I seem to remember Erik saying before that you didn't pay out the contract in full because the manager (or I guess player) wanted the freedom to take another job. In theory a one year rolling contract you have to pay 12 months but ptobably get away with 3 to 4. in negotiation.

Also, we may have got the 6 points we wanted from the 3 games, but after getting 6 from the first two, we really should have been looking for a 3 point bonus. Ps, i'd rather have had the 3 points from Muff than from Rotherham.

That's what it always was

*74. Not 74 ? :-)

He should be on a one year rolling contract so that it gets reviewed at the end of every season and if it's not working out he goes, if it is, he stays. Or is it not as simple as that ?

Why on earth would we have given him a four year deal . Don't buy it

Cannot believe Trotter, Soarse, Abdou do well in training. none can get past a canter on the field!

Wu - don't doubt that. . However the rumours that he's totally untouchable or on a 4 year deal..

Ribligo - its like comparing theory to practice. Practice always wins out because it is in the real world. Things happen. Theory is in the lab or the mind. You can use practice to prove a theory but to me it seems NA has a theory and will keep using practice until one day it proves it!

Trigger - no, perfectly understand your point. The wind was a factor. I did wonder if we missed a trick here...often it seems difficult to use the win to your advantage first half as you have to 'get into the game'. Second half you are happy to punt it down the pitch to at least relieve pressure and it does ALWAYS force one side back (not rocket science there NA). Just thought that Plymouth did use it better than us, perhaps because we allowed them and gave them exactly what they suspected. Play with wind second half so all we have to do is survive the first. Job half done. Been brave of BF to pay the other way first half though...

So where's the all-knowing Digy ??

Trigger - I really do think it can be that simple. I hope he reverts to the Rotherham line up, or maybe put Kennedy in at left back which will mean, no doubt, putting Francomb on the right because he will always find a place for his gimp, which in this case will be fine because it will keep the balance of the team.

NOT saying I agree with that plan, just saying that WILL be the plan. All sources close to the club suggest Ardley has full backing for spending in January.

Bushmonkey - NA will probably sign Farty McFartpants and say well you lot asked for wind.

Yesterday, grrrrrrrrr. Still.

Yesterday reminded me of *that* performance at home to Sheffield Wednesday

And I think that’s what yesterday did - all of the goodness from the last two (last one really) results(-s) got hoyed against the rocks like a monkey in an episode of Alan Partridge. Every January we look to see where improvements can be made but right now the big question is whether Ardley has lost the ability to find, pick and motivate the right players to do the right job. And being in a relegation battle isn’t a very good starting point to attract give-a-shit players. As we’ve seen, two games is a long time at the moment but as things stand I am losing my faith in NA’s ability to sort this out between now and the end of January.

Tell me, why exactly should NA be given any money at all to bring in new players in January? If he found someone good he would play him out of position.

To a large extent our survival depends upon Neal’s recruitment in January. Given his recent work in the transfer market we should be concerned.

Not convinced about that Spartan - not sure it’s that simple. Absolutely agree with the “why tinker?” argument but our problems are deeper-seated imo. Our entire squad lack urgency, lack pace and lack will. Poor teams can literally “out-want us.” We don’t haemorrhage goals but we do concede them because it’s L1. Until we can score then we’re relying on other teams to be worse than us and that’s not a convincing approach to a season.

Might as well give lincoln the 1.0 win now so we can have a Saturday off.

The thing about yesterday is that if he'd kept the same line up as Tuesday with no positional changes we would have likely won, or at least had more chance of winning and had we lost anyway we fans would have had to accept it and wouldn't have had anything to blame NA for. We blame him because it was his uncalled for meddling that lost us the game. You only have to look at how well we played when he finally woke up to what he'd done wrong and brought Kaja on and moved Forrester to the middle.

Is the wind available to sign in January? Maybe stick it up front?

Pub Quiz ?? Is it trying to remember which one you're in come 10.30pm ??

Jam - tongue in cheek - just that wind shouldn’t be a thing, especially with Ardley’s “total football” approach. But also because it wasn’t that bad anyway and both teams have to deal with the same conditions. In fact if NA had blamed or mentioned the wind i’d have been apoplectic.