I predicted 14th.
Why have we lost 9 in 11?
Two answers:
1) I don't know for sure, because results in football have so many factors behind them.
2) Trying to make that more solid:
a) Mowbray being over-loyal to the players who had done so well up to the start of February;
b) Injuries to key players - especially Lenihan - leaving our defence seriously weakened;
c) A drastic falling away in form of four of our most consistent players: Dack, Bennett, Williams and Mulgrew;
d) Failure to turn possession into clear-cut chances;
e) The nerviness in the last 15 minutes that has characterised this team for two seasons;
f) Probably connected to the previous one - the lack of a natural leader in midfield;
g) Mowbray's lack of confidence in the younger players (although we don't KNOW, of course, that they would have done any better);
h) The fact that a few losses in themselves breed doubt and a loss of confidence, so you get into a vicious circle;
i) This strange business of our often only starting to get into our stride in the second half (very hard to put a finger on the reason for that);
j) TM persisting with the 4-2-3-1 despite not having players ideal for it;
k) Having too many players who are risk-averse;
l) The dramatic inconsistency of our full-backs;
m) Total lack of good fortune in the penalty-area: how many loose balls have fallen into Graham's or Dack's path during this spell? Very few;
n) A lack of height and bulk in the team;
o) A lack of class and quality compared to the Clubs who have spent heavily;
Etc.
In other words, the usual thing when trying to fathom sporting success/failure: complexity - with some factors down to the manager, some not. Of course, Mowbray is the one who will pay the penalty, because that is the easy way out in football. I accept that's the reality, although I do get annoyed when even the players seize on this factor - as they often do - to free themselves of any blame: "Well, you see, mate, the reason I played badly in all those games was because the manager was poor. Simple, innit?"