Whilst he will struggle to be worse than Walton, this is still a very low bar. Keeper is one of the most important positions on the pitch and yet we are going for people I would be dubious about having as a second keeper. It's so frustrating that we look at such substandard candidates. Also it seems totally at odds with our striker signings adding further credence to the theory we aren't allowed to spend money on anything but attacking players.

A very interesting set of stats. Shows how vital Lenihan is and that he is more important to us. Tbh that's a tad worrying given his injury record. That said I don't think the possession stuff is as wasted it we might first appear. It's often when the ball is constantly given back to the opposition that it invites pressure onto the defence, resulting in more goals. So I imagine that us retaining possession through Tosin actually probably does make a difference to the amount of pressure on our defence and limits the number of attacks. It's probably one of the reasons the current defensive partnership works so well. That said, I would agree, the out and out defending of Lenihan probably is of greater value. Edit: Just a thought but could also the lack of Lenihan and the stats showing more defeats when this happen be attributed to the lack of his leadership skills. When Lenihan is missing there isn't much leadership and it's probably then when ahem, our favourite "right back, is "leading" the team? Just another factor/thought on the influence of Lenihan.

Some interesting thoughts. On hearing people's well articulated views, I think I may have been overly kind to Holtby. I think I've a couple of mid-season matches in my head where he played really well, heavily influencing my thoughts. So perhaps a 6.5 or 7 may have been more appropriate. Potential wise I think he has a lot in him, so could become a very good signing, which again perhaps influences the rating. A cynic may say him likely to be at Rovers for more than one season is seen as an overwhelming benefit given the rest of the signings but i like to think that it was more potential than a lack of short-term-ism influencing the rating. As for Johnson, given his wages, how crap his bad performances are, his fitness issues and the intentions for the player - not to mention he is another short term signing - I stand by the 3.5. Perhaps I'd go as high as a 4 for his good performances but really would struggle to give any more than that. Really helpful and interesting to hear what others think.

The bull about confidence really can't be true at all. After all if that were the case Bennett can't be feeling too confident after his recent forrays at full back and Walton looks shot of confidence after some utter clangers of late. Half our strikers have zero confidence which shows in their hesitation on the pitch. Funny how confidence only seems to be a factor with Nayambe.

The admission that Nayambe was left out because he has played a lot of football, is the clearest, most blatant evidence yet that Bennett must be included at all costs. When a player is dropped for playing a lot of football (not I note, because he was fatigued) then it says performances or winning don't seem to be number one on the agenda. TM's handling of Nayambe is appalling. No wonder he won't sign a new contract. For every player we bring through, it seems like there's a decent chance TM will alienate them like Raya.

