Can't argue with any of the above as per the game. I do think the Met was a particularly difficult place for us to go on the day and with regards to where we are at. For me the Met never change their style. I don't think they had to be at their best to turn us over - which tells us where we are. My one take-away is that for me, it was the first time since the downturn where you could actually assess what credentials some of these lads have in terms of diagnosis. In terms of personnel, it will envariably change, but we have no definable style. We have to start somewhere. I think the lad Brown broke up play - not much else - doesn't win ariel stuff which is a downside. The central combo remains un-tried until Matty comes back. If he's available Tuesday, I would partner him alongside McVey to see how they shape up. Question mark over McVey. I think the lad is neat and tidy and does some reasonable interventions. He does offload close at hand - sideways or back. How much more drive and scope he has in his locker remains un-known. We need continuity and to find the right players for their roles. This is the only way we can move on as ugly as it may be at times. The movement of the Met provide them with numerous options in possession. Mazzone out wide, targeted with goal-kicks, supported down the flanks enabling them to get balls into the box. Lessons perhaps for Calcutt. I think we miss Chaps with his delivery - our set-pieces have been poor. Our backs have to re-engage in an attacking sence, not just hoping the lads in front can deliver. I do think we have the premise with something to work with - I havn't thought for that for weeks. Good opposition on the horizon may actually bring more out of us. I do think we can at the very least start to find some answers and hopefully move on.