Obvious negatives and positives to Martinez but it definitely reads like an agenda when people ignore poor luck, poor referee decisions and the fact that this side which everyone seems to agree has massive potential was largely brought together and given confidence by the manager you are berating.
People even seem to be accusing him of sticking too long with Stones, and yet just a few games ago he was the Messiah and Mori was dodgy.
There isn't a manager on earth that isn't balancing negatives with positives. I've been firmly on the fence most of Martinez time here, but now think it would be a huge mistake to disrupt what's going on.
I've no idea why Howard has been first choice, not just in recent months but going right back to Moyes time. I have no idea why we hadn't made any effort to cover a huge gap in experience in central defence, but the problem did seem to be becoming obvious during Moyes reign.
It's possible that we were just caught in a transition between DM philosophy of bringing in experienced players when needed, often gambling on bargains and RM determination to bring through younger players to gradually grow into the side and replace older players. It's left a gap and left young players exposed but in the long term may be much more beneficial.
Just a theory that he has felt we couldn't put too much pressure too soon on a young back four but didn't want to bring in experienced cover who may block their progress, but it's as valid as claiming he is blind to flaws of certain players.