I've done a few of these now assessing the previous year''s transfers. I think I started doing this back in League 1 to help me process TM's work in the transfer market, and if nothing else, the last few years have certainly made for interesting debate as to how our transfer business (and TM) have done. We're coming up to the end of the season, and since Rovers have evidently signed off early, I thought it would be fine for me to do likewise and wouldn't hurt for this to be a couple of games early. As it is I'm not sure too much will change in the last couple of matches to make this review obsolete. As ever, I'm really interested in others thoughts on our transfer business. So here goes. It should be said that in some ways this is a rehash of last December's review, given that there were no new signings in January. The more I think about this the more inexplicable this is for so many reasons. Firstly there was the injury to Dack. Given we had lost our best player, to make no adjustments and sign no one as cover is incredible. Fortunately Armstrong took over the role of pinch hitter - who saw that coming? - but even if there was a suspicion that he could do this, there was evident need to share out the burden of Dack's influence. Given TM has at times commented on missing Dack, to not make any move to replace whatsoever, seems a tad odd. Cunningham's injury and a threadbare defence is another shocker as to why there were no buys. The defence looked thin when Cunningham was fit, without him it looked threadbare. Given his injury was even further before the transfer window than Dack's again it seems incredible we didn't replace him. We've since had Williams covering two positions, and Bennett drop to new lows at left back. Again, this all seemed pretty needless. We've been very fortunate Lenihen hasn't had a more typical season injury wise for him. Thirdly, we were meant to be chasing playoffs. I'm not saying we should have gone crazy but a little bit of extra help may have seen us mount a more successful push for playoffs.Even had it not been for the two crucial injuries that needed replacing, the idea that a bit of fresh blood could have injected a bit of energy and competition into the squad seems like something we really could have done with. Especially given the players and formations didn't always seem a natural fit. So whilst it's not a signing as such, TM's omission to sign anybody in January, given the huge need, is a huge failure of omission imo, and needs to be factored into evaluating our transfer dealings. As for the signings themselves, with the benefit of a year of playing, here are my thoughts. Walton - 2 If you had asked me pre lock down it probably would have been a 5. A poor half of the season was seeming to be offset somewhat by some solid performances, although that in part just accentuated the problem of having a loan keeper. Since then Walton has shown that his first half of the season wasn't simply an adjustment period and has (bar the West Brom game) put in some of the most abject performances of any keeper in a Rovers shirt, costing us a number of points. So two thirds of a season he has been horrific, we don't own a first choice keeper so it doesn't matter if there's potential in there (his few good performances suggest that he might become decent in a number of years) .and he cost us a lot of points. Meanwhile we swapped out a keeper with potential who's done pretty well, had a lot of potential and was ours. I genuinely don't think we could have handled this any worse. Tosin - 9 Brilliant signing. Links into the style we like to play, has looked super solid with Lenihen, and has been excellent for us. It's a shame he was only on loan. A few errors as a young defender, but few calamitous and given his overall talent, had he no errors in him he'd have been playing for City. Great signing marred only slightly by the fact he was one of three of a back line that was temporary. Hopefully (but unlikely) we can get him back next season. Johnson - 3.5 You don't buy someone of his wages to be a squad player. On his day he can be very, very good and there were some good spells from him. However, these 45 minute spells were often let down by fitness, his legs weren't up to sustaining that level of performance even when performing well. And if his good performances were strong, his poor performances were terrible, bordering on cardboard cut out. So 50:50 whether we get a good or bad game, and even the good won't last for more than 60 minutes. There have been spells when he has been out of the team (for a big chunk of the first half of the season I think) and his age means that his fitness problems aren't going to get any better. Also given he's behind Evans in the pecking order, and we haven't got better than Evans in 6 transfer windows, you really feel he's failed to do what he has been brought in to do. I guess he's better than Smallwood, but meh, that's a low bar indeed. Given he was envisaged as a first team regular and clearly isn't capable of that either on a performance or consistency basis, then he can only really be classed as a poor signing to me. Cunningham - N/A Unfair to rate, but looked promising in the few games he played. However, as Armstrong and Walton have shown in different respects (one good, one bad) this season, using a handful of games as a snap shot isn't really enough to judge a player on. He could have been excellent, but equally could have tailed off. Unfair to judge or praise TM off the back of so few performances from this guy. Downing - 9 Great free transfer, adding versatility, width and creativity. He also, sad incitement of our defence as it is, is the best left back we have with Cunningham injured too. All in all an excellent signing, who has performed consistently well in a variety of roles. Ina small squad with a mediocre budget this quality in versatility cannot be underplayed. Personally would have liked to see him more wide left in a 4-2-3-1 supplying crosses to our strikers, but wherever he has played (bar the false 9) he has looked solid and consistent. The only negative is his age, but a very astute free transfer who I think could have been the final piece of the jigsaw had other transfers worked out. Very clever move. Holtby - 8 Really liked the look of Holtby and thought he was a clever signing. Bags of talent and looks rather good whenever I have seen him plau. I've limited him to an 8 (maybe 7.5) though as in terms of actual end product, there doesn't seem to have been as much as I had hoped/expected for the level of his talent. Happy to be corrected on this, but for an excellent talent,it doesn't seem to end in much. That said I think some of his link up play with Armstrong and Dack at times has been fantastic, and unlike some of other players there's plenty of time for him to develop in this. Gally - 2 At least there's been a few goals. But like Bereton he cost a ton of money, leaving us short elsewhere. The money could have been invested in a much needed strengthening of defence or a keeper. He doesn't fit the wide right role that he is often shoved into. And whilst not his fault he's being played out of position, it makes his transfer all the more baffling. He doesn't look like having a strikers instincts either, and I don't like his attitude. Apart from that, he's been a great buy. So on paper 6 signings, 3 excellent, 3 very poor. with an average score (rounding up) of 5.6.That seems decent on the face of it. But when the omission of not buying anyone when blatantly needed in January is factored in, the fact the majority of the budget was blown on a failure, and the longevity of many of the signings, good and bad, was 1 season - the likelihood is that 4 of this year's signings need replacing - you really think that this had been a bad year in the transfer market. Given that's included the successes of Tosin and Downing, it's pretty shocking when looking at the overall picture to see how badly this year's recruitment has been handled. It doesn't give me much confidence for the future.

