YorkshirePudding

Incorrect with a couple of points: Maddison was not the best player on the pitch - Pinto was. He was the only one who had a proper ''go'' and made more progress down the right than any other player did anywhere else. Madds was a bit off-colour compared to usual. The change to a back 3 was not reasonable at all - we were winning at HT. Changing the defensive structure unnecessarily during a game is too risky for it''s own good. As it showed early into the second half. Klose is overrated as a passer - when he tries a longer pass he fails 80% of the time. I prefer defenders like Hanley in the champs. Leave the passing to those who naturally can. Hanley looked like a proper, solid, traditional defender. Winning everything in the air, covering well.

It is a great jacket. If he let his hair go a bit he wouldn''t look out of place fronting an Oasis tribute band. P.s. to whoever said about pretty green prices - you should check Stone Island

I''ll explain why he gets a bit of grief... even though it''s blindingly obvious. Apart from a handful of recent games, he''s largely been ineffective - poor passing, slow, loses the ball and wasteful in front of goal. He rages at other players a lot of the time when he''s hardly a leading example of quality himself Oh, and for all this we paid £7m+ NN I suppose you also thought Neil didn''t deserve to be sacked...

While thought has clearly gone into this very long post, have you actually been to all of the games which Irvine has been in charge? Or have you basing this from just the Brighton game? If so, the coaching/managerial staff will adapt to the opposition each game and so this may not be representative of Irvine''s general tactical approach. Moreover, some of the aspects you make about Irvine''s ''tweaks'' sometimes were employed by Alex Neil, again depending on opposition, but the players were ineffective at carrying the tactics out. For example, you say ''Dorrans drops when the centre backs split'' and ''Oliveira drops deeper'' etc. but they were doing that anyway when playing, just generally the team wasn''t performing as well, or on a consistent basis. In fact, the form of the team under Irvine cannot be yet determined due to his, thus far, short tenure. I just don''t think nature and success of these ''tweaks'' are solely by way of Irvine''s efforts. There''s been a few different factors that could have effected how the team play - Webber''s introduction and overhaul of staff, the imminent summer transfer window, the departure of a manager who''d lost his way.

Sorry I must have missed the bit where he''s taught to convincingly look like he can defend. He''s great at that, but even better at letting goals in.

Irvine never said he didn''t want the job, he said he wasn''t going to apply.

He was in our half because he''s finally realised that he''s absolute dogsh1t in front of goal.

You''d make more money betting against Ipsh1t to get promoted... Actually, i have a masters degree. I may consider applying just so I could laugh in Mick McCarthy''s face

He did pretty well in the last two games but suffers from inconsistency

Depends who the ''head coach'' is. I would only if I knew others were.

Clearly post of the week this one.

Bomber should we just stop playing now then since you know it ain''t gonna happen? All hail the opinion of Bomber

Steven Naismith could easily have been cast in trainspotting. Probably on an equal footballing ability as ''Spud'' too.

Surprised to not hear Jackett mentioned a bit more now that Rowett and Warburton have been taken.

I would personally prefer to see Kenny Jackett zipping over (get it?) to Carrow Road to take over the managerial duties. He''s got more experience than Rowett and has a great track record with similar-sized clubs - Swansea, Millwall, Wolves. Pardew obviously has the most experience but not sure if he''d want the job imo.