Last night wasn't the worst performance I've seen at the Boleyn this season (that was Bristol City) but it was poor nonetheless. What seems apparent is that teams have sussed BFS's gameplay and can frustrate it. Much like Avram last year, he doesn't seem able to change the gameplay effectively midgame when Plan A isn't working. I think we don't have a Plan B unfortunately. I think we could easily have won the game last night but that wouldn't have changed the fact that it was a poor performance, on top of a lot of other poor home performances this year. If you'd have told me that we'd break a club record this year at the start of the season, I wouldn't have said that it would be successive home draws!

4-5-1 (it really isn't 4-3-3, Sam) is crap at home. Cole was closely man-marked by Boro, as presumably they'd worked out that if Cole was neutralised, we'd be stuffed. Unlike some on here, I thought Cole put in a shift but playing the lone role is a thankless task without players joining from midfield (which wasn't happening). The difference when Carew, a man so over the hill he's in the following valley, came on was marked - he was nowhere near as willing to run around and get in the face of the Boro defence as Cole had been.

4-5-1 doesn't work but Nolan can't play in a 4-4-2 (and BFS isn't going to drop him). We've still got a great chance to go up automatically - and the Reading game is massive - but I think the best thing that could happen is that we get it and then sack BFS. I'm pretty sure he only had a two-year deal, so severance shouldn't be as bad as it could be. SuGo aren't idiots - they must see that this is crap and that something must change.

And what is the point of spending large (comparatively) on decent strikers (first Baldock, now Maynard) and then sticking them out wide? It is the most frustrating thing of all.

This is without doubt the best bit of media relations that Sullivan has done since he took over. I haven't liked the way that he (and, more to the point, Brady) has tried to do business through the media before because it makes us look two-bob and is always open to manipulation by the media outlet anyway (which wouldn't happen in giving an interview to a dedicated West Ham site like this). Hats off to Iain for bringing this in.

I'm not sure I've believed everything I've read over the past few days - Sullivan is a very rich man an under no obligation to tell the truth if it doesn't suit his own ends (I don't mean that as a criticism - he has to guard his (sizeable) investment after all). However, I believe most, probably all, of what's been said in this chapter - we were a financial basket case under the Icelanders , no doubt about it and, looking at some of the dodgy owners out there, we were fortunate in getting not just West Ham fans, but experienced owners of a football club. Football tends not to be run like a real business and the near twenty years at Brum have stood them in good stead for taking over us, in the shape we were.

Desparately poor and unimaginative tonight. I've just seen BFS on SSN say it was a very very good performance, with very good creativity . Is he trolling the fans that were there?

Sears has no left foot at all - why play him wide left FFS? He went closest to scoring with a lovely shot against the post from outside of the box - with his right foot. There's a clue, Sam.

I'd give him another go in his position before writing him off - I think he could make a decent Championship player and that's all we need at the moment. I refuse to believe that of all the available players, he is best at playing wide left.

I wasn't keen on the OS during the tender (but better us than Spuds on our doorstep). I also always thought the weak point was the £40m Newham loan (it looked like State Aid and I'm surprised our/Newham's lawyers didn't address this earlier). I think we should just walk away now though. Other than Citeh (who operate on a different financial planet), clubs that decide to rent in this country generally regret it (Coventry, for example). We will be getting rid of the major physical asset of the club, making it more difficult to secure finance in the future. Revenue from other uses of the ground will go to the landlord, not us (and they'll be looking to claw back their £50m investment) and match day catering may also (as it does for some tenant clubs) fall to them too.

Losing control of the conversion work is also unwise - if we want to play there, we need to have it redesigned to our spec, not OPLC's.

I thought the scrappiness of the game was down to Pompey's spoiling tactics. I guess we'll see that type of physicality quite a lot with the division's lesser teams and we need to cope with it better. With all the stops in play for free-kicks, we couldn't get into much of a rhythm. I said to my mate 15 minutes into the first half that Pompey would be lucky to finish with 11 players, the amount of fouls that were flying around.

I was disappointed Baldock didn't get a run out when it was 4-2 and comfortable but it was satisfying to see good performances from Lansbury and Bentley.

This is the time of year where agents will try to drum up some business for their clients through the press and I hope that this is one of those - I certainly wouldn't want to see him at West Ham, he is consistently trouble (and, at 30, his 'best' years are likely behind him).

As to Fernandes offer and the Board's rejection, this is just rich men squabbling. It might annoy SuGo but I've no love for them so I don't really care. I do remember, soon after the last takeover that SuGo said, publicly, that they encouraged other investors, naming Fernandes (who said he wasn't interested at that time), to take a stake. If you leave bait on a fishing rod, don't complain when the fish bite.

I genuinely feel worse about the (very strong) possibility of Allardyce's appointment than I did about the relegation. Allardyce plays ugly football and we've always prided ourselves on playing attractive football - if we don't play (or, at least (on the basis of the last couple of years) attempt to play) attractive football, we're not West Ham any more.

The fact that he was even on the shortlist is just another example of SuGo not understanding football. If Allardyce is appointed and either of SuGo trot out their usual line, while he's manager, that they are West Ham people through and through, they deserve all the vitriol that should be rained down upon them.

I also think that Allardyce's brand of football is out of date and will not bring the success in the Championship that some posters think it will. In recent years, Burnley, WBA, Newcastle, Norwich and Blackpool have been promoted playing proper football, Swansea are the same and in the p-o final. Even Brighton came up from League 1 playing football. I think Fat Sam's football is, thankfully, not a guarantee of (middling) success any more.

Given how much grief from fans that Curbs got as West Ham manager, with his boring yet effective football, I think a Fat Sam appointment is doomed to failure (much like it was at Newcastle, where the fans have a similar expectation on the type of football that their team should play).

With Ba being rested today and Obinna coming in, I think it's safe to say that the 'shots on target' stat will go down today.

I think they all played well. Noble was my MotM and I'm surprised that Cole didn't score more highly, I thought he had an excellent game and was unlucky not to score. I don't think Tomkins is cut out to be a RB but I can't fault Grant's tactical changes (though I was faulting him plenty before ko). Great game, great atmosphere. And I now know, after Parker pulled up sharply holding his shoulder, what the sound of 30,000 people taking a sharp intake of breath sounds like!

First McCarthy, now EHD - are we Blackburn's mug punters, or something?

Good, solid, players that would have improved WHU have changed hands in this window for reasonable sums within what we are told is our, small, budget and we've not had a sniff of them.

I would seriously prefer the Brown-led board from before the Icelandic takeover to SuGo.