But his reply blew a big hole in your continual repeating the same thing. If we are scoring, it doesn't matter how many strikers we have and we still have an International keeper in goal.
You cant name an alternative viable replacement to Parish, so there is little point you keep saying he should move aside.

I'm sure Maine will reply but his reply didn't blow a big hole in Maine's post. If it did, I expect half the league to have no striker as back up. Do you reckon that'll happen at all in the future? 1 striker per team, especially those fighting relegation? Yeah let's all make it equally harder. Er, no.

Were we scoring much without a striker? How about for 4 months? Benteke or any player can get injured on 1st September or 1st February.

Again ffs, nobody is saying an alternative for Parish as chairman but Parish is either playing squad Kerplunk or doesn't appreciate the necessary needs or respect the managers' desperate requirements. Therefore in these crucial moments something needs changing. That is bl33ding obvious and only Parish's relatives would disagree.

The people defending 1 striker and 2 keepers on this thread are bonkers, and they don't have the excuse of ffp that we didn't have the funds because we were supplying the money, too late.

There are 6 big teams in the prem, then there's Everton and West ham, who could attach themselves to these, cos of ground and support base IMO. If West ham are run well,the sky's the limit with that ground deal.
The rest of us are basically the same. All potentially 25-35k per game and getting practically the same money every season. Teams like us and Bournemouth are a little behind because we have a lot of ground and infrastructure to catch up on, but basically parity is coming to the 14 of us who make up the numbers.
Then the future of all of us is in a cycle of about 10 years, where we blossom then fall from grace, then repeat again, probably.
We will get relegated again soon, if not this season in the foreseeable future, because we just can't grow enough within the financial constraints put in place by the big boys in order to keep the status quo. Let's be clear that is exactly what FFP is. Don't buy this bollocks about making sure clubs don't go out of existence, cos in reality who bar their own fans cares what happens to other clubs.
I say let the big 6 have a larger percentage of the overseas TV rights that they're bleating about in return for scrapping the phoney FFP regs they've helped produce. Then Sugar Daddies can come in and buy clubs and spend what they want and more City's, Chelsea's and PSG's can spring up. Hang on that's what they don't want isn't it? Would be interesting to see their reaction to a proposal like that.
So basically we are where we're gonna be unless a big investor can come in and buy us and spend what he wants. Until that let's just enjoy the ups and downs like we used to without the constant bleating.

There are 6 big teams in the prem, then there's Everton and West ham, who could attach themselves to these, cos of ground and support base IMO. If West ham are run well,the sky's the limit with that ground deal.
The rest of us are basically the same. All potentially 25-35k per game and getting practically the same money every season. Teams like us and Bournemouth are a little behind because we have a lot of ground and infrastructure to catch up on, but basically parity is coming to the 14 of us who make up the numbers.
Then the future of all of us is in a cycle of about 10 years, where we blossom then fall from grace, then repeat again, probably.
We will get relegated again soon, if not this season in the foreseeable future, because we just can't grow enough within the financial constraints put in place by the big boys in order to keep the status quo. Let's be clear that is exactly what FFP is. Don't buy this bollocks about making sure clubs don't go out of existence, cos in reality who bar their own fans cares what happens to other clubs.
I say let the big 6 have a larger percentage of the overseas TV rights that they're bleating about in return for scrapping the phoney FFP regs they've helped produce. Then Sugar Daddies can come in and buy clubs and spend what they want and more City's, Chelsea's and PSG's can spring up. Hang on that's what they don't want isn't it? Would be interesting to see their reaction to a proposal like that.
So basically we are where we're gonna be unless a big investor can come in and buy us and spend what he wants. Until that let's just enjoy the ups and downs like we used to without the constant bleating.

In order to '' progress '' us, in my opinion the key is identifying and retaining a good manager. And by that I mean keeping someone for a number of years rather than months.

We've had so many changes and so much instability at manager level that there is no embedded footballing philosophy, no consistent transfer policy, no consistent squad development, and youth team players rarely get opportunities to challenge for first team football as they are untrusted and unknown to the succession of managers we have had.

Now I know that's a tall order in modern day football and with the pressure that goes with trying to stay in the PL, managers are rarely given any time once results start to slip.

But for me, that's the challenge that Steve has to move the club away from an annual relegation battle.