May Contain Nuts

If a 4 year contract means we finally stick with something and see it through, allow a manager his poor spells and give him the opportunity to work through them, rather than panicking and dropping the axe at the first sign of trouble then no, it's not a mistake.
(Unless we actually get relegated, but that's not going to happen)
(Please don't screenshot @ or quote me on that in 7 months)

You may as well just ask why does anyone do anything?
It's exactly the sort of post you'd be all over like a rash, analysing and questioning it's purposes to the nth degree if you spotted something you didn't like in it.

Hmm. I think there was a bit of a pop at LR with all that 'laborious keep ball' stuff. 
LR was himself a new manager, with a completely new squad, and also worked under Clowes. By all accounts he was pretty close to the full time job and was in talks about it at one point. Did he not deserve the same 'realism' we apparently owe to Warne? If he'd been appointed would the OP still be talking about our 'laborious keep ball' or would he be pretending we were Pep-era Barcelona out of sheer gratitude to David Clowes? 
I'm sure everyone is hugely grateful to the new owner, and will always be grateful. But they are perfectly entitled to express their views of the team, and manager, on this forum. Whether people are being too negative or expecting too much too soon is one thing. But they don't owe it to the owner to either pretend to believe something they don't, or keep their mouth shut. 
It's a forum and people rant about the team for the same reason they came out in droves to save the club: because they love it. Because it matters. 

I'd just thought it was easier to say what's on your mind. 
Maybe you're reading more into the post than it actually warrants.
I read the post and was pretty ambivalent about the whole statement. But that's just me. 

Another point to this is that reducing the discussion to points totals completely ignores the context under which these games were played.
The first 5 league games under Rosenior were immediately after he'd thrown a team together, when the players were lacking fitness (the infamous '2 weeks behind') and needed to be given time to gel. Toward the end of these performances our players looked leggy, as you'd expect, and we lost games to high energy pressing teams.
The first 5 league games under Warne came after a 2 week international break in which we didn't play, where others in our league continued without a break. It's hardly surprising that we started out life under Warne with more energy, is it? A rested squad with time to work on fitness, new manager bounce. It's also hardly surprising we've looked knackered recently under Warne with his extra focus on energetic play - and quite possibly not a coincidence that we've started to pick up injuries?
It's almost like this squad needed careful management, but looking in from the outside it seems to have had the opposite since Warne came in.

We did, but the comment above was about what the players are doing inside the box rather than the delivery I thought.

My point was more that these players, if they down tools, won't be here for any longer than 2 years to burden us financially, whereas Anya was here for... wait, is he still here?
He hasn't been seen anywhere else since his contract ended, maybe we've got him locked up in a cupboard in Warne's office?

Basically just a thread created to have a thinly veiled pop at Rosenior and anyone who was supportive of what he was trying to achieve, disguised as a thread about the quality of the forum. But please don't say anything negative about anyone else.
Laughable. Blatant.
May I plead for some moderation and realism please?

I think there is a perception that when players don't like a manager these days that they just wait them out and stats for how short-lived management appointments generally are tends to back that up. With a 4 years contract for Warne and his backroom staff, just in financial terms it would be impossible to send him packing any time soon. Maybe Clowes feels that sends a message, i.e. the manager is here to stay, now crack on.

So, we can be critical of Rosenior because you didn’t like his style of football (while also ignoring the unrealistic expectations of what a new owner and manager should achieve and ignorance of just how effective League 1 opposition can be when pumped up by the adrenaline of playing the mighty DCFC)? 

Basically just a thread created to have a thinly veiled pop at Rosenior and anyone who was supportive of what he was trying to achieve, disguised as a thread about the quality of the forum. But please don't say anything negative about anyone else.
Laughable. Blatant.
May I plead for some moderation and realism please?

If a 4 year contract means we finally stick with something and see it through, allow a manager his poor spells and give him the opportunity to work through them, rather than panicking and dropping the axe at the first sign of trouble then no, it's not a mistake.
(Unless we actually get relegated, but that's not going to happen)
(Please don't screenshot @ or quote me on that in 7 months)

Basically just a thread created to have a thinly veiled pop at Rosenior and anyone who was supportive of what he was trying to achieve, disguised as a thread about the quality of the forum. But please don't say anything negative about anyone else.
Laughable. Blatant.
May I plead for some moderation and realism please?

Basically just a thread created to have a thinly veiled pop at Rosenior and anyone who was supportive of what he was trying to achieve, disguised as a thread about the quality of the forum. But please don't say anything negative about anyone else.
Laughable. Blatant.
May I plead for some moderation and realism please?

