I think part of the reason we do poorly in the second half - not the fault for today's goals although it didn't help our game - is the lack of options from the bench who are any good to see out games. Today for example, who could we bring on to shore things up? What happens is a defender is having a poor game? How much trouble for the opposition strike force is Gally really going to provide? Where's the pace off the bench? Rovers have a plan B Graham, but outside of that, at the moment we have very few options to see out games and protect leads. Part of that is the injury crisis but part of that imo is an unbalanced squad. Along with our lack of a something out of nothing player, this is why I expect we won't get playoffs this year,

A few thoughts on today's game. Not read anything back so pretty unedited/initial reaction type of response. If there was a table for effort Rovers would be first. The effort we put in was phenomenal, almost a Hughes-like team effort. We worked really hard against a technically superior team and deserved at least a point if not all 3. Actually, we deserved all 3 end of story. So regardless of what else, well done TM for instilling a hell of a work ethic in the lads. Their goals came about in a pretty unstoppable fashion. The first was because they had players who can make something out of nothing - as what happened for a magnificent first goal for Brentford, That;s something Rovers don't - with no disrespect intended to us - have in this league that a number of the other top 6 contenders have: a player who can make something out of nothing, even when the team isn't playing well. In the hunt for promotion this is a definite factor against us. For their second the referee was wearing a home shirt. That never was a penalty, it was not even a call that the ref had to make and got wrong - plain and simple it was a penalty out of nothing. If our penalty was dubious - and there certainly was a strong case for the penalty, though I appreciate there is an argument the other way - then there was no case for theirs whatsoever.So neither goal could really be helped by Rovers. As for Rovers - lots of huff and puff, looked decent on the break, but really limited Brentford offensively. Had it not been for a moment of magic and a referee assist WWE would think twice before sanctioning, they didn't look like scoring in the second half. For all their nice passing and possession in the second half they seemed to have run out of ideas, as shown by a fair number of balls lumped forward at the end. Really thought we had weathered the storm - first half Brentford were sloppy shooting straight at the keeper or messing up the final pass. But having weathered the first half a tad fortuitously, probably brought about in no small part through to our endeavour and hard work, I thought we had them fairly nullified. A few comments on individual players: Walton - been very critical of him, however today he was immense. There was one poor piece of keeping early when he came for a low cross at the near post and missed, but after that error didn't put a foot wrong. Was an impressive performance, from him. Bell - I just don't know about the guy. He worked hard, defended well, but everything looks an effort and a struggle with him, and Brentford had their best attacks down the left side. For all his improvement I suspect we need better to progress, but he is no longer looking a liability which is a huge step forward. Buying 1 left back instead of 2 is kind of helpful/useful. Travis - immense and immensely frustrating. A terrier in breaking up their attacks but dribbles far too often, and often dribbles into trouble. I counted 3 or 4 occasions where this was the case, and he needs to cut this out of his game to go from being a good player to a top class one. Nayambe - excellent and immense. Tosin and Lenihen too. Likewise Armstrong. A bit more clinical in one on one situations would be nice, but then I fear he'd be at a different league to us, nevermind club. Gally - he wins flick ons but doesn't look at all threatening or creative in any sense of the word. Want him to come good but yikes, doesn't look all that likely on today's showing. Buckley - an absolute gem and asset when in possession, a passenger when we don't have it. Really torn as the lad has lots of skill but no athleticism. Perhaps better as an impact sub for now until he toughens up. Speaking of subs we had so few options from the bench it hurt. Up front isn't too bad, Gally is like for like with Samuel (although I suspect the latter may be a bit better) and a Plan B in Graham (would perhaps have been worth a cameo today). However midfield and defensively there wasn't really any options which again is a huge worry. If any of our players are playing poorly or tiring there isn't any options to bring on to change the game. This is another factor I think that will cost us in the run up. Sure, the injury situation is a key factor in this, but again, it could be a difference maker in top 6. Overall I am encouraged as we deserved to win, and if we put in that level of performance and effort we will get more points on the board. However, today also confirmed to me whilst we are capable of getting into the playoffs it's through hard work and consistency (I guess that is always the case) and that we've no X factor, in player magic or squad rotation that we can call on to help us. This lack of X factor I feel will be the difference maker in whether we make playoffs or not. .

Nayambe excellent block, though whole team defending well. Our liabilities don't look like liabilities. Brentford look super uncomfortable with long balls in behind the defence. Utterly torn on Buckley today - does so much for us when in possession, so little when out of it. Brentford sloppy imo and could have had a goal I'd they had done a few simple passes better. That said our effort alone deserves something from the game.

