murphy

I know... Imagine having a Forest supporting mate

Because Cooper wants a right back to fill in with the 2 cbs making a three in possession. Justin is probably more suited to that role even though Ricardo is the better player overall.

You're right, we have no right to turn up at Palace and expect to win, but I don't think that is the problem being discussed here. The problem is that having got ourselves ahead we invited Palace on to us and conceded possession, territory and threat with no outlet leading to the inevitable late equaliser.

I feel a bit sorry for Justin as it seems to me that he is being criticised for fulfilling the role that Cooper has given him. I'm not a football hipster, so correct me if I'm wrong, but in possession, Cooper asks Justin to sit in with the two centre halves to form a three. For that reason, he is likely preferred to Ricardo. Then he gets criticised for not coming forward and also criticised for being to narrow. Meanwhile, with Justin sitting, Kristiansen is given licence to push forward and join the attack with the left winger drifting in field. I don't really understand why we don't allow either full back to push forward, depending on which flank we are attacking, while the other one sits. I would then play Ricardo as rb and Justin lb.

We didn't lose. It just feels like we did.

I think that Justin is preferred to Ricardo defensively as his role is to sit in, in possession and form a three with Faes and Okoli with Kristiansen given licence to bomb forward and the left winger tucks in as a 10. That is how I understand it anyway, for the benefit of everyone questioning Justin's position.

.

If we all adopted that logic, then Boris Johnson would still be PM.

I think that Cooper needs to come out and explain what he is trying to achieve tactically because there is a growing disconnect with the fans regarding this over-cautious, shackled set up. Maybe we're missing something. Personally, I'd rather go down fighting than set up for Crystal Palace as if they're Real Madrid.

If it's 0-0 after 75 mins, Cooper will bring on Choudhury and Soumare to see it out.

It is possible to believe that Skipp is a decent player AND that we over paid for him. Not only did we overpay but we blew the budget on a position in which we were already well stocked. I think that it would have been better spent where the team is weakest. I think it was also a bit of a depressing buy because it signals Cooper's intention to play a block of DMs, even at home and that paucity of ambition is going to cost us. None of that is criticism of the player himself.

I agree. We need to have some balance and we're not going to win many games if we divest the team of our best attacking options and our best chances to score. It's like we have escaped a points deduction only to enforce one on ourselves. If we go down setting the team up in this almost cowardly way, we will never know if we could have stayed up if we had played to our strengths.

I think its the way that Cooper is using his squad that some of us have found alarming.

I don't like this idea of playing with the handbrake on, at home, until the opposition scores and then chase the game. We are up against it enough already without effectively giving the opposition a goal start. What would happen if we didn't go behind I ask myself? Would Cooper throw the cavalry on in the second half in search of a winner or would he stick and try to protect a point? I think the latter. He is showing the opposition too much respect and handing over the initiative from the start.

We will always have that draw against Spurs. No one can take that away from us.