The thing is

I can find no holes in an argument as well thought out and well written as Chal Hill's just down the board.

the points about Player positions, youth development and team selections last season are unquestionable, unlike the levels of ambition shown last season by the club's heierachy(sp?).

My big concern over changing the manager is that we could (not literally) end up with Gary Megson.

What i'm saysing is that any replacement could end up being a lot worse than we have right now (see forest last season).

I hear a lot of Phil Parkinson this, Mike Newell that, but both have had three years to build their respective squads, which is almost exactly how long it took Worthy to achieve the best out of what he inherited, (with a lttle help from some timeley signings).

Since then he's had to rebuild a team twice in two seasons. Despite this I like many others believed this season would be a cake walk, how wrong we were.

The most galling thing is that a scum supporting aquaintance of mine saw this coming at the start of the season, said we'd both struggle but for differing reasons. them for their lack of money and reliance on youth, us for the ongoing disruptiuon of promotion /relegation in consecutive seasons.

My point is i'm not an innie or an outie I just want to see the best for the club, and, Worthy or no Worthy, I don't think creating the divisions that seem to be appearing at this moment in time is in the best interests of the club.

At the moment both supporters and (certain) members of the board could be accused of doing exactly that.

Posted By: Canaria_Mediocris, Mar 2, 15:20:49