Agreed. Especially since we had a better team in league 1, and generally have a better team and have spent way more than them. To be on level pegging pretty much despite all that is a very poor do.

This false 9 stuff has to go. It's not helping our strikers or whichever midfielder takes the role of the false 9. Given we have a strong midfield (attacking wise) it's a formation that nullifies one of our biggest threats. The other issue I have with it is that more often than not it doesn't work. Our points tally since the restart indicates that it isnt a great formation for us, and has a limited scope of teams it seems to be successful against. Once you factor out the surprise factor as we regularly play it too, it really has little going for it.

Lol. I appreciate there are very few consequences at our club. But I could be wrong in thinking that the Millwall game did for Appleton under Venkys watch, albeit in more turbulent times. Appreciate that probably a lot worse has to happen before Venkys act but they act and with his mate in charge the chances of change are minimal. If I'm honest it's more the game seemed deja vu then what happens to the manager.

I do worry that TM after reaching expectations (if in an awkward manner and with £7 million wasted) the last 2 seasons may start taking us backwards. For starters the squad looks worse at the end of this season then at the end of the first transfer window after promotion. Sure a few youngsters have come through but in terms of buys and holes in the squad we are looking at being no further on.

You do wonder psychologically what an 8-0 mauling will do to them as well as the other effects. On the flip side at this rate Wigan will finish above us pre deduction. Thats pretty poor.

This reminds me a little bit of the Millwall game under Appleton. Similar.performance and result. Similar consequences?

Think this sums up my view too. They are where they are because the football league is grossly negligent with fit and proper owners. If it weren't for them and someone with unsavoury motives they wouldn't be in this situation. Hull seem in real trouble, but then so do three or four other teams. It could be close and -8 to the goal difference cannot help at all. Good to know that you bet on things other than football. Edit as an aside it's nice to see the loathsome Derby's playoff bid failing. Glad it looks like they are coming unstuck. Doesn't matter how much money they throw at it or what dodgy deals they do, or even how much talent is in the squad, they just can't get the job done.

I think I would get rid at any price really but there may not be any takers unless it's on loan? Maybe for a low fee £1-2 mill someone might take a punt but it'll not be easy to shift him. A Big Sam type manager probably could get a tune out of him, so a sale isn't out of the question, but his wages are perhaps another barrier. That said either here or elsewhere a Big Sam type manager could make his useful if not proficient and an asset not a liability. Frustratingly TM seems to be doing the opposite playing him away from a role he could perhaps do. . Mind you I think there are a number of players who'd do well under a Big Sam type manager. I could see Bothwell's runs drawing fouls in dangerous areas. Downing or even Mulgrew whipping in dangerous balls to the box. I reckon a number of players would be more efficient under Big Sam.

