Naz. I feel we should be careful what we wish for. One of the blokes who stands near me said that Ardley should go yesterday as "We should be doing better!" I challenged him to name a team with a 4,500 attendance and no Sugar Daddy that was doing better than us. The only team he came up with was Shrewsbury Town. I feel we are over achieving on our budget at present and while I dream of us unearthing another Dave Bassett who can take us through the divisions with no money I fear those days have gone. Until we get back to Plough Lane and increase attendances and revenues I suspect staying in League 1 will be a stretch for any manager.

What has Anthony Hartigan done to deserve being dropped behind three old donkeys? Did he shit in NA's desk or something?

SILK - there are no issues between the current operators of either forum. It's a shame that others might feel that bridges are and will remain burned, but that's outside all our control. Olive branches have been extended in that regard. The answer was, sadly, unequivocal. But it's still a mountain out of a molehill IMHO. I agree it's sad that there's not more of an infusion of ideas and discussions, but there's certainly cross-pollination via other social media.

I want NA to succeed and stay with us. We are all club building and we all make mistakes BUT yesterday was deeply deeply depressing in terms of what he did ... the really depressing thing is it wasn’t a surprise to so many people. At home respect the oppo but assert our own game on them..

"There was a lengthy discussion addressing concerns about the current under performance of the team. The FCB remain very supportive of Neal Ardley and believe that he is the best person to correct the current problems with performances. A number of actions that have and are being taken to help support Neal and the team were discussed, including the potential for moves in the January transfer window. The DTB supported the FCB’s position and asked to be kept informed if there was anything else that could be done to help the situation."

Doubt a new manager - or even a new managerial team - would set us back more than it would to have (say) Akinfenwa or Tyrone Barnett in the squad

I also presume the DTB interact on Webjam, they just need to look at it to make it easier to access so that folk like me haven't given up on it after coming up against a brick wall (virtual).

Oi - Erik does post in the Facebook group but only to address the occasional operational question. Only the sort of stuff that would appear later on the OS.

Yesterday was probably the most annoyed I have been in years of going to Wimbledon. For us to set up with two defensive midfielders to stop the team bottom of the league was criminal. I feel uneasy for someone to be sacked from thier job, but I do get the imp when headline stats get thrown at us in the iFollow interview 18 shots on goal is a headline, but expand on how many hit the target and also how many of them shots were before 75 minutes. I really wanted to go off on one on our 9yrspodcast FB live after the game as I just could not believe we had surrendered at home.

I'm just guessing but I bet any manager with a better CV than Ardley will want considerably more than what we are paying at present.

No Wombled. I wouldn't have been pissed off about losing to Plymouth if we'd set ourselves up to win and payed attacking football at KM against the bottom club who have skx injuries. We set ourselves up defensively and played the same old boring crap we'd been playing until 10 days ago. Not good enough.

Looks like the apocalypse really is coming if the Ronan summoning spell is no longer effective!

Whilst i take some of Farnham's points, saying you should be prepared to pay to get rid of Ardley is the same as saying you must be able to name his successor in order to say you want rid of him. It should be looked on as an overall package of what is good for the club, money may tend to support keeping Ardley but there are circumstances in which the cost is worth paying without me having to fund it out of my own pocket. As for fan engagement, the DT has at least 3 meetings a year at which members can go and hold the DTB, and through them the FCB, to account. Engaging on one forum as opposed to another is a slippery slope, I don't think Erik should interact on Facebook other than publishing factual information, Facebook excludes many who won't sell their privacy for likes.

So would three points have been better so long as we all agreed with what NA was doing?

Tudor - isn't the problem is that SGB wasn't set up because of that some people wanted to spend time with their mates but because of the spat over a tasteless joke. Isn't it time that bridges were mended?

The club is run by people who care and have achieved fantastic success

Been too pissed off and angry to look here and not read back, but enough is enough from tinkerman Ardley for me. He just can't help but try and be too clever. Unfortunately I doubt with our structure that we will have the ability or balls to get rid of him. He needs to go back to Academy management where his fucking about doesn't really matter. Not been this frustrated with a Wimbledon manager since Peter Withe. :-(

Mikey T is the power behind the throne??

Wombled it's not about the points. Three games ago I'd have bitten your hand off for 6 points. It's about Ardley clearly not learning a damn thing.

Kyle - I'd be very surprised if that a) was the case, and b) even if it was there isn't some review process where we could get rid of him (even if it's only at the end of the season)

Leddrede - if so, they got a point from it. ;)

I'm with Farnham. Most of the rest need some chill pills. Six points from 3 games - could have been a lot worse.

Wonder if top of the table Shrewsbury went out all guns blazing in their draw against Plymouth last Saturday?

Okay, so IMHO, as far as WUP and the SGB go, this entire club is run by fans, top to bottom, and they're fully entitled to have mates who go back further than 2002, and hang around with them. As long as the FCB remains reportable to the DTB, the members of which will also have their own circles of mates, then it doesn't really matter- as long as if something really, drastically needs to be changed, the DT Members can effect that. Checks and balances. Short term, NA remains an FCB issue, although I would like the DTB to consider the long-term view (which is their remit). Secondly, our club is also big enough to support two different forums/chatrooms. Both of which have their own rules/level of visibility. Both of which, through their operating procedure or decor, can open themselves up for a bit of snarky prodding every once in a while. That's all there is to it.

Farnham: You are, of course, entitled to your point of view but Ardley’s five years is already above average according to the latest issue of your superb mag. That lists 16 managers in 62 years, so an average tenure of 3.9 years – if you exclude the first manager in your list, Les Henley, that average drops to 3.1 years. As articles in The Historical Don often point out, supporting Wimbledon is not just about results, for many (including yourself) it’s a much wider commitment. In your life as a Don, you remember having seen enough by half time at your first match - you were cold and bored and wanted to go home. “The personnel and venues may have changed over the past half century but the joy of following the club remains.” That joy has simply gone for many right now.