Michael Wynless Jones

Jesus Christ, I haven't posted on here for about 2 years, although been reading but nothing has forced me out of hiding to post like this utter utter garbage being spoken by the Dark Knight. I actually genuinely can't believe what I'm reading, so I just wanted to pop on to add to the list of people calling you a deluded fool. See you all in another couple of years.

Count ourselves lucky, Chelsea are charging £75 😱

The were rumours at the time that Worthington confused the two, and we signed the spitty one by mistake.....

Even lost to West Brom 😂. Derby's record is in jeopardy.

I'm in the Chelsea away, play the kids and lose camp, just for this season.

I presume he won't be working for Sky that night?

I just hope we don't go with all 3 CBs, in both games v Stoke and Coventry as soon as we did that we defensively went to pot, with none of the CBs seeming to know who they should be picking up.

Actually it's more 'your dad would knock my dad out' going on the context of the debate.......

Purely that he has pace, so he'll at least be able to make the runs into the box for Placheta. To be honest I'd take literally anyone in the squad playing up top ahead of Steipermann 😄

You certainly were watching a different game, it was clear as the nose on your face Marco was done in after about 50 minutes, and the main reason Placheta had to keep stopping and waiting as Marco was nowhere to be found in an attacking sense. Would it have been different with one of the kids on? Don't know, never actually said it would be, my argument is countering those who seem to think it would have been dangerous to try. Oh well onto Luton, one thing is for sure though, there will be a few of us not very happy if Marco is starting up front again, personally with Buendia back, I'd rather play we play Martin up top.

I'm not even saying Farke cost us points, I just don't get the argument that one of them wasn't worth a 10 minute cameo for a player who was a spent force in this game, and actually keeping Marco on in that condition could have lumped us with yet another muscle based injury to deal with. If we are saying these kids are nowhere near 1st team level, then Farke better put his stubborness to one side and make up with Leitner then.

But surely even knowing nothing about the options on the bench, they simply could not have offered less than a player who'd offered nothing as a striker all game, and was blowing out of his **** so hard I could have beat him in a sprint? If we are seriously saying the alternative in the last 10 minutes was even worse, then they may as well give up their dream of professional football. This isn't a dig at Marco either, but he is simply not a striker.

Are they seriously suggesting Howe as a replacement???? They can't be that deluded that he'd want anything to do with a bang average lower league side?

Disagree with what though? They're arguing against an opinion that no one has made, the debate seems to be going as follows? Person A: Why didn't Farke bring on one of the youngsters to replace Marco who was bringing nothing to the table. Person B: Because we can't put on a whole load of untested kids. etc etc Person A: But that's not what I said. Person B: You're clueless And so it goes on. Argue if you think people are wrong in saying Steipermann should have been taken off if you think he shouldn't, as that's all that seems to be what people are saying.

But its not exactly this is it? Because NOT ONE PERSON has said we should have brought on 5 untested kids have? All the likes of Branston have said is why when Steipermann was clearly a spent force in this game was ONE OF THEM not worth throwing on for 10 minutes, they simply couldn't have contributed less than Marco did as a striker. I'm not exactly sure why people aren't understanding this?