Your first paragraph ignores the fact that both can be true. He can be progressing us AND be playing players out of position. Think of it the other way round - how much better than where we are now would we be if he didn't continue to make these basic mistakes. Also as commented by others and myself on here it's hard to assess what progress is due to the ambiguity of what success looks like and the uncertain but limited time frame we have before the team is dismantled. Personally I don't think we have progressed this season anything like we should have. When you compare to Souness's or Hughes third season we were perhaps at the pinnacle of that team and you feel we are still a long way from the best we could possibly be under TM. By the third year it was their team in their style and doing the best that they could do. I think we don't know our best team and aren't punching above our weight as those teams (albeit in a championship context) with the consistency you would expect after 4+ windows of shaping the team. I also have issues in terms of progress with the squad. Too many loans, too many aging stars who need replacing. It seems like the squad needs a lot of work in the summer and very little was addressed effectively last summer. Even our good buys had a limited shelf life due to loans or age. Finally in terms of context - the playoffs have been more than attainable. Just a tiny bit more consistency, beating one weaker team we have struggled against a minor improvement in form and we would be properly in the mix and in a good position. Given the circumstances of the season, we really should have capitalised on this, even with Dack's injury - an admittedly significant blow. I hope so too. Goodness knows we need it. I think my big reservations on this happening is he hasn't looked like he is nearly clicking at all, he has looked very poor on many occasions as oppose to frustrating and thirdly I really don't see the wide right experience helping him. I wouldn't lay odds on it. I grant you I didn't see Armstrong becoming what he was but the talent was clearly there. There were lots of cries of if only he were a bit more consistent he would be a huge asset, little knowing how consistent he would become. So yeah players can change but the evidence before me makes it seem unlikely. I think Gally and Ben would still be classed as mediocre signings at best if they did hit Armstrong type form. The reason I say this is 1) for the money we paid you expect an immediate contribution and we have had little. 2) the opportunity costs of not being able to spread the money round the team. And 3) even if they did well would we get more than the cost of each player? Probably not making it a very costly way to accumulate an extra million or two.

Nah, the only manager hated by Rovers fans was Kean. Even Coyle was acknowledged to have been given a crap deal even though he was utterly inept. I see plenty of criticism for the current manager, yes, but here's the thing: it's all for actual mistakes he has made. Persevering with under performing players, poor formations, playing players out of position, his poor transfers, his unbalanced squad, his criticisms in public on certain players. These are all legitimate concerns and genuine issues with TM. Now, there is an issue as to whether his positives should be mentioned more as well. And there is definitely an argument they should. We're not useless and neither is he because of where we are. But again, whether there should be more balance doesn't mean a) fans want us to lose or b) that there aren't some serious flaws in the manager. And for the record I am more annoyed with TM than Coyle or some of the other jokers we have appointed - because he isn't a complete duffer. Coyle for example was a write off, useless, so his uselessness was expected. TM has a bit about him which is why his basic mistakes and errors are all the more frustrating. I mean how can the guy who buys Dack think Bereton us worth 7 million? How can he outthink Cardiff and Bristol but not know how to beat a team in the bottom 3? How can he be so critical of Nayambe but let Bennett play despite being horrific. How can we play a formation specifically to get the best out of Dack, yet then stuck Gally on the wing? You see, TM is a paradox and all the more irritating for it.

This is what gets me most. The stuff which is very controllable but seems to make us weaker is most worrying. There is an element of risk in any signing and game plans don't work out but constantly starting under performing players, playing nunerous players out of position and chopping and changing the team and formation are all things that are obvious and known (especially after a few games) but seem to take forever to be acted upon. And if we can't get the basics like this right, then it is just giving us an uphill struggle. Plus if TM hasn't learned this by now then he never will.

My remark is snidey?!? Implying Rovers fans want us to lose wins award for that. That said I shouldnt respond in kind, even if it does my nut in that people think they would want their team to lose? Seriously there's nothing good about losing for a Rovers fan. (Although I admit, if it were a midtable game with nothing to play for and by us losing we relegated Burnley or Manure, I admit, I would be rather philosophical about the loss...) Very. Or they were just bulling because they didn't want to go. That said it's a bit of an extrapolation from that to saying fans who criticise the team or manager want us to lose.