Not a fan of downing and Armstrong on inverted wings...

Bench is horribly unbalanced but lots of attacking options if a Graham long ball attack would work or Gally's, ahem, energy. No Mulgrew on the bench shows he will never play for us again as if not on the bench now then never will be. Team is as good as it gets with our injuries. Doesn't look that strong on paper but did the job Vs Charlton so here's hoping for a similar result.

Its not negative but pretty factual I would say. I'm really enjoying us doing well too - really enjoying it - but even taking a snapshot of the now (by that I mean TMs reign) there are still a bucket load of issues. I've not gone into any pre TM. Sure it's going ok on the pitch but that doesn't make the issues disappear. And long term they are going to hurt us.

Dispute this massively. They are amongst the worst owners ever. Even now in what is agreed their best run as owners they are still pretty terrible. TM has gone on an unprecedented bad run and stayed in place, our managers are chosen by an agency, the current chap has his best mate as CEO, we're not working hard to get round FFP (like seemingly every other club is) we had a massive £7 mill transfer on an unknown player who looks a dud and well over market value and we've not been in the playoffs. That's a pretty poor record and that's the best of them. Especially the influence of the agency in manager (and possibly player) selection and Waggot's links to TM being the most serious and damaging issues to me. A terrible way to be as a club.

Yes my thoughts too. Not sure many could be classed as successes at this moment in time. A lot of even the top list seem decent rather than good. The positive is that a number of them still have time to change this perception. Gally, Bell, Samuel for example all have the potential to come good. Whether they will is a different matter but if it is disappointing there aren't more obvious successes (and listed like this it shows TM isn't that strong in the transfer market) the positive is that a number can do an Armstrong and change that perception. Here's hoping that happens as it isn't great reading currently.

Mulgrew is an example of a player being surplus to requirements. No not mega happy with him but he was a case in point that there are players out there who would be ok being 3rd choice. Am sure there are many others who have fallen out of favour at clubs, and was just using Mulgrew as an example of this. Mixed. But who cares? Its not about a popularity contest but getting what is best for the team. If it works fans will acknowledge it. Or a loan would have done too. Its about having cover. Given Williams cost £250k I'm fairly confident we could have found better and as others have said good quality competition for a place is no bad thing. Think Holtby for example not sure he was promised a first team place but gradually came in and did well for himself. I think we massively disagree on this. I've felt defensive reinforcements have been needed for ages and it looks like it could come back to haunt us. Let's say Lenihen misses 2 games where we get less points that could be huge in the race for top 6.

Given how everyone has complained how thin we are in defence then this is doubtful. We have been thin on the ground for defensive reinforcements for a year now so don't think anyone would complain about having cover there. Whilst not easy there are always players out of favour/looking to move on. The Downing situation at MK Dons is a good example of this. Off the top of my head the Mulgrew situation (albeit he can't move to another club) and Sinclair from Celtic (read an article on him going from first choice to reserves) show that players' fortunes change and ready to move on. Whilst not super easy the idea that it is difficult to find a decent centre back is a bit of a fallacy.

Well in part yes because none of us had a crystal ball in January and could tell that! Unfair to judge on hindsight imo. The probability was we would need them before now (how often Nayambe and Lenihen been injured in the last couple of years) and it certainly looks like we'll need them now. If we were getting them from lower leagues for example they may have been willing to come as 3rd choice. Or if they had fallen out with the manager and wanted a fresh start. Or if they were 4th choice or worse elsewhere. Or as oldgregg points out they may take a longer view than the next 6 months. A load of reasons why they may chose to come to us as 3rd choice centre back.

The goals early is a good point I hadn't considered. Long term i can't see it being good for Gally's game or development though as not sure anywhere else would play him in that position. Totally agree about the summer! No arguments there.

True. Although that a) is only known with hindsight and b) is because so far we have been lucky with injuries and suspensions in defence (shame about elsewhere in the team though.) I think it more probable that they would have played a few more games and most likely would get a couple when Lenihen gets suspended. Also think players would prefer to be one away from game time then 2 or 3 players. And as it is regardless of how much they would have played we are all a tad worried that there isn't better back up there

We are still a basket case of a club and TM is part of said basket case and problem. Its the agency he is with that's still calling the shots, it's still his mate who is CEO/director/whatever we call them these days. We're doing well on the pitch at the moment, credit to TM and the team for that and long may it continue, and that alleviates the problem somewhat. But we are still a broken club of which TM is part of the brokenness.

