9 minutes ago, Butty said:

Well the club obviously felt we needed another in as we tried to sign Dembele.

Is he a striker? Think he's more of a winger/midfielder. Anyway, for the figures quoted, it would have been a good permanent signing. It seems the Hedges transfer was brought forward from Summer when we missed out and/or Markanday got injured

We have 6 players for the 2 roles upfront. 

13 minutes ago, jim mk2 said:

Silly post and doesn't answer the question of the predicament Rovers now find themselves in

Well it's true. You would complain the club didn't sign a replacement if someone in any position got injured, from goalkeeper to Striker and every position in between. 

Then you would complain if we signed players who didn't play because the players who start didn't injured and were starting ahead of them "Why did we waste money on so and so" 

All this stuff is easy to moan about in hindsight 

8 minutes ago, JHRover said:

No it isn't. Employing dodgy accountancy practices with the aim of cheating the system is significantly worse than breaking spending limits but being honest and transparent about it. It is a different offence. One might be accidental, inadvertent or be a few quid over the limit, the other is a brazen attempt to manipulate the system using false information.

The only reason those sanctions were imposed was because of those practices. No points deduction was imposed for the offence of spending too much on players.

If it was the 'same thing' then why didn't those clubs then get separate points deductions for overspending?

The argument on here since day 1 has been that we cannot spend beyond a certain amount on players because if we do we will get a serious sanction, probably points deduction. My point has been that sanctions for such spending are rare and highly unlikely.

Though it is convenient to Waggott and co. because most people don't know what is going on and just see the words FFP and points deduction for Derby and Sheff Wed and immediately assume we would go exactly the same way if we spent anything on players.

 

I think you answer yourself here.

They spent more than FFP allowed and and a club either owns up, or tries to hide it/get away with it

4 clubs who were in our division at the time have had deductions relating to breaches of FFP and/or their actions in relation to FFP 

You really think some some clubs have accidentally spent more than was allowed under the rules? Very badly run if thats the case..... 

I agree it's worse to try and cover it up, but ultimately it goes back to breaking FFP rules/guidelines in the first place 

1 minute ago, roversfan99 said:

This idea that someone will always step in unexpectedly when the key striker departs/is out is flawed, hopefully it will happen again but there is a reason that goalscorers cost so much.

Flawed? I would say more hopeful, but really what else can we do? As you say goalscorers cost a lot of money. 

Brereton, Dack, Khadra, Hedges, Markanday, Gallagher, Dolan and even Vale. Thats 8 for 2 positions, although Dack will probaby play in Buckleys position and vale is young, but still its 6 players. 

QPR fans are complaining they didn't sign a striker too  

5 minutes ago, jim mk2 said:

It's OK saying "someone has to step up" to replace Brereton but who exactly?

Dack - forget it, he'll never be the same player again

Butterworth - schoolboy player, not ready for the first team

Gallagher - maybe but highly unlikely

The failure to add forward firepower in January was a serious mistake. Injuries to key players was always going to happen

As its stands, unless the midfield contributes (not on present form) and defenders start chipping in (even more unlikely) where are the goals coming from? 

I assume you didn't give Brereton much chance of stepping up when Armstrong left? 

5 minutes ago, Gavlar Somerset Rover! said:

How many career goals do those guys have between them? Barely hits 30 I would imagine. It doesn't matter if we play with these wide forwards, we still need them to hit the back of the net. I'm not looking at this with hindsight - I said throughout January that Markanday wouldn't be enough. We need someone who can sniff out a goal. We don't have that.

How many did Brereton have before this season? These guys need to step up now 

2 minutes ago, Gavlar Somerset Rover! said:

@Rovers: TM on Brereton Diaz: "He's in good spirits, but he's not going to be available for the next game or two.He twisted his ankle, it could be a few days, few weeks, few months. Let's wait and see."

As an aside, Ayala is out again. The winter break strikes yet again for our Spaniard.

