According to Soccerbase, Richard Browns only premier league start for Rovers at Ewood was the 7-1 drubbing of Norwich in 1992.

Very good point Marty. I’d never thought of that. If according to Jack’s “plan” we won the league a year earlier than anticipated, the original plan surely was to improve again over the summer of ‘95.

Three days ago.

You’re a master of deflection I will give you that. So I’ll ask you straight. Do you think that we possibly deserved more than a point today? Yes or no? Be careful. Read back what you have already said.

I did go to the game. I thought we deserved naff all . And if you went to that game and think we deserved more than a point your in cloud cuckoo land. And thus begins the circle again.

It’s a good job points earned before the end of the transfer window arent as important as those earner at the end of the season. 👍

I know we are boring people going around in circles here, and it’s true I think we deserved naff all. And you are well entitled to say that is horseshit. Fair enough. But you said we deserved “a point minimum.” That implies that we maybe deserved more than a point. But when I suggested that you were in cuckoo land if we deserved more than a point in that game you’ve kind of denied that’s what you said! I’d suggest it’s you that goes back and re-read what you have written. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt that you may have misunderstood something here. Aside, on a positive note I think a midfield of A. Wharton and Travis could be the basis of a central midfield for the season. Wharton clearly the bright spark of the day today for me.

You said we deserved a point “minimum”. And then you said it again in the post directly above to Booth. That surely implies you think we maybe deserved more than a point. Which is precisely what I said you said.

And as the home team you would expect us to come on strong. Stoke created better situations throughout the game than we did. They just managed the game. Get infront. Hold. If @BankEnd Rover thinks we maybe deserved to win that he’s in cuckoo land

With all due respect, your hoover has never cut the grass like my lawnmower has multiple times this year.

We deserved naff all. First half we should have been 2 or 3 behind. Second half they stopped pressing so high and we still created next to nothing. As far as away performances go, Stoke nailed that and fully deserved 3 points.

He added 5 minutes and on my watch he blew on 95:45 so he added 45 seconds on top of what they indicated. It’s not enough and usually drives me mad. But at least today he added extra on for time wasted in injury time. Often they don’t.

Oh, and we seriously missed Rothwell. Because JR on an average day was better than what our midfield has shown over the last 3 games.

That was awful. However, it’s also probably the game where it has dawned on me that Adam Wharton could be the real deal.

What An Ass that signing is.

When did having to have left footer or “left-sided” central defender become an issue. I don’t remember many of our great defences having left-footed centre halves.

Depends if you like the original. If you liked the original you'll like the new one. If not you won't. Mainly because it's practically the same plot line. Maverick does something stupid. Instead of a bollocking he gets sent to top gun. Students unknowingly embarass instructor in a bar. Instructor walks into class next day much to their shock. Students don't get on during flight training. They bond a little bit in a topless homo-erotic sports scene. Someone close to Maverick dies. Mav may not carry on, but he does. Proper mission comes along at the end. The selected pilots for the mission aren't what peple expect. Mission is unpromising at one stage but eventually becomes good. Pilots, who previously dont get on, get out of plane on deck of aircraft carrier and embrace.

I'd much prefer two quality, permenant centre back permenantly. And no I wouldnt be happy with a loanee replacing Lenihan. I'd clearly rather have a player of sufficient quality who is ours. But that's not the point I've been making. If we are to bring in a loanee, and we can't make JPVH a permenant, then I'd be happy with bringing him back as a loan signing.

There.

Agree on all of that. But if on transfer deadline day we’ve brought nobody in, would you say we don’t want Van Hecke on loan, it’s either permanent or nothing?

Agreed. Badly worded. I’m not saying I don’t want him. But I’d rather JPVH as I doubt VDB would have made the impact and be as successful as Van Hecke was here last year. Van Hecke is proven at Ewood as being exceptional. But my general point is, you can’t say you want Van Den Berg on loan but under no circumstances do you want JPVH on loan unless it’s a permanent. That’s crazy.

So if we can’t get Van Den Berg, you still wouldn’t want JPVH on loan ?

Then why would you want an unproven , younger centre half to come in on loan. But not a player who has already shown he was our best centre half last year by being player of the year. Who is 100% proven in this division We would all much rather we signed him permanently, but if that really isn’t possible then why wouldn’t you loan him, especially as you are clearly open to loaning a centre half ?

So we don’t want anybody on loan at centre half then?

We've tried Dack up top on his own and it just doesnt work. He's marked out of it too easy as he cant lose his man. His goal last night, and the majority of his other goals, are him finding space when running into the box. Timing his arrival perfectly. The way to play Dack would be to have Gally up front and dack running off behind him. Basically turn SG into DG. That can leave Brereton in his wide role to join in as he see's fit. I'd be going more like this. But who you'd put on the left I don't know. Edun? Dolan? Sammie? Buckley? None appear ideal for that role . Maybe Edun to cover Pickering behind him Kaminski Britain Phillips Ayala Pickering Travis Morton Brereton Dack ????? Gallagher