we do also have Harrison Reed, after an impressive season at Norwich, Jacob Davenport who impressed at Burton but is only young, Elliott Bennett who wasnt considered to be a central midfielder at that time, Jack Rodwell who is very much a gamble and Richie Smallwood who there are big question marks about. Overall I think we do have better options in there however to protect the defence than we did 2 seasons ago. The problem could lie in strength in depth. Mowbrays failure to sign a centre back this summer could come back to haunt him. That last season was riddled with incompetent stand-ins, Elliott Ward, Gordon Greer, Tommie Hoban, Wes Brown etc, whenever Mulgrew and Lenihan were injured or wasted in midfield. Whilst we have managed to ship out them 4, and although Mulgrew and Lenihan are permanent centre backs, we only have one player who can naturally cover, and in Paul Downing there are big question marks over his ability at this level.

Rich Sharpe has suggested that he will be publishing a story tomorrow in the LT on his twitter feed, and that there is a chance of it going through.

Again, taking criticism about an INDIVIDUAL match and both managerial decisions and player performances that may have caused the INDIVIDUAL thrashing and using them within a bigger picture to try and make a mockery of valid points. You say its a massive leap, something that people are basically in universal agreement and understanding on. Believe you me, if we had lost 4-1 to Rochdale or Fleetwood then criticism would have been twice as strong. You say cut a bit of slack, but people are commenting about ONE GAME in the appropriate match thread. Please highlight quotes whereby people are suggesting that they think we will struggle throughout the entire season, that there are questions about Mowbrays future, or anything that demonstrates anything other than criticism over an individual performance and result. It might happen on occasion, but if it does, it will warrant criticism. Just as if we do it to someone else, we will get praise.

And where fans of every team that hammers another team convincingly will eulogise their team in praise, whereas teams that are hammered in abject fashion will be criticised by their fans.

Eleven Sports presumably bid more than Sky or BT for the rights so its not a case of deserving it, if they bid more then it is what it is. I bet the ratings have gone down so we will see if its sustainable long term, personally I hope not but I imagine that football rights diversifying over several channels (Amazon Prime have also secured some rights) and even into streaming will continue over the next few years. Gone are the days of one network covering all of the games, to the cost of the consumer. I am very disappointed with it as I did watch both leagues but on very much a casual basis. For example, between the evening PL game and the EFL highlights being on. I would never pay for a seperate subscription or go out of my way to watch it online via streaming as you touch on, hence why I suspect that ratings will have dropped. Find Sky and BT to both be pretty good in terms of coverage in the main, although I prefer pundits such as Jamie Redknapp and Michael Owen to be kept off. BT is made worthwhile with both Premier League games and European games.

I'd argue that the best place to move on isnt the thread of the game we got hammered in.

Theres a noticeable swarm of people, and this isnt specifically aimed at Parson at all so apologies if it seems it, who seem to only be willing to accept praise and if we lose, or do something that could potentially be critiqued, its put down as "one of those things, we cant win them all, have some perspective, dont be negative etc." In the main, supporters will praise and criticise when due in equal measure. Id argue its part of our culture to go to the game and go to the pub or whatever afterwards and say what youd do differently etc to your mates. Nothing wrong with putting yourself in the managers shoes, weve all got different opinions and it doesnt mean we think we can do a better job than Mowbray or think overall we are doing badly. Yesterday I felt that Smallwood had ran out of credit and should have been dropped, and I felt that Palmer and Armstrong should have been in the opposite roles to which they ended up in. And I stand by those criticisms. Does that mean I think I would make a better manager than Mowbray? Obviously not. Does that mean I fear for our season after that solitary game, or that Mowbray should go? Again, certainly not. As you say, we are specifically in a thread for a game we lost 4-1 in. The majority of criticism has been about decisions made during this game, and its only those who seem desperate to highlight these criticisms who are in fact the ones ironically guilty of lacking perspective. For all the criticism in here, there is an equal amount of praise in the Brentford thread, mainly for the characteristics that were absent yesterday.

You are as guilty as anyone of taking tbe game out of context. In the main people are solely judging on yesterdays game. No over the top conclusions that we will go down, or Mowbray should go or any crap like that. In this individual game thread people will comment on tactical choices, subs and selections ect that people feel he did wrong. Mowbray will make mistakes, he is human and football is a game of opinions. "The poor guy cant win" is nonsense. Last week he seemingly got his tactics absolutely spot on and look at the praise he got then in the Brentford thread.

Agreed. Theres a bit of a myth that old fashioned wingers dont exist anymore but I've provided lists of wingers throughout the Championship. I felt we should have made getting at least one in as an option in the summer a big priority. I do understand why players who are naturally strikers/centrally based midfielders are played wide, but ideally wed have a winger on one side to offset the fact that on the other side, our wide man will naturally drift in. Players like Palmer and Rothwell can be useful wide in that they will come in and link with Dack etc. Players like Armstrong wide, assuming your striker is someone like Graham who can hold the ball up, can use being wide to make clever runs in behind the striker and exploit the space thats left. But if you have one of these, its best in my opinion to have someone on the other side who keeps the width most of the time. Wingers, and they dont have to be defensively irresponsible. Infact naturally central players will often prove even less useful defensively as they will naturally come inside at times and leave their full back exposed. And @chaddyrovers the post wasnt just aimed at you. Just giving a few facts and a bit of meat on the bones against the flawed notion that he is a "show pony" without an end product.

There seems to be a bit of a myth forming whereby Palmer is a "show pony" with no end product and basically the opposite of Rothwell. Yes, Palmer has missed a couple of good chances but he has 3 goals in 6 games, he is contributing directly to a goal every other game. Rothwell for all his industry hasnt directly contributed to one, although he did play the pass that played in Bennett to cross for Palmer to score the winner v Brentford. Even today, Rothwell was a real bright spark when he came on but his final decision was lacking, no different to Palmer in that regard. Palmer has the added advantage of having historical evidence of competence in the division. In 16 starts and 8 sub appearances for Huddersfield, before getting a serious injury, he contributed with 4 goals and 3 assists, as well as a goal in a solitary FA Cup game. He got another 2 goals and an assist in 2 starts and 13 sub appearances for Derby, and a further assist in the cup. Not ground breaking or enough to suggest any level of consistency, but hes not just a show pony. For both, we have to appreciate that they are central players "doing a job out wide." For me, thats down to an imbalanced recruitment, albeit I think both players can play a big part. Stuart, you mention that 3 of our front 6 need to be "worker bees" and Mowbray said again today that is what he will continue to play, I personally think there are times when we only need 2.

Apologies, I didnt mean to sound as if I was complaining that you was criticising his performance. I believe that people should in general be able to criticise todays performance, individuals and collectively, just as everyone was in universal agreement that last week we were as good as we were bad today. I just wanted to point out that he has already scored 3 goals so there is definitely some end product. I did think he was poor today but I feel like basically everyone in the team was. His miss was very poor just as it was at Ipswich, no denying that. Its important to remember that he is a number 10 and I feel like Mowbray carries some of the brunt today for his and Armstrongs performances for the roles he gave them both. For me, in Dacks absence, Palmer should be played centrally. Can't comment on Bells performances for Fleetwood but in his first couple of games here he was refreshingly attacking and he does seem to have reigned that side of his game in since. Nyambe isnt very attacking in general and his crossing is far worse than Bell's, I do wonder if Mowbray specifically instructs them to sit further back.