Quote directly from LT is different

He won’t be available this weekend which is a blow but it’s an opportunity for someone else to come in and see if they can knock the goals in.

“Ben filled a void when Adam Armstrong left and if Ben is going to miss a game or two then someone else has to step up.”

20 minutes ago, Gavlar Somerset Rover! said:

Very vague from TM..."days, weeks or months"...I'm not joking either.

The decision to not bring in another striker (NOT Markanday) pre-window ending is looking like one absolute balls up from the club. It was a very risky decision, and you could argue it's been backfiring for some time given we can't hit a barn door, even with BBD.

Where does he say potentially months? 

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/19931975.ben-brereton-diaz-injury-update-blackburn-rovers-boss/

Sounds like 2 games max 

13 minutes ago, Gavlar Somerset Rover! said:

Very vague from TM..."days, weeks or months"...I'm not joking either.

The decision to not bring in another striker (NOT Markanday) pre-window ending is looking like one absolute balls up from the club. It was a very risky decision, and you could argue it's been backfiring for some time given we can't hit a barn door, even with BBD.

We brought in Hedges and Markanday who can play in one of the 2 front positions. One got injured after 10 minutes. We also have Gallagher, Khadra and Dolan who can play there. 

It's always easy to say we should have signed players after someone gets injured. 

Brereton was always going to start with one of the others mentioned above. Bournemouth signed Moore for £3.5 million and on more than we pay anyone, to sit on the bench. They have parachute payments, we can't afford to do that. 

1 hour ago, JHRover said:

I can not include Derby and Sheff Wed because their sanctions were for breaking different rules!

You can't spend ages warning against the pitfalls of spending money on players and then use two clubs who were sanctioned for fiddling their accounts and just lump every club that recieves a sanction into the same category. Compare us to Birmingham fine as that is the benchmark. We will only emulate the other two if we do something underhand with our Brockhall sale - like backdate it or grossly inflate its value.

Their sanctions were for using prohibited accountancy tactics to try and assist them in dodging the rules.

I know it is real - my point is that only in very rare cases do overspending clubs actually get sanctioned for doing it and usually those are the clubs run by buffoons. Those clubs guilty of overspending - and it is obvious to everyone that Stoke, Bristol City and Middlesbrough are - have not been punished and I will eat my hat if any of them actually have any points deducted. Reasons being their owners are too astute to allow it and the EFL know this. If they were going to sanction them they would have been able to do so long before now.

Because lets remember that the FFP rules haven't come in during the last year or two - they've been here for 8 years and were in the pipeline long before that. Which makes Rovers inability to cope with them even more bizarre given we were in this division when they were brought in and suffered at the hands of them back in 2015 yet are still unable to get our house in order to comply with them.

Meanwhile titans of the game like Bristol City and Boro have managed to avoid any issues despite spending considerably more than we have over the years.

I'll be amazed if that happens.

They broke the rules to try and avoid FFP requirements. It's the same thing. 

9 minutes ago, joey_big_nose said:

I am sure if we played a two up front he would be in the box way way more than he is now. 

It's not just that he's way out on the right side, it's also that he's expected to track all the way back down the right side, so he really is pulled a long way away from goal.

We pretty much do play 2 upfront though? 

I don't see why tracking back is a problem, in fact his defencive headers are pretty good. It's his positioning and desire to compete for headers offensively with defenders that is his biggest problem. Not his only problem though ,as he's not great technically. Maybe it's confidence, but he needs to be attacking things and hitting shots earlier, cos that's what he is good at. It's him not delivering, rather than the formation that's the issue imo 

47 minutes ago, JHRover said:

We hear this sort of thing around this sort of time every year. Very rarely happens. Only 2 clubs have been docked points due to FFP breaches - Birmingham and Reading. Derby were docked points for administration and like with Sheff Wed also for employing dodgy accounting tactics to try and avoid FFP trouble, not for actually breaching FFP.