During the anguish abour the survival of DCFC, the content of this forum was fantastic - a tribute to the club's traditions and the fanbase.
I doubt the Samaritans could have done a better job in comforting the many loyal fans deeply anguished by events and the possible liquidation of one of the beating hearts of the Derby and Derbyshire community.
This forum also created and published many calls to action nationally and locally which attracted so many favourable headlines and must have played their part in the eventual rescue of the Club.
Our national prestige soared, generated a lot of national sympathy and support, and led to tremendous gates and match support even when we lost.
However, since LR was replaced by PW, I wonder if I am alone in noticing a downward spiral in the objectives and quality of some contributions. Yes, we are all entitled to our opinions, but do we not need to temper the expression of them by considering the effect on the DCFC owner, staff and players who are becoming the target of some vitriol?
Some of us seem to forget our debt to our new owner. And seem to forget the laborious keep-ball of LR which we had endured for more than the current season and which had led to so many away defeats and the inability even to score a goal for match after match.
This forgetfulness is accompanied by totally unrealistic expectations of what the new owner and manager should achieve. And ignorance of just how effective League 1 opposition can be when pumped up by the adrenalin of facing the high and not so mighty DCFC.
It is sadly well known that social media can inflict a lot of harm on its targets. For the sake of our Club and those on its payroll and the person who bankrolls our payroll, may I plead for some moderation and realism please?

(Paraphrasing...) "I accept responsibility that the players didn't run enough and didn't tackle enough" is not accepting responsibility, it's pretending to accept responsibility while lumping all the blame on the players.

On last night's match specifically,  I would have liked Warne to have taken more responsibility in his RamsTV interview for the poor first half performance. He set them up wrongly and had to change it at half time. We were playing badly way before Chester's injury.
He didn't play Sibley in his preferred position as someone stated, he  should have been part of a midfield three, where he can run at defences. I'd have started McGoldrick alongside Osula,  get some control of the ball early.
After half time we used a back four for the first time since Warne's arrival and despite Smith playing completely out of position we immediately looked more comfortable and better able to find other players. However, by this time options were limited and Mendez-Laing was the main threat, as usual, better when he was able to play further forward. Dobbin looks bright and can beat a man, but we didn't really get the right sort of balls into the box from either wing.
I can't believe I'm saying this, but am starting to feel a bit sorry for both Bird and Hourihane. No good saying they aren't playing well when we seem determined to bypass midfield in our approach play.
Whilst not calling them out as suspicious exactly, Warne did cast doubt on both Chester and Barkhuizen's injuries, by saying that Chester "felt" his calf, said Barks' hamstring was "surprising". The inference was definitely there. He also took a swipe at Sibley and Dobbin, and stated that we have no right back at the club, which must have filled Oduruh with confidence, for sure! 
It seems to me that he thinks he has a bit of a problem getting the players onside with what he's trying to do. What is he trying to do, by the way? I've still no idea! 
Fozzy's comment after the match was telling. Run more. Is that it? There's no wonder they are confused, so am I.
 

After more reflection about the match…
The ‘positives’
We kept a clean sheet and I can’t remember them creating many clear cut chances.
Wildsmith, Cashin, Roberts and Forsyth all played well. Dobbin was lively when he came on. Smith did OK at right back when out of position.
The back four seemed more positive than the back five and, overall, the second half was better (albeit I agree with Warne that it was still too frantic as a result of the sloppy first half).
Unlike Rowettball, at least we were trying to be positive and get the ball forward and attack; not sitting back, 10 men behind the ball and looking to hit teams on the break. It rarely worked, but at least there is positive intent.
Warne’s post match interview was good. 
The negatives
If you haven’t got the players to play your preferred style or formation then adapt your style and formation! A good manager shouldn’t need to come in and have to wait for January to basically rip up a new squad and start again. We haven’t the time or money for that anyway, so Warne needs to find a way of using the players we have.  
I don’t think a back 5 with NML at right wing back and Barkuizen or Roberts at left wing back is going to work. 
Similarly, bypassing the midfield with endless balls down the channels in hope of hitting of hitting a player rather than expectation isn’t a long term prospect for success. The bright spots of yesterday’s game where when our wingers ran at defenders and got the ball in. More of getting the ball to their feet and less hoofing it please.
We have good footballers playing in midfield, but if you don’t use them they’re wasted. I find it funny that I keep hearing we need a load of bruisers there to play for Warne; maybe so, but if that is the case it again highlights a potential managerial weakness. Play to our strengths (although in fairness I have always said we’ll need a few more players to bring the squad up to full strength- and that might mean different types of player too - but that’s a long term issue; use the players you have now to the best of their ability).  
Found the Chester for McGoldrick sub very odd. Could go like for like with Stearman but instead moves Sibley to left wing back. Completely foreign position for him. To then drag him off at half time was just a waste of a sub.  If you want to bring Didzy (?) on then do so, but change the system to accommodate, don’t shoehorn things in that will never work.  Again, I get that we’re still short of players and have pretty much had people out of position from day 1. However, Knight playing right back was out of necessity; I don’t think the same can be said for Warne, who could at least limit the square pegs approach if he wanted to.
Officials were appalling again.  Not blaming them for the result. Just an observation. 
Took ages to get out of Pride Park last night so endured more of Radio Derby than normal. The new chap is OK, but my God Ed Dawes is still king of the wrist slashers.  If his post match questions and observations are anything to go by I don’t know how anybody could listen to his commentary. Somehow, even when i probably agree with what he says in principle, he still manages to wind me up.  
 