The fact you can make a convincing case for so many teams going down makes it a very exciting league. The Wigan deduction means that even with their great form they still need to perform exceptionally well to avoid the drop. Is Charlton's best players refusing to play beginning to catch up with them? Is Hulls lack of replacements for talent sold going to hurt them? Are Stoke a complete basket case of a club? Are Luton and Barnsley just too small? It's compelling stuff down there. At the other end if we don't get playoffs then any team other than Derby and their loathsome ethics in what is a swamp of morals and I'd be happy. That a club can make me disgusted even within the sewer that is football is quite impressive in a perverse way. Thing is there are a ton of teams chasing the playoffs all with a decent about. It's interesting stuff. Then there's the top. Brentford, West Brom and Leeds are excellent teams but only 2 are going up automatically. One is going to have to settle for the playoff lottery. Perhaps Fulham should be included in that number but I feel they are handicapped by their manager. So at both ends of the table there is a hell of a lot to play for and a heck of a lot of uncertainty. Tbh I think it once again proves the championship is the most exciting league out there.

Not sure it does compensate for so many reasons. One is to do with resources and risk - if a 2 million signing doesn't work out, one portion of the budget has gone wrong. When 5-7 million is wasted that's your whole budget. In other words we could gamble in two or three £2 million ish signings and the risks are devolved and reduced by two thirds. The potential benefits are multiplied by three as well if all come off. As it is the lost opportunity costs of being able to buy a balanced squad on top of the flops of Gally and Ben is huge and something that has hurt us just as much as their non performances. There's also the issues of Armstrong costing more than you say and only having become very good in the last 6 months. Well worth persevering with and plenty of potential - and am loving his form - but equally let's not pretend we have had 3 years of excellent form out of him. Not criticising the move but just pointing out another reason why they don't balance out. Oh then there's the minor detail of the 12 million putting us in danger of FFP/allowing this to become an excuse for cutting the budget. So yeah on a host of fronts people are quite rightly concerned by the outlay on strikers, and it cannot simply be washed away with well Dack and Armstrong are good signings. More to the point what pees me off about your post is that Rovers fans genuinely want us to lose. Yeah right! I've yet to find a Rovers fan who wants us to lose. Criticising the manager is not the same as wanting the team to lose. Nor is not rating the manager. The two things are mutually exclusive and the idea that any Rovers fan would be gutted if we snuck into the playoffs and went up is horse manure. More like you can't cope with different opinions. It must be easier if you tell yourself those nasty critics want us to lose, but it just doesn't wash or ring true at all.

TM is accorded the benefit of the wider context of if we get rid his replacement would likely be worse. It's an argument I have a lot of time for given we recruit from a second rate agency. However the wider context should also be applied to how quickly we need promotion and the odds of a slow build happening being slim indeed. Dack, Armstrong, Lenihen all will be gone in the next year or two - it's the nature of football and a pattern under Vs. So a slow build isn't really that viable, and I feel we stand on the edge of another shut down resources and bust cycle. With this in mind IF we can keep the squad together next year it very much must be last chance saloon. As it is, I fear we are already drinking in it. The squad needs a fair number replacing with loans and aging stars and there's never been a more open championship where an ounce more consistency or quality and we would be a few points better off and comfortably in playoffs. Which brings us on to today's game. Another one that shows the skills and flaws of TM's Rovers in equal measure. A point against a very good standard of opposition is not to be sniffed at and shows we are a decent to good side. However we perhaps could and should have won, which would have put us solidly back in the race, but once again failed to do so. We really are a close but no cigar (wherever that phrase comes from) type of team. We clearly are nearly men and won't actually break top 6, but equally and frustratingly we aren't far away. We perhaps could and should have won today and have been in that place before. It being tantalisingly just out of reach, being just not quite good enough is what gets us so frustrated. In a way I see a lot of parallels with Bowyer. The team isn't as good but we get more bang for our bucks out of this lot. If TM was just a bit cannier at signing players maybe we'd be edging it. As it is we're nearly men and I feel we are on the edge of another bust cycle. Could coronavirus be our rescue, with a lack of buying power for clubs keeping the squad together, giving TM another chance at promotion. Perhaps. Certainly bar Tosin - admittedly a huge miss - the replacements would struggle to be worse than what we have. That said TMs record in the transfer market has not been good so it's an anxious time. I guess my theory is we will see another Bowyer cycle through, then get through a few more of our agency's rejects. Hopefully we will get another Bowyer cycle through and third time lucky - this one has the nous to get us over the finish line. That we've come kinda close with the loons in charge, a substandard structure and imo mediocre management, means it is possible. It's the hope that kills you.

