May Contain Nuts

Yes, and Gary Rowett's style of football got us to a Championship Play-off semi-final.
Very few would want to see us play like that again though, most felt they'd had enough of watching it after less than a year.

Ironic.
We're not here to mess around but we're going to give someone the job on an interim basis, let them develop a certain style of play suited to the players we could get (the only players we could get) and then, 2 months after the start of the season, we're going to look to employ a manager who's style of play is the polar opposite of the one we've done all that work on and which doesn't suit the players we've signed (the only players we could get).
Sounds suspiciously like messing around to me!

Yes, and Gary Rowett's style of football got us to a Championship Play-off semi-final.
Very few would want to see us play like that again though, most felt they'd had enough of watching it after less than a year.

Obviously I've caught a few bits here and there where it couldn't be avoided, but I haven't intentionally paid attention to any of it tbh. I'm not really a 'joiner-inner' anyway, any hint of 'expected' active participation and I get uncomfortable, just let other people get on with doing their thing and hope nobody tries to force me into action.
I'm not sure I even think of it as a significant world event tbh. It doesn't really change anything about the way most people go about their lives. It's just replacing one head of state who doesn't actually influence much of anything meaningful these days for another. The new one might not be present the same 'cuddly' image but well, oh well.
Clearly though it's important to a lot of people, many do care about it, but as far as I can see its actual significance is really quite confined to those who already feel it's more significant that it is. A self-perpetuation of perceived importance that ultimately amounts to a different face on a few coins & banknotes, changing some song lyrics and watermarks on product packaging and everyone proceeding to live their lives exactly as they had been doing before.
That's how I feel about it all anyway. Not saying I'm right.

Ironic.
We're not here to mess around but we're going to give someone the job on an interim basis, let them develop a certain style of play suited to the players we could get (the only players we could get) and then, 2 months after the start of the season, we're going to look to employ a manager who's style of play is the polar opposite of the one we've done all that work on and which doesn't suit the players we've signed (the only players we could get).
Sounds suspiciously like messing around to me!

Ironic.
We're not here to mess around but we're going to give someone the job on an interim basis, let them develop a certain style of play suited to the players we could get (the only players we could get) and then, 2 months after the start of the season, we're going to look to employ a manager who's style of play is the polar opposite of the one we've done all that work on and which doesn't suit the players we've signed (the only players we could get).
Sounds suspiciously like messing around to me!

Yes, and Gary Rowett's style of football got us to a Championship Play-off semi-final.
Very few would want to see us play like that again though, most felt they'd had enough of watching it after less than a year.

Yes, and Gary Rowett's style of football got us to a Championship Play-off semi-final.
Very few would want to see us play like that again though, most felt they'd had enough of watching it after less than a year.

Yes, and Gary Rowett's style of football got us to a Championship Play-off semi-final.
Very few would want to see us play like that again though, most felt they'd had enough of watching it after less than a year.

Try telling that to the poor souls who have to go through every episode of Kavanagh KC, dubbing and editing where neccesary.
 

Obviously I've caught a few bits here and there where it couldn't be avoided, but I haven't intentionally paid attention to any of it tbh. I'm not really a 'joiner-inner' anyway, any hint of 'expected' active participation and I get uncomfortable, just let other people get on with doing their thing and hope nobody tries to force me into action.
I'm not sure I even think of it as a significant world event tbh. It doesn't really change anything about the way most people go about their lives. It's just replacing one head of state who doesn't actually influence much of anything meaningful these days for another. The new one might not be present the same 'cuddly' image but well, oh well.
Clearly though it's important to a lot of people, many do care about it, but as far as I can see its actual significance is really quite confined to those who already feel it's more significant that it is. A self-perpetuation of perceived importance that ultimately amounts to a different face on a few coins & banknotes, changing some song lyrics and watermarks on product packaging and everyone proceeding to live their lives exactly as they had been doing before.
That's how I feel about it all anyway. Not saying I'm right.

Nah, I'd send her down Tesco to get some chicken. I want chicken! ?

Alien, the sequel to Alien and prequel to Alien

It was a mistake allowing people to select Rosenior in a thread titled "if not Rosenior" though tbh, made no sense at all.  Didn't warrant a meltdown, however.