Yeah but the quality of them are Williams and Mulgrew so not hard to be 3rd choice. Add in the fact of suspensions (hence this thread) injuries (Nayambe and Lenihen have picked up a number and that Tosin and Williams act as cover for the full back positions and there is a fair old chance that a 3rd choice centre back would get a decent amount of game time. Also they don't have to be an exceptional centre back just better than Williams and Mulgrew. Am sure there are a number of players who teams want of their wage bill, have fallen out with the manager, need games for fitness etc. So yeah, I think there may well have been some decent options out there. Was thinking another Downing-esque signing (the centre back) in an ideal world, not a world beater but competent at this level. Regardless of said wishful thinking I think there are enough factors regarding game time and level needed to have attracted someone.

Interesting stuff bar some of the antagonism in defence of Gally! Another factor to consider is in some of those games did Gally move positions from the wing to up front? And what effect did that have? I am pretty confident he did in a couple of games which may have given us more balance to see games out. (Downing switching from right to left is another example of this.) The only plus of Gally on the wing is that he is more physical and robust and perhaps contributes more defensively than a traditional wide player. That being the case and the style we are aiming for I think Bennett would do a much better job in that role. Personally though I think we have it right with neither in the team and a bit of a different style. I do worry the £5 mill tag gets games for Gally when it shouldn't. Like I said even if that's the style we want to play, we have better players suited to it. Perhaps Gally's best role is a plan B striker whipping balls into the box for him. Anything else long term won't work as he doesn't have the attributes for it.n

Probably our biggest area where we needed to strengthen in hindsight. Take one of Nayambe, Tosin or Lenihen out and it looks an entirely different prospect in defence. Walton and Bell have improved of late. Not sure we will hit 3rd time lucky (or good management) with either Williams or Bennett defensively. Incidentally whilst Williams is the best of a poor set of options if he is injured we are really stuffed. Am all for settled defences but having such a small defensive pool to chose from is really poor.

I think he maybe wised up a bit before that. His pre season last year (prior to the injury,) was very positive - he put a load of extra work in over the summer. Can't imagine what a long term injury on top of that does but I am liking his character and performances.

Interesting stuff. My take on it is managers are worth a lot in this division, moreso than perhaps in other leagues. Hopefully that'll be Fulham's downfall although player quality could well see them safely in. Manager wise Millwall have a smart cookie in Rowett and that could make them good for the playoffs. My dark horses for them as he has got them playing very well. Sheff Weds have imploded which only can help our chances and Brentford are a good team whose disappointing results seem to be draws so think they are definitely in. Forest and Bristol are spectacularly inconsistent, especially the latter. Of the 2 I expect Forest to grab playoffs being marginally more consistent and getting a good result Vs West Brom suggests they've a fair bit about them. Preston I don't know whether to admire for getting where they are on a budget or loath their cheating. They strike me as a rock paper scissors kind of team. One tactic that either works or it doesn't. Think most teams would like to face them in the playoffs because it's obvious what they'll do and is perhaps.easoer to prepare. Cardiff - Harris hasn't done amazingly as a manager so think will miss out. Think it's still a huge ask especially with so many injuries and little room for error. But I do think there may be room to start dreaming. As others have said this is a poor league and the perfect opportunity. Here's hoping we seize it.

Well what a result and a good day at the office externally too. I really should criticise Walton more often if the result is that kind of save. Ok we were 2-0 up but conceed a goal, the team gets nervous and then it's hanging on time. Samuel seems to also have been immense. One thing he deserves credit for was prior to last season and his injury it seemed as if he had put in a hell of a lot of work to get fitter and stronger which is a fantastic attitude to have and suggests he is hungry for success and to get better. 2 games on the trot now where he has looked good. Could he be this season's Travis getting a look in for injuries then not looking back? Lots of positive results elsewhere for us bit then this is a crazy league. Where else can the bottom team then thump 3rd by 3 goals or an appalling injury ravaged Hull then score 4. The Millwall result is great but a double edged sword as Rowett is a good manager and they could also be dark horses for the playoffs imo. That said Sheff Wednesday have imploded with another poor result and I thought they would be challenging for playoffs so swings and roundabouts. No complaints. A few of our weaker players showing their strengths. A solid win and clean sheet. What's not to like?

No one is comparing Walton against our best ever keeper. No one has that kind of standard for him. If we are going on our last promoted season as a comparison I'd have been happy with Walton being as good as Filan or Kelly. Neither were amazing that year (in fact Filan in relegation season seemed to be the peak of his career) bit both were solid keepers. If Walton were as good as I perceived those two to be then I'd be happy with him..

