Petriix

Away at Annfield isn't a terrible draw. In the FA Cup gate receipts are split 50-50 and there's a decent chance of getting some good TV revenue from this too. So it's a nice little earner if nothing else. The worst kind of draw is against a boring team with a small ground who then beat us.

Good for him. Now he's got something to remind us about next time he makes a defensive error.

Yes, we're still doing zonal marking (just like all the other top level teams). It isn't and never was the problem. We are defending much better at the expense of stuffing everyone behind the ball and ceding possession much of the time. It does seem to be working.

I feel like I've done this to death, but I'll give it one more try... There are multiple facets to playing professional football and, to be able to feature at the highest level, you need to have a decent standard across most of the basic attributes. Certain deficiencies can be accommodated depending on what your strengths are and the overall responsibility your position has in the team. Limited physical strength and size can be forgiven if you have pace and skill. A lack of pace can be mitigated by a decent ability to read the game and anticipate (or the opposite in the case of Kyle Walker). Ultimately it comes down to the positives vs the negatives you bring to the team. Unfortunately, Billy has shown only the occasional glimpse of attacking spark without ever positively influencing the outcome of a game. That gives him very little in the way of credit for the times when he lets us down. And the negatives really stack up. It might not be obvious, but there's a fundamental responsibility as a central midfielder to read the game, fill the gaps, cut off the angles, cover the runs etc. It's not so much about putting in tackles and blocks as it is about positioning and awareness. This is where Gilmour really lacks. With a bit of extra pace or strength, you can recover from a positional mistakes. Sadly, with Billy's physique, he doesn't have the tools to dig himself out of a hole. Once his man gets goal side, you virtually never see him recover. If he was getting goals and assists, or even creating decent openings then we could probably be more accepting of his mistakes. Without that, on balance, he is always going to be more of a liability than an asset.

There's a huge overlap between mid-level Championship players and mid-level Premier League players, often with individuals varying with the peaks and troughs of their own level throughout their careers. To describe someone as being somehow objectively right for one level and not another is simply nonsense. There is, of course, the hope that the young players we develop will achieve and sustain a high level of performance, but form and fitness are dynamic attributes. Then there's the bigger picture of context - the club, manager, formation and tactics etc. Sometimes players adapt well and other times not. There are only a tiny number of players who are genuinely world class. Maybe just 100 in the Premier League. We're unlikely to ever sign one of those and, when we do have the good fortune to bring one through the club for a time (if you would consider Maddison or Buendia in this category) then you have to make the most of it, enjoy the memories and get a decent transfer fee in the end. But this is vanishingly rare. Most players aren't going anywhere near 'the top', but that doesn't mean they can't do a job in the Premier League. Cantwell might end up doing OK with Bournemouth and he'll potentially earn far more with them that he's been earning with us on what was effectively a youth contract. While I'm not defending the mercenary side of football, it's understandable that someone would want to maximise their earnings during what is a short career.

Having two '1 in 3 strikers' is a massive advantage over having just one. They might even play both of them at the same time on occasion.

Well I'm obviously in the minority on here, but I'm proud to support a club which clearly has higher ethical standards than most. I don't think I'd be willing to follow a team backed by a dubious regime. If we had a similar takeover to Newcastle then that would be the end of my connection with Norwich City. To be honest, being a football supporter is at odds with my general philosophy in life. It's only really the perception that Norwich does things a bit differently that allows me to overcome the uneasiness I have with the whole thing. I'll personally be boycotting the world cup. I have no interest in being any part of that particular aberration. I know that won't make the slightest difference in the scheme of things, but it's just a personal conscience thing. I detest the term 'virtue signalling'; as if it's somehow offensive to say and do kind things. While there might be tiny proportion of people who are really only interested in the image of appearing to be a good person, the vast majority of people are genuinely compassionate. There are obviously hypocrisies built into having a Western lifestyle, but that doesn't mean that making efforts to do better should be scorned. At the end of the day, I need to be able to look my children in the eyes and say that I did my best to make the world a good place.

This really is the crunch point. Our awful first half of the season gives us little room for error. I can't imagine us managing to stay above Newcastle after all their spending so we absolutely have to drag one of those other teams into the mix. If we don't win at least two of these six then we'll be pretty much relegated already. I still think it's a massive ask which is likely beyond us.

There are some seemingly contradictory facts. We had a bunch of fairly 'average' players around the fringes of the team in the Championship last season. However, as a squad, they achieved the best results in the club's history. I have no idea how significant Hugill's contribution was. He certainly didn't do a great deal on the pitch, but seemed to have a big personality in the dressing room. Perhaps he was just a good fit for Farke because he worked hard and did what was asked of him. I don't see what bringing him back would achieve now. His utility this season would have been solely in negating the need to sign Sargent thus freeing some funds for a CDM.

