All the Germans

Previously, I'd have liked Southampton and Leicester to survive but all of the others in with a chance, to be relegated. Due to recent events, the only one that I'd like to survive is Southampton, who won't. So, it is with a heavy heart that I will let West Ham off and choose Everton and Leeds to go with them, please.

I loved Farke (and still do). His sacking was absolute madness and it genuinely still makes me a little sad to think about. I would have loved it for him to stay, develop a proper legacy for years and end up with a statue. However, I think it would be absolutely harsh to get rid of Wagner at this time and I'm not sure changing again is a good idea. In future, if the stars align, absolutely have Farke back - if he would have us after how he was thrown under the bus - but now is definitely not the time for me.

He's clearly just someones alter ego who is just on a wind up. Just ignore him.

Nice talking to you but your break is over, back to the mines.

Onel definitely has limitations, but he regularly causes a kind of chaos that we can benefit from in attack. If he is the best we've got, we're in trouble, but he is definitely worth keeping around as a part of the squad. Marquinhos on the other hand, I do not get. Always plays the safe, predictable, backwards pass. Never beats a man, never does anything progressive and may as well not be on the pitch. Brazillian on loan from Arsenal tells a whole different story to the reality of boring, passive and predictable.

Rubbish, from start to finish, rubbish. "I'm special, not like the rest of you, I care". Rubbish. (I'm a little ashamed that I've even bothered to respond to this).

Be careful what you wish for. Just because be are unhappy and people generally demand instant results, a change isn't worth making if you get someone worse in. People wanted to sack Farke but halfway through Smiths campaign, who would have preferred Farke back? Be careful what you wish for.

Leeds, Everton and West Ham, come on down.

I don't rate Hanley, but this is rubbish. We were winning comfortably before he went off and our most frail time was after he had gone off - admittedly late in the game when Gibson was off too. To suggest this comfortable win is anything to do with Hanley going off is letting your own bias overrule sense.

I like Hernandez but I thought he and Marquinhos were both comfortably the worst performers of the starting 11 today.

It's amazing what difference a goal makes, the team would've been slated for that performance if we were drawing or losing. It was OK but not brilliant (just like it wouldn't have been poor if we were losing).

McVeigh and Mulryne (in the pub).

Then I go back to my original statement. It is not a sensible statement to suggest we should have let him go despite not receiving any sensible offers.

It's such a tough, tough decision, can I have more than three relegated, please? I'd choose Leeds, Everton, West Ham, Bournemouth, Wolves, Forest and Palace to be relegated (in that order of preference) if I could just have a mere 7 teams relegated? Please?

A 15k offer for a 15k car with an asking price of 35k is still sensible; it is the asking price that is not sensible. I think you meant "no acceptable offers". Acceptable and sensible are different things.

This makes me sad for humanity.

How can you allow someone to move if there are no sensible offers? This does not make sense.

Please make it stop.

Phillips is rubbish, but he's loads better than Gilmour. Rice is good. (I like how you omit Bellingham, who is genuinely excellent).

I imagine Simon Lappin has conflicted feelings about this game.

I say this as someone with zero interest in Womens football and have no intention of watching it. The level of support is not the only thing here though, it's essentially the cost vs the level of support / viewing / income generation. So, even if Womens football has less support than Soccer AM (I am not sure if it does or not), it is not that straightforward of a comparison as there are other factors.

I think there's a big difference between A) Seeing his failures. B) Demanding him leave. C) Seeing him as the second coming. He has undoubtedly made mistakes (in my opinion sacking Farke being chief among them) but people in the B) camp above are often the same that wants to sack a manager when you are unlikely to get a better one or make a substitute when you've got David Strihavka sitting on the bench. They call for change in hope that it might improve. A change is only worth it if it's for the better. If you have an idea whom could replace him that is better, brillaint. Otherwise, let's not repeat his mistake of sacking someone who has performed and replacing them with someone worse. Just because people think it's bad now, it doesn't mean it can't get worse. A change that makes you worse is (shock) a bad idea.

"Very probably"? They are third. Don't get me wrong, they definitely have a reasonably good chance, but I would not call it very probable. Football is cyclical, you didn't expect to be above them forever more did you?

Should we remind you of this in the future when he makes a mistake and you make some overly dramatic claim about him not being good enough, or would you prefer us to remind you of that when in the double future he makes a save and you declare him to be the best?

Agreed. I really want to try Omo and Gibson. Hanley is brilliant in the air but for me is poor in pretty much every other area.