To answer your question: 1) never mentioned in their prime - this is something you have added in. 2) firstly against other good signings for Rovers in a variety of positions since you said he has been a good signing. So I'm talking about Downing and Arma this year, Smallwood in league 1, that level of impact that "good" signings make. 3) what I would consider a decent standard as to not regularly be doing disappointing things whether howlers or should do better.

I'm judging him on his performances for Rovers. In my home we refer to things sometimes as the "Friedel effect" as in its good but still disappointing as not excellent (a bit like any keeper who followed on from Brad). I'm certainly not wanting that standard or expecting top quality by any stretch! What I am asking for is a keeper who makes few mistakes they shouldn't make be they howlers or should do better type attempts. I think I'd settle and am judging him against solid keepers rather than the spectacular. I'm not sure how this is so complicated as we all know Armstrong or Dack probably arent Prem quality but are doing very well for us and are good championship playrrs. Smallwood did very well for us in league 1 judged as a league 1 player, not Vs Kante, for exameple. I'm not of this logic of the yardstick being higher for the keeper position than it is for any of the outfield players. We don't think Williams or Bell are poor as they aren't Prem quality but not cutting it at this standard. I don't see how there's this suddenly different criteria by which keepers are differently judged. Also many of my recent posts on this topic began because Chaddy said Walton had been a good signing for us which is spin of the highest order. He (Walton) has performed nowhere near as well as Arma or Downing this season, or even Tosin. On reflection perhaps some of the high standard stuff comes from me asking Chaddy to justify Walton being good for us and considering what good looks like (although i would think that still factors in our level.) Given his form hasn't been that great or he hasn't excelled at this level I think it's a bit cheeky to try slipping him in as a good signing.

I wouldn't like to say having seen very little non Rovers football. Not that all other championship keepers are crap (which I assume you're going for) is an endorsement of Walton's ability. Or perhaps you are trying to jnvidalidate my opinion if I don't have an encyclopedic knowledge of keepers? I haven't of strikers either but could tell you that Graham was pretty good and Brown was pretty terrible. Another straw man argument.

None of that suggests he has been good for us - at best this is a case he has been decent for us. It's pretty flimsy 10 clean sheets and command of the area, especially when we have conceeded an average number of goals and a couple of clangers have come from balls into the box. My criteria for a good keeper would be as follows: Clangers - one or nil. Not the case with Walton there's at least 4 his biggest fans agree on and I think I'd go with a justifiable half dozen. Good keepers don't make that many mistakes. Shot stopping - a good keeper gets all the ones he should do (l- as in you don't think keeper could have better there. Not a clanger but a could do better, if that makes sense? a great keeper also saves ones that really should be a goal. Probably been a few where I felt he could have done better and there's been very few where I think he has got things he shouldn't have done (Gestede header Vs Boro and the Wigan game spring to mind.) Contrast that with the great keepers we've had over the years and very often you can point to a number of games where they have kept us in it. Command of Area - a few clangers aside (which suggest he isn't amazing) this is one of his better features. Not comparing with Raya who was weak at it, but against good keepers I'm not sure he's massively better at it. That said it is an asset most of the time and so grant this is one area where he looks a good keeper. Distribution - good keepers do this well, although I always think of this as an added bonus. Not sure he is great at this as releases things slowly so not an asset for the case of him being a good keeper. Consistency - good keepers consistently perform at about 7-7.5 per game, great ones 8+ consistently. This is a feature I rate really highly, the reliability of a keeper. That's not been the case with Walton - he's really ranged from poor to average to excellent. Even the Boro game as a recent example he did excellently with Gestede's header but could have done better for the goal. The guy is too erratic performance wise and sometimes even within matches. For me a good keeper is more consistent - you know what you are getting. Clean sheets and goals conceeded. Not the full picture but can indicate whether a keeper is any good. The number of clean sheets is impressive but less so the number of goals we have conceeded. Certainly the latter strongly suggests he is average at best. The former does suggest he is certainly not in the Steele type category. So one stat for, one stat against. That said Filan won player of the season and was brilliant behind a terrible defence. I remember Southall playing for Wales Vs Dutch and the Welsh lost 7-0 and without a doubt Southall kept them in it. Pickford was actually good when at Sunderland. On reflection it's not what I'd base a keeper's ability on. Ok that is subjective but shows a bit of evidence as to why I don't think he is a good signing.