We're not talking about a "red-mist descends" type of red card, just that if he committed another foul in that game he was getting sent off.  As soon as he got moved to right wing-back, he got booked for hauling his winger down.  Immediately after that they ran at him again, and to be fair to Sibley he did very well to not commit a foul (even accidentally), but he was inches away from it.  If anything like that happened again, he was off. 
It's not Sibley's fault, it's Warne's for putting him in that position in the first place.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Rosenior was 'so early' into his reign (or as it happened, about in the middle of it!) when the scrutiny started for him and he'd had an average (not bad) start too. There's simply no escaping it.
Is it really scrutiny anyway, or just discussion and analysis, exactly what we're on a forum to do?
A big problem is the way Warne he's been talked up so in some quarters, with it often being impossible for someone to say anything positive about him without throwing shade at the previous incumbent in the same breath. The hype has been unreal, and if you create such hype around someone on a message board, you're going to attract a few "Wait, hold on a minute... " responses in return.
The more hype, the quicker that reaction will come and probably with more ire when things don't go to plan. You can't make out that  the new thing is vastly superior to the old thing and then expect no comeback when the new, much vaunted thing has a hiccup.
The reaction isn't likely to be about Warne himself, in any case.
Making out that anyone countering the hype is just being negative, impatient, unwilling to let Warne get on with the job and a Rosenior loving sycophant (I'm not accusing you of this, but it has been said - sometimes with validity, but usually not) also probably isn't helping matters, really.
I get that it's a case of supporting the new manager, and some may be a little more reluctant than others to voice their opinions, or simply not wish to comment on any negatives until he's had 10, 15, 20 games, but those who do aren't 'not supporting the manager' just because they wish to discuss any concerns they have.
That said I can see how it comes across poorly, but again it comes down to the hype - counter-hype and by its very nature is perceived as negativity.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Rosenior was 'so early' into his reign (or as it happened, about in the middle of it!) when the scrutiny started for him and he'd had an average (not bad) start too. There's simply no escaping it.
Is it really scrutiny anyway, or just discussion and analysis, exactly what we're on a forum to do?
A big problem is the way Warne he's been talked up so in some quarters, with it often being impossible for someone to say anything positive about him without throwing shade at the previous incumbent in the same breath. The hype has been unreal, and if you create such hype around someone on a message board, you're going to attract a few "Wait, hold on a minute... " responses in return.
The more hype, the quicker that reaction will come and probably with more ire when things don't go to plan. You can't make out that  the new thing is vastly superior to the old thing and then expect no comeback when the new, much vaunted thing has a hiccup.
The reaction isn't likely to be about Warne himself, in any case.
Making out that anyone countering the hype is just being negative, impatient, unwilling to let Warne get on with the job and a Rosenior loving sycophant (I'm not accusing you of this, but it has been said - sometimes with validity, but usually not) also probably isn't helping matters, really.
I get that it's a case of supporting the new manager, and some may be a little more reluctant than others to voice their opinions, or simply not wish to comment on any negatives until he's had 10, 15, 20 games, but those who do aren't 'not supporting the manager' just because they wish to discuss any concerns they have.
That said I can see how it comes across poorly, but again it comes down to the hype - counter-hype and by its very nature is perceived as negativity.

I have been watching Louise Sibley play for 4 years or so now. At no point whatsoever did I think, “you know what, he’d make a really good left back”. Completely baffling decision. He could have made a like for like swap with Stearman but instead moved 4 players around. On reflection however I have decided that the fault for our current predicament lies squarely at the door of Byrne and Buchanan. Tossers.

Tonight was rubbish but everything I’ve heard him say makes sense, which heartens me. I don’t think he wants hoofball but he wants to faff around less and be on the front foot. Either got the wrong players or players with the wrong attitude at the mo.  I don’t think this is the group of players to see out his vision, but I think that’s why they’ve gone for the 4 year deal. There’s a long term plan, even if short term it’s not a good fit. 

Or maybe Clowes brought Warne in with the intention of giving him time and not trying to rush things in the way Mel did? 

Tory leaders last weeks, he ain’t as bad as them ? I was happy enough with LR in charge, not perfect but did very well under the circumstances. The timing of bringing Warne in was strange. It would have made more sense if results had been poor but I think he had only lost 3 of the 12 games. However, now that he has been brought in, on a 4 year contract ? , we need to get behind him and hope things improve ?