Rousseau

I must admit that I too, despite playing well in games -- especially in the DM role -- am not particularly enthused about Ball returning. Yes, he did well, but not spectacularly well. He may be a good squad player, with plenty of promise, but I'd prefer a more experienced CB/DM -- he's probably well down the pecking order in the latter role now anyway. I'm starting to get frustrated at the lack of defensive targets, but I'm pleased we're still looking at a few midfield players; they're starting to include more defensive midfield targets, which is better than going for No.10 all the time. The Ugandan DM would be a good buy; we don't have any proper destroyer-types -- Barton can do that, but I suspect he'll be a more creative, deep-lying playmaker. The variety of midfielders looks promising: it's not just No.10s. And, like dB says, it's still early in the window. We have to trust the manager knows what we need.

I like Mourinho, but I doubt he's the right man for Man Utd. He may get them competitive in the title-race again, but he has failed to show he can sustain it at a club over a longer period of time. He's also not renowned for playing attractive, attacking football -- although I do like is pragmatism and tactical nous. Another gripe is youth-development; he's not shown he can incorporate younger players into his teams. I'm pleased to see him back in the game, but I doubt he's the right man for Utd. I hope he proves me wrong.

Could be quite tidy if he's in the Wanyama mold. However... DEFENDERS!!

Swansea? Cardiff? There is precedent.

It''s easy to forget how intelligent he actually is, with all the "off-field stuff". I believe he was doing a philosophy course last year, and he come across very well on Question Time a while back. He's always been an articulate man, quoting Nietzche etc., but it's easy to be deceived by the 'tough guy' persona/perception. I can see a double pivot of Barton and Rositter next season; a deep-lying playmaker role for Barton with a bit of aggression and steel. It sounds quite exciting!

I thank them for their services, and wish them well. They tried (Clark in particular) but were found wanting, unfortunately. I wouldn't mind keeping Shiels around: he seems to be content being a squad player (34+ games off the bench this season apparently), which is quite rare, I think; I still think he can do a job here and there.

Can I get "You're a joke, Tom" on a T-shirt? Fantastic work Frankie! It must be soul-destroying to be consistently burned by logic.

He likes a lean squad, but I don't think that covers struggling to name 5 players on the bench -- presumably he'd like more than that! Too light a squad, that meant we couldn't hope to sustain early season form. He may have to deviate from that desire, considering the amount of games we expect to play in a season. It's a learning curve for him, and I hope he'll take the lessons on board. He doesn't appear to be too stubborn; he's demonstrated he can change some things, even if the philosophy must remain.

That's a good point. I think this failing (to change tactics) is down to having very few options on the bench. Warburton must take the blame for that, but I expect (hope?) to see several additions made to rectify this problem in the summer.

OK -- I'll give it a rest. Thanks for this most edifying debate.

Here's another one: [tweet]734119939993391104[/tweet]

You can say the same about Bayern Munich and Barcelona: they play predictable football. There is a difference between being predictable and being ineffective. I think Hibs were fairly predictable -- 5 at the back and counter, then move to their normal 4-4-2 (diamond) when they were pushing to get back into the game -- but they were effective. Predictability shouldn't matter, if we're doing the right things, but it's the efficacy that is the issue. We need better players, and we need better options on the bench.

What's your point? We don't do something, because we don't?

He doesn't fit into the team. We need better players, certainly, but not players that don't fit. Moreover, he actually lost a heading duel to Miller for our equiliser, so he's hardly great in the air; Hibs have been poor in the air for a while. (It does beg the question, why didn't we put more balls into the box?)

Like I said elsewhere, he sounds like a nutcase, but I highly doubt he's speaking on behalf of his party. Politics in this situation just makes it worse. There are many tweets/comments (and lack thereof) from all shades of the political spectrum. I don't care for political pointscoring in what is an already thoroughly disgusting and abhorrent situation.

Sounds like a bit of a nutter...

Sorry - not directed at you; more a general statement as there's been a couple.

No need to bring politics into it.

[tweet]734093977746575360[/tweet]

[tweet]734084262778052608[/tweet]

[tweet]734084758397915136[/tweet]

[tweet]734077677213220864[/tweet]

[tweet]734089598041784320[/tweet]

Just because we all need a wee smile: [tweet]734085450181271552[/tweet]

Blatant piece of spin by The Sun, but at least Andy Walker's telling the truth.