Why it takes us till now for us to play our best 11 in the circumstances with an unchanged lineup I will never know. Better late than never though.

Where to start? I get it's opinions but the Walton not being a failure one seems a bit stubborn and illogical. His form for the first part of the season was poor. His form since the restart has been dire. He's dropped significantly more clangers then Raya. How the heck is that not a failure? Teams carry players, that's always been the case. And judging by his performances I think that's the case. Johnson wasn't brought as a useful in some situations squad player. The fact he has not held down a place and looked poor on a number of occasions, at likely great expense, suggests he has been a failure. I get it's opinions but as I have said on other threads opinions aren't sacrosanct and unchallengeable/must be valued - for example if I thought the moon was made of cheese. And whilst football is hugely subjective I struggle to see how a chap performing badly every week from August to November and then since the restart, can be seen as a decent piece of business!

Not a reaction to his performances since the start up - although you have to admit these have been shocking. The first half of the season I was a big critic too as he was poor then as well. If anything people were forgetting the poor start he made for us as he picked up from around Christmas time onwards. And yes I would say as a signing in such a key position he has been a disaster because two thirds of his performances, not just since the restart - which is revisionism - have been appalling. That to me is the definition of a bad signing. And actually as the Wigan and Preston games for two show, one player can undo the good work of the rest as the team as evidenced by these examples. Our good or decent defending was undone by Walton's needless errors. It shows the keeper is in some ways very much in debted to the rest of the team. I think if you look people are more saying he makes basic rookie errors that shouldn't be made - like playing players out of position and keeping with underperforming favourites. These are clueless moves. Clearly he isn't a terrible manager - we've lived through Coyle and Kean so we Rovers fans can spot a bad manager - but he does make stupid, needless mistakes that really are basic football 101 principles. To say otherwise and that these aren't clueless moves is a nonsense. Fortunately other players have compensated for this as have some of TMs tactics on occasions, but the two aren't mutually exclusive. You can be an ok manager but make clueless decisions in there. As for a load of bad players last summer was 50:50 on good and bad players. Gally and Walton have both been poor. I don't really think there's much debate on this and Johnson has been overall poor too. That's not a great signing ratio and a huge waste of resources and botches in some vital positions.

Not a reaction to his performances since the start up - although you have to admit these have been shocking. The first half of the season I was a big critic too as he was poor then as well. If anything people were forgetting the poor start he made for us as he picked up from around Christmas time onwards. And yes I would say as a signing in such a key position he has been a disaster because two thirds of his performances, not just since the restart - which is revisionism - have been appalling. That to me is the definition of a bad signing. And actually as the Wigan and Preston games for two show, one player can undo the good work of the rest as the team as evidenced by these examples. Our good or decent defending was undone by Walton's needless errors. It shows the keeper is in some ways very much in debted to the rest of the team. I think if you look people are more saying he makes basic rookie errors that shouldn't be made - like playing players out of position and keeping with underperforming favourites. These are clueless moves. Clearly he isn't a terrible manager - we've lived through Coyle and Kean so we Rovers fans can spot a bad manager - but he does make stupid, needless mistakes that really are basic football 101 principles. To say otherwise and that these aren't clueless moves is a nonsense. Fortunately other players have compensated for this as have some of TMs tactics on occasions, but the two aren't mutually exclusive. You can be an ok manager but make clueless decisions in there. As for a load of bad players last summer was 50:50 on good and bad players. Gally and Walton have both been poor. I don't really think there's much debate on this and Johnson has been overall poor too. That's not a great signing ratio and a huge waste of resources and botches in some vital positions.