Having listened to Rosenior post match it seems that NML was injured hence not starting, so had he been fit we may well actually have seen us start the game with him and Barkhuizen as wing backs. As you say neither of them enjoy that, and just because it worked in the second half doesn't automatically mean it's a viable option from the start of games.
There was no need to experiment / change to wingbacks at home to Wycombe is the point really, they're no Plymouth in the way they play, our home form isn't an issue and changing things caused us to be be in the position of needing to overturn a deficit in the first place; the players didn't look like they knew where they were supposed to be, two going for the same ball gifts them the first goal. 
Perversely had Wycombe not got that goal they probably wouldn't have sat back, and it's debatable whether we'd have improved first half had they not done that. 
We made an unnecessary change and it very nearly backfired. The last 35 minutes were promising but shouldn't have been needed, even if ultimately the end result was good and we've gained some experience of 3 at the back along the way to take into other games.
Had we not capitalised on our chances (or had they gone 2-0 up when Cashin made that saving tackle) we'd be on the end of a demoralising home defeat (may have draw had it been 2-0) and it would have to go down to us not getting it right for the first part of the game.
Not totally specific to this conversation because it's been going on a while... I get that people are naturally very protective of our staff and players after the past couple of years, but at times I think it's bordering on overprotective, where the notion that someone may have made a mistake seems to cause offense and shouldn't be talked about, like it's not OK to admit that something was an error just because it worked out in the end and you're being negative / disloyal if you question a decision.
As I said in my initial post I'm fully on board with Rosenior, and he deserves praise for changing things when they weren't working, but I'm not going to go overboard with the praise and rubbish any concerns anyone might have, or pretend that (what I see as) an error isn't an error.

I'd probably maybe potentially have said Darren Ferguson.
Good record in this league and plays nice football.
Only caveats he'd need replacing as soon as we go up, he may have learnt all he's ever going to learn so you're stuck with any faults he may have no matter what, and his success has only ever been at one club anyway.
Talked myself out of it.

I'd probably maybe potentially have said Darren Ferguson.
Good record in this league and plays nice football.
Only caveats he'd need replacing as soon as we go up, he may have learnt all he's ever going to learn so you're stuck with any faults he may have no matter what, and his success has only ever been at one club anyway.
Talked myself out of it.

I'd probably maybe potentially have said Darren Ferguson.
Good record in this league and plays nice football.
Only caveats he'd need replacing as soon as we go up, he may have learnt all he's ever going to learn so you're stuck with any faults he may have no matter what, and his success has only ever been at one club anyway.
Talked myself out of it.

I'd probably maybe potentially have said Darren Ferguson.
Good record in this league and plays nice football.
Only caveats he'd need replacing as soon as we go up, he may have learnt all he's ever going to learn so you're stuck with any faults he may have no matter what, and his success has only ever been at one club anyway.
Talked myself out of it.

It was a mistake allowing people to select Rosenior in a thread titled "if not Rosenior" though tbh, made no sense at all.  Didn't warrant a meltdown, however.

We started playing better after 25 minutes but Wycombe had also sat back a bit, happy to pack their box and chance a breakaway goal for 2-0, which very nearly worked but for Cashin's brilliant tackle.
From 25-55 it was quite like a lot of our other games - we were decent but not particularly quick in build up, and the chances of us actually scoring a goal were slim.despite having a few shots.
We weren't getting in behind them and by the time we got the ball in positions to shoot there was a wall of defenders ready and waiting to block those shots. It was better than the first 25 but it was still the wrong setup.
I'm not sure how you can really call getting NML & Collins on the pitch a brave decision, we were still a goal down and couldn't just continue the way we were it else it'd likely have stayed that way.

At the time he made those substitutions, we were starting to dominate and many managers would have left it unchanged for another ten minutes or so. Also, NML and Barkhuizen were unhappy last season at their previous clubs precisely because they were selected to play as wing-backs, a position that they weren't comfortable in. I was concerned that NML in particular might struggle to provide defensive cover to Chester, but for that half-hour it worked well. We ended up with a front five who were all attackers : that, to me, was "brave", given so many were calling for his head prematch and booing during it. 

Pretty much agree with you on all of this.  What seemed to work yesterday was playing 3 at the back with NML & TB in the wide “wing back” roles.  Be interesting to see if this is used again, maybe not from the start but if we are struggling to break teams down.
All in all, a very good last 30 mins in particular under immense pressure as I’m sure Liam and the team will have been aware of the the supporters “jungle drums of doom” 

The last 30 years? They haven't won the league since 1927 (before that it was 1909), the FA Cup since 1955 and their only European title is an Anglo-Italian cup win in 1973. They've spent a quarter of their entire history playing below the top level.
How long can you be massive underachievers before you accept that your level is the one you've consistently been at for the majority of the past 100+ years?
Are we really holding something they achieved 5 years short of a century ago as evidence to their size as a club?
What success exactly is it that's being brought back? Ah yes, the glory days of 1905-1909 & 1996-1997. 7 seasons out of 129 years.
They had a couple of flash-in-the-pan spells under Dalgliesh(?) & Keegan where they challenged for the Premiership title (as it was called all 25 years ago) but they were seasons in which the club overachieved, they weren't the norm, nor an indication of their true level.
Their true level is lower to upper-mid table "Premier League" , with the odd flirtation with the top two, and the occasional drop down to a lower level. Exactly as it has been for the past 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90+ years.

Agreed. He looks more influential playing at right back, in this team. Understand that Rosenior probably noted Mehmeti as their threat and wanted to sure up that side (although it didn’t work brilliantly in the first 20) he didn’t want Knight pinned back by the threat of him. It was a good adjustment.