Rousseau

Seeing that Marseille team like...

Or maybe 4-2-3-1, with Dorrans beside Jack, Niko No.10 and Miller wide?

Flat 4-4-2, with Dorrans LM? Looks like two up front, but why is Miller there...? Is Rossiter injured again?

[tweet]888746181442011137[/tweet]

I think dB is pointing out that Proges seem to be a tough outfit to break down, which seems fair. We still should've beaten them, though.

I think Foderingham is under-appreciated, but he still has things to improve upon; he's still young so I'm confident he'll develop well over the next few years. A compilation of his best saves (after a certain date, I think, which I don't recall): [tweet]819635196689584128[/tweet]

Your plea to 'PC believers' works both ways. There is certainly a division, with both sides at either end of the spectrum; the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

Could work, but I do think you need the wide CBs to be comfortable playing wide, almost as full-backs, with a bit of pace; Cardoso is the only one I see being able to do that, and that's only with a few games played. I think Wallace played LCB at one stage: that could be better, for me, than Bates or WIlson?

This game has really brought out the divisions within the support, and fairly got the juices going! I love Rangers.

5 out of the last 6 then?

I agree with Craig: I don't think we have the centre-backs for a back-three. I like the formation too, but perhaps not for us at this time. I think the width has to come from the full-backs, which is not that unusual. I loved the AC Milan side that played a 4-4-2 diamond, with midfielders that didn't play with; the width coming from their full-backs. My only worry is that Wallace and Tavernier have been rather poor with their crossing thus far - might be better with 2 up front, as it was today?

Fair enough, I'll apologise if not, but it just sounds/looks like the 'PC arguing with fans' debacle, when in fact he was just talking and apologising.

I usually don't care about the results of these games, and although the result doesn't concern, the fact that we've now gone 5 games (?) without scoring is really annoying me. I like the intensity, the defensive organisation, but it doesn't matter if we can't score goals.

Kranjcar wasn't screaming at PC, he was screaming at the ref after a pretty bad challenge on him by one of the opposition players; studs up kind of thing. I wish people would stop making pish up to suite their agenda. FFS. (Not having a go at FS.)

They're not playing "wide" though, are they? It's a 4-3-1-2 or 4-4-2 diamond: there is no wide player. I like the idea; it gets the bet players in the team.

Since us last year?

Not happy with the quality, but they were fine with Windass, Crooks, Gilks, Senderos, Hodson and Garner? FFS.

We'll most likely lose, but hopefully we can keep it respectable, and see our side line up against a top side that won't sit ten men behind the ball!

Ah... if only this was two years ago, we would've seen the genius that is Marcelo Bielsa.

I think the Progres-AEL game shows that Progres were perhaps better defensively than we gave them credit for. However, we should not be conceding two goals against them, as they had very little quality going forward. We missed glaring opportunities in that second leg too.

I suspect they were misinformed. Was it not revealed that we actually got more than 500k?

Haven't we been over this? There are a few good managers that were 'keepers, excluding the few that you mention: Lopetagui, Blackwell, Adkins, Beasant, Preud'homme, Slutsy, Nuno Santo, and Caixinha (maybe too early to say if he will be good...). I'm amused that you keep bringing up this argument to imply/prove that Caixinha is/will be a poor manager. Of course there are going to be fewer former goalkeepers as managers because, as you quoted from the Guardian, there is a smaller pool of candidates. What about those managers that didn't play football at all? Andre Villas-Boas, Sacchi, Carlos Alberto Parreira, Avram Grant, Brian Kerr, and our very own Bill Struth. Even Wenger and Mourinho had very little success as players, if you can even call it a career. A player's playing career, and less so his position, has very little bearing on whether they will be a good manager or not.

I doubt the Juventus guys are available. And then it'd only be Chiellini or Bonucci, as Barzagli is 36; the former is a die-hard Juve man and the latter would cost a fortune - Chelsea probably have it, though. Rudiger is a good young player, with experience of playing in Italy in a back three.

I've got the feeling Pena will play as one of two DMs. He's a box-to-box player that likes to arrive late, rather than an orthodox attacking midfielder. I can see Dorrans being the No.10, although that doesn't leave room for Kranjcar!! Foderingham Tavernier - Alves - Cardoso - Wallace Jack - Pena Candeias - Dorrans/Kranjcar - Dalcio/Miller Herrera/Morelos I've not been impressed with Wallace, so I'd prefer Beerman -- or at least given a shot, but I doubt it. Miller has been piss poor in that inside forward role, but he might be better with a more attacking player (Pena) behind him, with more support and options; Dorrans is more mobile than Kranjcar too. We've not got many natural wingers, but we do have options in Windass, Holt, Dodoo and Waghorn in an inside forward role. Not ideal, but they can play there -- if indeed it is an inside forward role. A 4-2-2-2 (or even a 4-4-2 diamond) could be interesting too, with Kranjcar and Dorrans as double No.10s and our FBs providing the width: Fod Tav - Alves - Cardoso - Wallace Jack - Pena Dorrans - Kranjcar Morelos/Miller - Herrera