Rousseau

I think I'd recall Docherty, especially with Ejaria leaving. Unless we've got someone else lined up.

Yes, that's why I had 'strikers' in inverted commas. 4-3-3 can have seven attackers. Sir Alex and Man Utd were playing in a league that didn't want to play football; the 4-4-2 was ubiquitous. He was able to smash them with a 4-3-3. I agree we certainly need more creative midfielders -- But, I don't think that precludes us from using it now; it's generally worked quite well.

I'd still use Pena. He's a unique player, with a valuable skill-set. He's not a complete midfielder, and he does have issues, but I'd use him until his contract runs out -- if we can't get rid of him for a fee, which looks unlikely.

4-3-3 is the best formation in the game; it allows more attackers in the final third, and a three-man midfield providing more control. Isolated strikers is a problem, but only through a failure of execution. It's not a failure of the system. There should be three 'strikers' in the 4-3-3. There's a reason why Sir Alex Ferguson changed from a dominant 4-4-2 to a 4-3-3 at the turn of the millennium. 4-3-3 should be our standard formation, which then gets tweaked depending on the opposition.

I know he got two goals, but how did Hardie play? Did he look like he could play a part for us?

I would've liked to have seen Grezda for Coulibaly earlier, or from the start -- or McCrorie with Coulibaly playing deeper. I think you're putting too much emphasis on formation. A team can play the same formation defensively or gung-ho. Compare a wonderfully attacking Ajax side just now, to a Man Utd; both are playing a 4-2-3-1, with wildly different outlooks. Arguably, Man Utd play with more 'attacking' midfielders. Ultimately, too, I think if Candeias, Ejaria and Kent were available, they'd have played. It puts a different complexion on the team, but the tactics would've been the same, IMO.

Grezda could/should have started, but he doesn't really finish games; you'd prefer to have him towards the end of the game, I think. I don't think we've found a place for Lafferty yet, in general. I don't think we're getting Lafferty, Middleton, Grezda and Morelos in the same side. Unless we're going gung-ho. What line-up / formation would you have played? I don't think we were ever going to deviate from the 4-3-3 / 4-2-3-1.

We'll need to agree to disagree. I don't think the tactics were bad, and certainly not "shocking" -- a lot of the "three defensive midfielders and only one natural winger" complaint was forced; Ejaria, Kent, Candeias all out etc. -- but, like @Frankie says, a change earlier would've been better. I also wouldn't say they're pure defensive midfielders, either; Not if their roles are to do otherwise. McCrorie can be high-energy, but he is a defender; Jack and Coulibaly have played as 8's for us, being asked to drive forward. You could ask if they actually did that job, and they didn't on the night. Everyone was poor -- except Barasic. My main complaint was for the players; they just couldn't string two passes together. That's not tactics.

I don't think the tactics were that bad. It was more the execution of it that disappointed me. We couldn't string two passes together.

These games were just a bonus for me. I would have bit your hand off for us to be competitive. However, we've managed to get ourselves in a really good position, then threw it away. I have the sense of deja vu.

Just started to put pressure on them... What is Tavernier doing? What is McGregor doing?

B*llocks.

There is some lovely combination play on the right, between Jack, Tavernier, Arfield and Morelos.

I don't think there's too much Gerrard can do about players not being able to pass -- other than replace every one of them!

We're sloppy, but it's also so slow. It takes Goldson half and hour to pass it to McAuley.

And the Oscar goes to...

From the initial line-up, I thought we were playing a 4-4-2 Diamond, with Middleton beside Morelos, but we're not playing that at all. Arfield is just playing wide in the normal formation. It's working well: there's a solidity to it. We're really sloppy in possession, though.

Yes, with Arfield dropping into Coulibaly's position; Grezda out wide.

His performances may have dipped recently, but I don't think, at least on the pitch, it warrants an early termination of his loan. Maybe he's struggling to cope with the demands? Strange considering he's a Liverpool player.

We might be able to get Davis on the cheap: I doubt he was ever in Hasenhuttl’s plans, going by the high-energy, high-pressing game he employed at Leipsig. Another Centre-half? I don't think it's needed, but then again, we'll need options next season -- McAuley at almost 40, Worral away, and Katic down the pecking order.

I've not seen anything of Dowell. I've been saying as much about Davis since he's been linked. I can still see him playing as a 10 for us, with more defensive players behind as the legs.

Dowell, was it? And Davis, I suppose.

How can you be absolutely certain about Eaves, yet think Sadiq deserves a chance? I'm as optimistic as you can get when it comes to players, any player, but Sadiq is brutal; the boy's a donkey. (He played in the Semi because Morelos and Lafferty were unavailable. There was literally no one else.)

I think that's a better way of looking at it than rejecting the guy outright because he hasn't score many and because he's playing in a certain league. He may not be the answer, but I agree that option is certainly needed.