Blackburn Rovers are dallying. Paul Ince should have been sacked 12 minutes into his team's abject defeat at Wigan on Saturday.
By then Rovers had already found themselves two goals down and were staring a sixth successive defeat squarely in the face; an 11th game without a win in The Premier League.
After a week of countless backings of the manager and an adamance that it was a dressing room united after the previous Saturday's spirited showing against Liverpool, Wigan away was to be the turning point.
Rovers we were told, were doing it for the manager. What transpired was an even bigger anti-climax than the Strictly Come Dancing semi-final.
Three weeks ago I said that Ince needed to be given time despite mounting concerns.
He was not my first choice to succeed Mark Hughes but his task was more perilous than many in the media realise. At variance to the prevailing opinion among Rovers' unanimous support, I feel some sympathy for Ince.
With financial resources as scanty as Rovers', Hughes's was a mixed legacy. It was a playing squad short only on midfield creativity but with little scope for major improvement. Rather than repeat myself, I will refer you back to a post I made three weeks ago, the, dare I say it, prophetically entitled 'Rovers in crisis.'
There are mitigating circumstances in Ince's defence then...but what of the rest?
His mistakes in no particular order include buying Keith Andrews, signing Robbie Fowler, deciding that Brett Emerton was the right man to replace David Bentley and entrusting his side's defensive game to a part-time coach, who has spent more time addressing his former club Arsenal's defensive frailties than his own employers' shortcomings.
Ince's handling of the media, his suggestion of a vendetta against ex-Manchester United players has also undermined his position. He can have no claims that he is being targeted unfairly. Rovers are second from bottom and five points adrift of safety.
Nor did he come into the job too late. Ince was appointed on June 22nd, over six weeks before the start of the season. He went on a holiday immediately afterwards.
If this sounds a lot like a vendetta against a former Manchester United player, then it is entirely unintended. It is merely an insistence that he is not the right man for the job.
John Williams, Rovers' astute chairman, who so valued the continuity of Graeme Souness and then Mark Hughes, is loath to part with a manager who was his own appointment just six months ago. But it was a gamble that didn't pay off.
Rovers must now cut their losses in time for a new man to be installed for Saturday's match against Stoke City.
Another gamble is out of the question. What Rovers need now is tried and trusted and there are only two viable candidates.
Former manager Graeme Souness, who divided opinion first time around, would galvanise the team, but the Scot's charismatic quality is not matched by his tactical h and on this occasion he will not be able to polish the attacking diamonds of Damien Duff, David Dunn and Matt Jansen.
While it would doubtless be entertaining 'weeing with the willy we've got', one suspects it might not be conducive to good results.
Sam Allardyce would be the most practical choice. He knows how to upset the odds and is accustomed to working with limited resources, both playing and financial. I was against his appointment in June, but desperate times call for desperate measures.