a week on tuesday A week Wednesday according to the official site. Because the dingles play Liverpool on the Tuesday. If they can manage to sponge up all the water from the supposed "pitch".

Actually, it's just another load of absolute ###### from the Guardian.

If you pick me up (after breakfast) from West London, allow me to consume alcohol in the car, and drop me at a party in Richmond by 7pm ... I'll make sure no Welsh people do you any harm.

I didn't want to post in this thread. Some things don't need acres of comment. But that article is a disgrace. Typical, absolutely typical Guardian crap. And in fact, worse than the companies they are mocking by even printing this sort of article to suit their own anti-corporate agenda. I'm only surprised they didn't round the article off with an annexe detailing their own contribution to the crisis. Or maybe I'm not, this sort of guff is perhaps their best effort to the crisis. More likely the article was ill researched and only written with one aim, which has absolutely nothing to do with helping people who need help. For what it's worth, the company I work for has pulled out all the stops to help. Perhaps the Guardian didn't want to mention us because the level of help didn't suit their article. Beyond the financial contribution which was already into 7 figures by the new year, our in-market companies are taking leading roles in helping with logistics and distribution. Vital in the affected areas, but not helpful to the Guardian in that pathetic article. Beyond it's direct donations, the company will also match (ie double) any contribution made by any employee to any recognised charity since the disaster happened. What the hell does the Guardian want. No doubt about that - to use this crisis to peddle it's own line. ABSOLUTELY PATHETIC.

Yes and if you honestly believe that all clubs get treated equally then you are extremely naive. You can post all week long about incidents that wouldn't benefit from technology you'll get no argument from me, i'd hate to see the game go down that road. However unless we get some honesty from the officials as a whole like admitting mistakes instead of having Hackett come on to defend every time we will be forced down that route. Riley said after the Chelsea incident that he had his whistle to his mouth in anticipation of a foul that he thought was going to happen but it didn't. In that case why doesn't he keep it in his gob all game as there may be a foul at any minute. The answer of course is because he was going to give the penalty but bottled it but because he's a spinless tosser he can't come out and admit his mistake. Hackett defended the linesman by saying that not even an olympic athlete could have got the right position to see the 'goal' yet people throughout the rest of the stadium including both managers saw it clearly. Someone said the linesman was tired after running up and down the touchline all night. Why was he doing that he should only be in his half and even then only be running when the ball is near and seeing as Man U had most of the ball he would have had about 10-15 mins of jogging to do, poor lamb. Whilst I don't believe it's a case of them all being cheats I do believe they are not doing the job they are paid to but more importantly too many are stealing the headlines. I won't stop watching the game because I enjoy it but i've never paid to watch a referee so why do I have to keep watching a performance by one. Incidentally I thought it was a great game tonight and I thought Poll was not too bad. A few mistakes but at least he made the decisions and the penalty was never deliberate handball. I'm not sure what you're trying to suggest in this post. You clearly don't like Mike Riley, or big clubs, or even Keith Hackett, however you think Poll has done ok tonight despite making a bigger blunder than the lino last night in missing Boa Morte's foul. Which has changed the result. Are you (with your "club bias" argument) suggesting that Fulham have slipped Poll a few quid to miss some decisions??

Now, to complete the set, Papa Bouba Diop (?sp) has handled in the area. After FOUR replays, neither Ian Darke or Niall Quinn can say whether or not it's a penalty (and to be fair, neither can I). Graham Poll said not. If it were available, any referee would have called for help from elsewhere - it's human instinct (especially when you're about to get your own personalised Graham Poll chant from one set of fans or the other whatever you do). In this case the video replays don't help anyone as the law stands (was it "deliberate"?) The only way to tell would be to ask the player. Maybe instead of technology we should introduce honesty. But the officials are already honest. If people don't believe that, they may as well stop watching the game.

