cowl

That's his position now, and he'll only get better in it. We've had the beating of the opposition in midfield for two games in a row now.

You could possibly make a reasonable argument for any of the starters to be MotM. So much so that I think there's a lot to Pedersen's take on it that the team was the MotM. Choosing just one player though, I've gone with Iorfa. I thought he was immense today, and this after some very questionable performances of late. Valery moving into midfield was excellent too. We competed all over the pitch superbly though. The ref can have some praise too. He let the game flow as much as possible and probably let a lot go that might even have been fouls, it seemed pretty even, and I'd always rather a ref err on the side of letting the game run.

He didn't have to do anything like the amount of defensive work against Wrexham as he did yesterday. You can locate his position anywhere on the pitch, but the job he was tasked with yesterday was certainly different to what he had against Wrexham. In any case, he simply had a poor game yesterday. It wasn't just the possession he gave away that lead to the goals, but the number of under hit and miscued passes. Very frustrating to watch. You think that's proof he's a poor player? Perhaps you're eager to write him off for whatever reason. Fine. Seems to me though that there's probably more to it when a player seems as capable of a good performance as a poor one.

I'd trust Pedersen to know how best to blood Weaver, and I'd say that we're already seeing that he's being careful with the minutes he's giving him.

McNeill was undoubtedly poor. But I wouldn't conclude too much from it. The situation right now is that a fair number of the players are being asked to play in positions that they really aren't comfortable with. They might not be world beaters even in their best position, but they are more capable than what we are seeing from them. McNeill had a good game away at Wrexham. I though Kobacki had a very good first half against Swansea when we at least saw him in a more advanced role, and you only have to contrast that with his performances when he was being played as a left wing-back.

The turd that just won't flush.

Thought the pitch looked a bit better than our last few home games today.

I can't make my mind up, to be honest. I'd long thought he does indeed simply play up to the moronic element of their fan base, but I thought today seemed just that little bit too Keegan-esque for it to be just his usual ‘controlled’ pashun. Röhl, perhaps more for what he is than anything he's said, has really got to him.

I rate Smith, but I really think he ought to have done better with his chance. Quick reactions from their keeper, I suppose, but equally, he'd have been getting the blame had he let that in.

It's hardly normal though to react as he has in interviews.

Genuinely shocked at just how easy it has been for Röhl to get under his skin.

I could well see it that Röhl starts next season at Southampton. But I don't believe for a moment that it's somehow all been agreed. Utter testicles.

It was a shame we didn't maintain the pretence of relegation playoffs with Luhukay for the remainder of the season given that we won the game in question. Obviously, it's a very bad error for him to have made, but it clearly wasn't that important either. Besides, it's hard to say when we weren't there ourselves to judge whether he might have been trying to merely to elicit a certain mind-set in the players; a bit like trying to ‘treat all games as cup finals’.

That's the thing though, we've already had it. No confirmation because he was never asked specifically about Bannan.

I wouldn't say Röhl dodged the question as he did talk about our general fitness, but then again he was never asked specifically about Bannan. Yes, why should he advantage the opposition even further by allowing them to fully plan for Bannan not playing, but the bottom line was that Bannan wasn't mentioned at all. It's hard to confidently draw any conclusions from it really. Still, I thought that Röhl's talking up of Chalobah's credentials to be quite noteworthy. He seemed to hint quite strongly that he might well be heavily involved this Saturday.

Do you think Röhl sounded like he wanted us merely to keep our ‘powder dry for next season’? When you're as close as we are to the play-offs you can't not push for them, and simply because this is a highly competitive sport, and trying to instil among a squad of players a sense of going into some kind ‘maintenance mode’ until next season (when a reasonable number won't even be here) is extremely difficult and probably quite unrealistic.

He wasn't that bad, although it undoubtedly ended very badly (as is invariably the case leading up to a sacking). He picked up a squad with a horrendous list of injuries, but stabilised us and we actually closed out that season in some good form. He was more than willing to play young players too. I loved Hutchinson and he was a great player for us, but he's hardly an unbiased character witness for Luhukay given what happened. Besides, we did win that away game at Leeds. Even so, there's no doubting Luhukay was at times way too ‘experimental’ in his approach.

And more to the point, we were on an excellent run of results either side of those 3 games anyway.

I don't know if this is a joke that's gone over my head, but it's simply not true. Bannan barely missed a single game in either League One season.

I'd be very surprised if he's regularly starting games between now and the end of the season, personally. Surprised and disappointed. We're just too close to the play-offs. But besides, Röhl's already taken the gamble with him by playing him at all. He's one for the future.

Serious lack of deadline day experience showing with some of you. Hours to go still.

I'm not sure if we're getting our wires crossed here, but isn't that a different rule to the 25-man-squad limit?

I don't think Gassama or McNeill count, do they?

I've no doubt whatsoever that all our managers have found him to be a very difficult character to deal with, and again, that would be an understatement.

I'm not criticizing the media here - they, like us, feel obliged to find out what the issue is once they're made aware of it. They can't just ignore this now they know, otherwise they'd be pointless. But the point is that it's the issue between the two of them that needs to be resolved. That's the most important thing for everyone. I don't see how the media spotlight is going to help facilitate that. And that's not me trying to implicate the media as I don't see what else they can do here.