den

I saw both Colin Hendry and Mike England. Colin was the talisman behind the premiership win, everyone knows about Colin. Braveheart was exactly what he was. He lead by example, that was his main attribute. Also scored the winning goal from centre forward, in the full members cup final, so he was versatile as well. Nobody overestimates his contribution to the biggest domestic prize, he was superb. however, he wasn't the best centre half that rovers have ever had. Mike England was a far better player. Take a look at This article on the PFA football legends website. As a footballer, he would outshine Hendry every time. He could play anywhere - centre half, centre forward or midfield. Hendry could never have done that. When I first saw him, he played, as an 18 year old right half, the equivalent of todays midfielder. He could have played there all his career, he was that good. The things that I remember about him were the way he used to ease across the pitch, slide into the tackle and take the ball away cleanly - sheer class. I saw him score two goals, playing centre forward at Turf Moor, against a good burnley side, playing for a relegation bound rovers team, he was superb. He moved to centre half soon in his career. From there he really made his name as the best centre half in Britain. Proof of how highly he was regarded, was when he was sold to Spurs for £95,000. A British record for a defender. Hendry was never regarded that highly. He was the regular captain of Wales. Hendry only captained Scotland on a few occassions. As it says on the PFA legends website, Mike England was world class. Hendry wasn't that. He went on to manage Wales. It's difficult to get over to people who have never seen him, exactly how good he was. However, take notice of the posters on here, who HAVE seen him. They will have seen both Hendry and England, I bet they go for England every time. Two words stick out about Mike England - "WORLD CLASS"

Unless someone comes forward wanting 3-5-2 we'll stick with 4-4-2 then. No-one has yet.

The poll isn't up yet. Watch this space for Mike England profile.

demographic: "relating to the dynamic balance of a population especially with regard to density and capacity for expansion or decline" Pardon?

Pardon?

I take it you mean the formation? I'm only being receptive to suggestions.

Whoa, Brownie, don't be so sure. Colin Hendry isn't the best centre half to have played for rovers and I'll tell you why in the next few days.

4-4-2 or 3-5-2? We might need a poll to decide. Let me explain the thinking behind me wanting to go 3-5-2: 3-5-2 is the nearest formation that would allow all the older players a chance of selection. It is very similar to the old "W" midfield formation of the 60's. Most of rovers best players come from the 60's or 90's. It evens out the chances. Nor is it biased towards the older players, as it is a formation played today in modern football. The obvious drawback is that it is a formation not often used by rovers nowadays. Now, look at this list of central midfielders midfielders: Ronnie Clayton, Tim Sherwood, Tugay, Barry Hole, David Batty, Ken Knighton, Super Atko, Roy Vernon. Stuart Metcalfe, DuncanMcKenzie, Howard Kendal, Tony Parkes, Eddie Quigley, Eamonn Rogers, Healess, forrest, bradshaw, Mickey speight, simon barker. Mick McGrath, Gordon Cowans. Peter Dobing. There are probably more. After all those, we have to find room for two wingers. Playing just one C.H. would allow three of these top midfielders into the side. Playing two centre halves would mean keeping only two of them. As Jim pointed, 4-4-2 could mean the loss of one of the GREAT midfielders, or result in Clayton or Douglas for example missing out, and let's be honest, attacking midfielders are far more popular than centre halves. The attacking/defensive balance of these teams never works out, I reckon we need a team of players that fans will pay good money to watch - midfielders/ forwards, which means 3-5-2. I'm serious, we might need a poll to decide. As for now let's just vote the first centre half in and then we will decide.

The results of the vote for the Left Back position finished as this: Graeme Le Saux 73 votes [48%] Bill Eckersley 56 votes[36%] Keith Newton 11 votes[7%] Therefore Le Saux joins Brad Friedel and Bob Crompton in the greatest ever team. Now to move onto the centre half. No-one objected to the suggestion that the team played in a 3-5-2 formation, in which place we require only one central defender. I've got together a short list of the following players: Mike England Colin Hendry Matt Woods David May Glenn Keeley Derek Fazackerley Graham Hawkins Kevin moran Stephane Henchoz John McNamee Tony gale Henning Berg More than likely some quality centre halves aren't on that list. Please let me know if anyone else should be there. We can use a few days to browse over the topic and maybe someone will come forward with a few thoughts about their own favourite.

John Connelly, a member of England's World Cup-winning squad in 1966, joined Rovers from ManU in 1968 (I think). John Connelly interview, just for Jim.

Don't know Ricky.

Baggio?

Over to you guys and gals.

We need any help we can get.

Sky sports now report Djorkaef is in talks with rovers. Confirmed by his agent Willie McKay.

Our fans were invited to do their own preview, in any fashion they liked. I thought rover6 did well. Give it a go yourselves. I'll be asking for volunteers soon.

If you watch the replay of the pen, when Emerton releases the ball, the defender put his right leg out, moves his body/arm towards the ball. Not ball to hand, but body to ball.

I reckon that's a pretty good preview rover6. Well done and thank you.

That left flank looks suspect.

Team; Friedel Neill Amo Matteo gray Emerton Flitty Fergy Jansen Stead Dickov

Apologies. In that case, former England captain and wing half Ronnie Clayton, legendary winger Bryan Douglas and great inside forwards such as Roy Vernon, Peter Dobing and Andy McEvoy have no chance. I give in. Douglas right wing, Clayton midfield, McEvoy striker, what's the problem Jim? They've as much chance as anyone else. As the positions are announced, if you want any player included, just say so. Arrgghh! You're talking about a different era. Douglas was a beautiful winger who could beat any full back in the world: can you imagine him "tracking back" (in modern parlance) to defend on the right side of a 4-4-2? Clayton was a classic wing half who linked up with the inside right and right winger and probably wouldn't know what midfield means. McEvoy, Vernon and Dobing, like all good inside forwards, were made in heaven. Striker is too ugly a word for players like them. OK Jim, I've been thinking about what you're saying. Although the original formation was intended to be 4-4-2, I'm prepared to go to 3-5-2. That shouldn't be a problem, it's still a very modern formation, and could give us chance to select from some of rovers undoubted midfield talent from the past and present. That would mean us electing just one more defender - central defender. I'm putting myself up for the high jump here. , but at the expense of a centre half, we are going to be able to fit in far more of the crowd pleasers - players that fans admire. Any objections anyone?

Apologies. In that case, former England captain and wing half Ronnie Clayton, legendary winger Bryan Douglas and great inside forwards such as Roy Vernon, Peter Dobing and Andy McEvoy have no chance. I give in. Douglas right wing, Clayton midfield, McEvoy striker, what's the problem Jim? They've as much chance as anyone else. As the positions are announced, if you want any player included, just say so.

Great idea. I actually emailed radio rovers and asked them if that could be done on the big screen, before each home game. Everton do it. Unsurprisingly, I didn't recieve a reply.

Jim, I said in the first post on this topic that the formation would be 4-4-2. That goes even more against Le Saux, then!

Interesting points Dave. The era that Bill played in could also restrict his appeal. In those days, as someone else pointed out earlier, full backs tended to stay back. Because the winger waited on the half way line, the full back couldn't get froward. [you might tell me differently with Bill, I don't know, I didn't see him]. So there's an argument for Le Saux? An all-round player who has far more to his game - or would 'eck have been better given the opportunity of modern coaching.