So Tomas Radzinski has just scored for Fulham to make it Fulham 3 Soton 2. But 4 seconds before he scored, Redknapp was crudely fouled by Boa Morte and Graham Poll missed the foul. The goal should certainly not have stood, it's as clear cut as last night's incident. But technology wouldn't help - it would cause havoc and lead to more and more problems and stoppages. Weak referees would use it constantly, strong referees would be on the end of endless criticism for not using it when Ferguson and Wenger say they should have. It's a very dangerous road to go down.

Remember it well - they were on their way to Bolton. They also caused an "incident" on the away end concourse before the game, when their Nathan Blake chants and attempts to learn Rovers songs switched to the "lets antagonise the English" chants. The police moved in and weeded them out and they got their own section in the corner of the stand. It's the only game I've ever been to where there were three different sets of fans watching two teams - most bizarre. (Except Fulham a few weeks back - "Neutrals Neutrals give us a song")

Good point. Look how infuriated we all were when the ref on Boxing Day v Newcastle went to the sideline twice. The second time (at what would have been a quickly taken throw) totally interrupted the momentum Rovers had built up. And the upshot of that incident was that some of these idiots can't even operate a bloody stopwatch. The last thing we want to do is give them VCRs as well !!

I'm not proposing any rule change, my point is simply that there is a team of five (supposedly competent) officials at this level of football. (Ref, 2 x lino, 4th official and asssessor). It is inconceivable that all five at OT missed last nights goal, yet there is no mechanism for one of them to get the correct message to the referee. I also agree with Paul that refs should be "wired for sound" - I am often amazed how competent and clear refs are in both codes of rugby where the rules are much more complex. There is no good reason why professional referees at the top level of football should escape such exposure and scrutiny. If all five officials were wired for sound and able to communicate instantly between themselves it could also actually assist the referee far more than two blokes waving coloured flags.

I am 100% against the use of "technology" to eliminate this sort of farce - and, granted, it is a farce tonight. And I'm also going to defend the linesman, although I will admit that had Rovers suffered from that decision I would struggle to do so. Football has survived well into it's second century without the use of microchips in the ball or cameras on the line. Only the advent of multi-channel TV and 24 hour sports news channels has accelerated the clamour for the use of technology. Human error is a factor in the game. Strikers miss penalties. Keepers slice clearances (or throw shots from the half way line into their goal). Russian linesmen give debatable decisions to win World Cups. And tonight, in a situation where the ball moved dozens of yards in either direction within seconds, a linesman who will surely be described as "rotund" in tomorrows papers put his head down and legged it (after 90 minutes of legging it) towards the United goal line. And missed the moment - clearly. To accuse him of cheating is crass and unfair. The failure - IMO - is not that individual - it's the whole team of match officials. There are four of them at pitch level, and the number of times they fail to use each other is ridiculous. At Premiership level, there is also a ref assessor at every game in the stands. Rather than turn to solutions which overrule human error, I think there is a case to force all the 5 officials at games to work together to minimise the chance of mistakes. Tonight, probably at least 3 of the 5 saw that Spurs scored a goal. But the rules / protocol don't allow them to contribute, if - as tonight - the ref has trusted the judgement of the official closest to the incident. It's a team game, and the match officials at games have to start acting as a team. Tonight's incident has highlighted it, but the number of times a linesman fails to help a ref is inexcusable. But my main objection to technology is because it can never be replicated at lower levels. At the level I play, you accept the decision of the referee. Sometimes there are linesmen, sometimes not. There will never be cameras and microchips. There will always be human error. And the day you introduce different rules depending on the level of competition is the day football falls to bits.

Isn't the PJ MoM picked by some people who are guests in an exec box ? It can't possibly be the manager - it gets announced on the PA at Ewood about 10 seconds after the final whistle, I can assure you that Hughes has got far more important things to do in the previous 90 minutes than ring Gerald Jackson.

Hallelujah Savage reads the messageboard !