Excellent post. Yes, Tzolis and Gunn are the main ones, but I'd really prefer to have kept Vrancic over signing PLM. The big one for me is Gilmour. I think trying to fit him in caused a large portion of our problems. I would have gone all out and signed a £15-20m CDM. But maybe a better striker would have been a good priority. I can't predict the future. I'm fearful that the players we now have will struggle next season. But I'm quietly hopeful that I'm being overly pessimistic. You've reassured me somewhat.

You're clearly not comprehending my posts. Just because I think Sargent, Rashica and Tzolis - the club's three biggest transfer fees ever paid - aren't very good, doesn't mean that I think we should have signed Adam Armstrong. I'd prefer to have promoted the youth players and kept Josh Martin in the squad. I've never advocated spending more money than we have. I just wish we hadn't spaffed the biggest budget in our history on this current crop. However I've also made it clear that I won't write anyone off until I've seen them play in the Championship. I've got a horrible feeling that we're in the early stages of a long decline - largely because we've changed too much too quickly. I'd really love to be wrong but I think we'll struggle to replicate our previous Championship success.

I'm not sure what you think is arrogant or entitled about being unhappy with the value for money of our transfer business. I would have massively preferred to make fewer (or no) signings and stuck with last year's team. We didn't replace Skipp and we spent a lot of money without appearing to improve the squad. I'd say spending all that money makes us a little less 'honourable'.

You're missing my point. I'm not writing him off even if the rest of the season goes as badly as the season so far. I'm willing to reserve judgement until next season. Of course if he goes on to score another 10 and we stay up then that's great. But it's fair to say that our summer transfer business is, so far, looking woefully short of success in terms of survival this season. And what I've seen from Rashica doesn't inspire me to think otherwise. Yes, one very good cross to go with his one decent corner and just one cup goal against a mid-table League One side.

We're still odds-on favourites for the drop, you can get over 3-1 if you want to bet on us staying up. I'm not being negative, just realistic. The damage has already been done so we would have to pull out some unlikely results in the coming weeks. You talk of 'research', but I'm not sure if you've actually looked at our remaining fixtures and picked out the ones you think we'll actually win. Our current league position is false due to the array of cancelled fixtures.

I'm still firmly in the 'all our summer transfer business was awful' camp. I don't rate Rashica so far either. That's why we're doing so badly. Two wins against woefully out of form teams and the fact we've played more games than anyone else at the bottom have temporarily lifted us outside the relegation zone. That doesn't mean we're suddenly guaranteed survival. I'll stand by what I said. I'll reserve judgement on Sargent until next season in the Championship. Hopefully he'll do well.

That's still £4.5m per goal. A great start after showing little in his first half season. Let's reserve judgement until we see what he can do in the Championship.

In many ways our whole season has been a bit like that. Penalties given away in otherwise tight matches, Sargent's miss against Brighton, only snatching a late draw against 10 man Newcastle etc.

I think the stats are a reasonably fair reflection of the game. Watford dominated possession but we ultimately had a similar number of chances. We scored 3 goals from just 2 shots on target whereas Watford didn't really test Gunn aside from hitting the bar and being offside. The telling difference is in the fouls column, and it probably should have been higher but for some lenient refereeing. The red card prevented any chance of a comeback.

We really aren't playing a 4-4-2. Maybe it's a 4-4-1-1 but it's essentially the same 4-2-3-1 we played under Farke. Tonight Pukki played mostly in the number 10 role and did a lot of defensive work when we didn't have the ball (which was most of the game).

I think there's probably something to be said for avoiding burdening any potential new signing with the misery of a relegation. It would likely be better for morale to wait until the summer and then sign players for the Championship with commensurately lower fees and wages.

I'd be worried if we changed the midfield after everything clicking as well as it did against Everton. I can't fathom how switching away from a double pivot would make us less defensively secure. The crucial thing will be getting enough work out of our wide players in both attack and defence. If they track back well then we'll be able to cope with Watford's athleticism. I don't doubt, however, that McLean will be back in. I'm firmly in the 'that will make us weaker' camp.

On the contrary, it's often the more complicated answer with counterintuitive reasoning which is more accurate. Claiming that 29 points would have been enough last season is true, but only for Burnley (or anyone who finished above them). But it's equally true that any of the bottom 3 would have needed 40 points to surpass Burnley and survive. Our situation is much more comparable to one of the bottom 3 trying to surpass 17th place so my reasoning is entirely appropriate. Sure, there's some room for considering the possibility that beating the team in 17th might reduce their total, but that would make it 36 points, not 29.

Probably 8-10 more points than we get. Don't let the hope kill you. 30 points wasn't enough last season. Burnley finished 17th on 39 points so, if one of the bottom 3 were to have survived, they would have needed 40 points to be sure.

Ironic, then, that we played as close to Farke's system (from last season's record break Championship win) as we've seen this term.

I would be incredibly disappointed if we reverted to a midfield 3. The merits of playing a double pivot with a free, attacking number 10 were so clearly displayed today. We need that defensive stability. I'm sure Kenny would have been picked if available, but that shouldn't mean he automatically gets the place back. Godfrey, Lewis and Aarons only got their chances when the incumbent players were injured.