People like Coates at Stoke and Gibson at Boro are the darlings of English football. Almost universally liked/respected and just about as reliable and ideal owners as any club could want - local and loaded and in it for the long term. I'd say there's zero prospect of the League wanting or trying to sanction them and even if they tried Gibson has shown he's up for a battle and will take them on.

Bristol City have just lost over £30 million in the last year alone. It is as clear as night follows day that they will be over the 3 year limit that people often refer to. Lets see if they actually get a sanction because I don't think they will. Lansdown is another one like Gibson and Coates - the sort they don't want to upset or antagonise and the sort with the ability to take them on if they try.

You have been saying clubs don't get punished for a while now, but you can't just not include Derby and Sheffield Wednesday with the other 2, it's all down to FFP and it seems more are coming. 

I know you think rovers just use it as an excuse not to spend,  but it is actually a real thing! 

13 hours ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

You know who is being played out of position- John buckley!! He isn’t an attacking mid. Dack is an attacking mid

gallagher on the wing in general. There is plentyyyy of players I could give you that are/ have been playing out of position. I don’t get why you want us so rigid and one way of playing that clearly opposition managers have clicked onto now 

Gallagher plays upfront, his inability to find positions centrally or attack the ball there is on him, not the formation. How come Brereton can do it from the other side? 

Buckley has had a good season playing where he is

Can't find his thread, but Duffer about to go into his first game as a manager 

https://www.instagram.com/reel/CaDQYSwjhMT/?utm_medium=copy_link

4 minutes ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

i don’t see how playing players in their correct positions over complicates things in all honesty. What confuses players is looking round and seeing gallagher in the right back role because we don’t change formation with nobody else fit in that position!

Gallagher played there what ,10 minutes one game, you're exaggerating about players playing out of position. Especially if that's your best example! 

3 minutes ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

Tweaking positions is changing formation is it not!!!!

Yes but keeping the basic shape. You're talking about switching to a back 4 from a 3. We have seen in the past this just leads to confusion on the pitch. It's an unnecessary over complication at this level. You need consistency hard work, with a bit of quality in the final third. That's what leads to results

6 minutes ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

Trying to tell me that klopp and pep don’t change things to turn games? Shut up shop? Nonsense 

I just said they tweak positions and swap players. Do they change formation? 

18 minutes ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

But the playing players out of position is as a consequence of not changing the rigid formation so we are having to shoehorn folk in positions they aren’t custom to. We should have 2-3 different formation able to change for players available-on form- opposition 

just standard management to be able to adapt to circumstances, not advocating change for change sake but when needed it’s a must

I don't think Liverpool and City do this even. They tweak where the players are positioned and swap players,  as do we. 

There is a reason we are where we are and that's consistency of personnel and formation. 

3 hours ago, Geoff66 said:

The supporters i talked to expect rovers at least making the play offs. Since the new year came along rovers have lost to Swansea, hull city and notts forest and drawn with huddersfield, luton and wba. You can understand frustration creeping in.

No disgrace in any of those draws. Hull and Swansea we were unlucky, the only really bad performance was Forest and in that we even rallied with 10 men. 

No need for panic 

If we get the intensity right at the start, we should have too much for them 

It's amazing that a draw away to WBA is now part of a death spiral

Shows where the team is at and the expectation thats there  

21 minutes ago, USABlue said:

I see us finishing 8th to 10th.  Mowbary leaning back in his easy chair, cup of tea and lemon drizzle on hand, feeling pretty good about himself.  Wondering how the new contract is gonna look 

Have you watched any interviews with him recently? If you did, I don't see how you could think he would be happy if we don't make the play offs. 

3 hours ago, 47er said:

Ditto us! 5 points from 5 games and haven't won any of the last 4. 4 sides just out of the 6---Preston, Sheff Utd, Luton and Forest have done much better than we have over the last 5 games.

Essential we turn it around  starting this weekend.

And we did much better over the previous 27 games, hence why we are ahead of them. 

Back to the good stuff here I reckon with the starting 11 that brought us great success. 2-0 Rovers