That game was one of the most dire Rovers-watching experiences to date. Which is worrying, because there's been a few candidates in recent games. The weather didn't help. Whoever designed that stand should ask themselves why they even bothered with a "roof" at all. I took three neutrals along, and (not for the first time this season) had to issue regular apologies on behalf of Blackburn Rovers, the Premier League, and the weather. My mate's dad enjoyed it, because 23 quid was a proper bargain to escape from the three grandchildren for a few hours, and because 10 minutes before it happened, he turned to us and said "I reckon Solano will win this game with a header from a corner". He's not coming to the Rovers again. Apart from that, the only highlights were during the warm up when Dickov had a shot which went wide but was hit so hard the ball smashed the seat in front of me. Something satisfying about watching claret and blue plastic being destroyed. And bumping into Flopsy and Pringle at half time. And if that's gone down as a highlight .... Roll on Charlton.

Did it say Lancaster - Stafford, 3 1/2 hours. Cos that's what it took the day before yesterday. I'm not sure Mr Savage has worked out how busy the M6 gets in the Warrington area.

Tickets are available on the day, according to the TO recorded message. Which means I'll probably see you there, given I'm doing New Year in the Stourbridge area ...

Ah, the old Blackburn fans are the root of all evil argument again. I thought we'd not seen that for a while. Is that the best you can offer to this discussion? Speaks volumes.

Cole was the one who refused to honour his obligations to play football for his employer. And as Stead admitted to the LET during his purple patch, Cole hardly ever spoke to him on or off the field. So I doubt that partnership would have flourished in the long term. Cole's inexcusable attitude towards Teddy Sheringham was - I'm sure - one of the reasons why Alex Ferguson was happy to cash in on him when the money was good.

I don't actually care if he ends up at Ewood or not. He has some good qualities, but we have plenty of central midfielders. My point is, if he wants a move, then he should say so. He signed the 4 year contract 4 months ago - it's his problem. If he feels bad about being away from his near and dear, then just say "I shouldn't have signed that deal in the summer, I want home to Wrexham" No probs from anyone. There is no need for the pathetic saga which he is playing out in the press.

Just can't help wondering what the outcome of Cole & Dickov playing in the same team would be like? One would be buzzing around like a blue-arsed fly, the other would be hands-on-hips waiting for the next precision through-ball. I know which I would prefer. I'm gutted to say that I think the outcome would be fantastic. One would be forced to take his hands off his hips and revel in the chances his new partner would create for him. And as he has the rare gift of finding non-existant space, and the other rare gift of popping up in the right place at the right time, he'd have enough chances to bag an absolute shedload. Unfortunately, his qualities don't extend to being challenged for an automatic starting spot, or speaking to lesser mortals who work hard and aren't in the same bracket when it comes to God-given natural talent. So we were never allowed to find out.

his market value is three sheep and a haircut if he wants to play for Rovers, let him ask for a transfer

Tough titties. If he wants a move because he cares so deeply about his family, then he says so. Via a transfer request. If he wants to join Hughes and Bowen, then he says so. Via a transfer request. These agents are clever. He could word the transfer request so it sounds like he cares about his family. If the family bulls!t is to secure his signing on fee then that's just poor arrows. If he doesn't care either way, he (or his agent) doesn't need to leak stories to the press every two days since mid-December, or volunteer for TV interviews at every possible opportunity.

Fed up with all this rubbish. Savage should stop whining about his family and get on with his job. If he wants to move to Rovers then slap in a transfer request and stop dragging the sob stories into it. Wrexham to Brum is hardly any different from Wrexham to Brockhall in any case - in fact given the M6 logjam area it must be quicker to Brum. We're not some sort of charity for bored Welsh outcasts. Slap in the transfer request and declare you want to play for the Rovers or **** right off.

Good God, I totally agree with you. I'm going to pop open a mini-Moet.

So would these fans who walked away have stayed for better home form at the cost of 6th place? Aston Villa had better home form than Rovers that season, but they finished 16th not 6th. (And with 5 million quid less prize money - that's a hell of a lot of season tickets). As did Southampton, Fulham, Boro and Everton. But we were in Europe, and they weren't. Our home form was 11th out of 20, second season back from the dead. That is hardly awful. It's mid-table respectability, with a win against the champions as an enjoyable bonus. And still the fans deserted in the summer. You cannot blame anyone for the lost sales other than those fans who chose not to return. And they prob had good reasons. You certainly cannot blame the club or the results.