The reason we couldn't try it is we don't have enough centre backs. We've only 3 recognised center backs in the squad! Given we're struggling to put out 2 this weekend, much less 3 I can't see it working. Also are our strikers that good it's worth playing 2 of them? And not sure where Rothwell and Dack fit in that formation. That said the squad's so unbalanced no formation is a good fit.

Yes. Perhaps had instead of have would be better for clarity. I know we lost but it seems like we were/are being presented with a good opportunity at the start of the season. Factor in Charlton was a good opportunity with managerial uncertainty over the summer, had lost a few key players and how that'll have effected their summer, and we really are looking a gift horse in the mouth.

Apparently we're "really thin" with Lenihen and Tosin out. Well I never! Only surprise is that it only took 3 games for this to catch up with us

Well last night taught me my hypothetical horror examples of players out of position weren't daft enough. Really shows how much TM is losing the plot.

Yes they seem in a bit of termoil. Personally I think we have a good start to the season catching both Fulham and Boro when their inexperienced managers are still getting to grips with the championship. Add in their poor form and a home game and we really should be looking at a win. Also TM seems to get a few good results when the pressure is on and after an uninspiring start to the season the pressure is definitely on. We saw this a number of times last season. With all this in mind I predict a win for Rovers. 2-1 or 3-2. No way will we keep a clean sheet but all things point to a win. Much needed imo to stop us getting into a relegation battle early on.

Thanks. That's worse than Bereton out wide. Graham on the wing??? He's loosing it. Graham has none of the qualities of a winger. Madness!

Was Bereton on the wing or up front. Just to say we started another rather positive cup run against Oldham amidst a difficult league start. Just saying...

As you say that right side is horrifically weak. Of all the strikers shunted out wide Gally is the one who will do worst out there and is least suited to it. Mind you questions should be asked if 12 mill later we've still no successor to Graham. I think Gally is the most likely of our strikers to do so and best fit for the team's shape. However it's not easy to become the punch hitter (to borrow a term) in a struggling team.

You've said this before yet admit that Bennett switches off too - your main criticism of Nayambe. Given positionally Bennett is ropey too and Nayambe has better pace I'm struggling to see what Bennett brings to the role. Even if he is better going forward - and as a midfielder he should be - he's not that great in attack (few assists and goals even at right mid) and what we need our full backs to first and foremost defend. Add in that Nayambe is young and likely to improve and it seems obvious to me. Additionally if Bennett is better (and limited which I'm sure most would agree with) then it's another poor recruitment decision by TM not to get a specialist RB in and have to rely on a midfielder.

This is what I don't get. We have investment projects and pay big bucks for it, yet the investment projects we have at the club we don't actually invest in. Seems very contradictory imo and suspicious. Incidentally you could add Rothwell to the list of muck ups too.

Not all players and clearly some players are more suited to some positions than others. Granted changing positions happens and works - Henry to striker and Emerton to RB are 2 which jump out to my mind, but many don't work as players aren't suited to these new positions. For example Bereton is struggling out wide, which isn't really fair to him. Bennett is struggling at RB and I suggest the same - it's not fair on the player. You would rightly recoil in horror if I said we should play Smallwood up front or Graham as a winger and rightly so. So just because some players can shift positions it's very clear that many can't or shouldn't and it can be bad management I'd put Bennett in that category.

Evasive! And that's not true. I may believe the correct decision to get to Scotland is to head south from Leeds but it doesn't make it the right decision. What do you think the evidence shows?

But not quite so clearly and appallingly in the wrong. Being honest Parson do you really think Bennett is better at RB? I think the evidence is pretty damning. It might be his decision to make but it doesn't make it the correct one whatsoever.

I have one talking about Keith Andrews as an all action midfielder on the front. Surely that is worth a few quid... Thanks for the help guys. Any Rovers museum or anything might want them?

Absolutely - having done a lot of work with international students saving face is as important as it gets. That said I so wonder if there's a hiding criminal activity from the early days of their ownership - although with the league's tardiness to discipline again this may be a face saving exercise as well as hiding illegalities.

Cements Bennett's place. non playing captain's exist but are rare - and let's be honest does anyone really think Bennett will be a non playing captain? We might as well rename this thread the goodbye Nayambe thread. Too much competition in midfield for Bennett to play there regularly and there's too many strikers to cram in at right mid. Sad news as I liked Nayambe as a player and Bennett guarentees a couple of horrendous muck ups per game at RB.

Thing is 19 games is not a bad run. Even knocking off this season, and just thinking of last season, 17 games is not insignificant, that's a third of the season, which cannot be ignored. Added to which we've begun this season in line with how we finished the previous and I'd be very worried. Factor in a chaotic transfer window and then starting poorly in 2 games - in conjunction with everything beforehand - and it looks very poor. It reminds me of the end of Hodgeson's first season/beginning of his last - there's often continuity. I'm not sure we can just give a clean slate each new season either. If it were the other way round, doing badly, but having 3 seasons of solid success behind him, we wouldn't be ignoring the previous. I'm not sure just because the latter previous was bad means that we should just discount it. That said, if you didn't get rid in the summer, you do have to give him a bit longer. They should have bit the bullet at the end of last season. As they didn't they have to give him a bit more time, though for me the emphasis has to be on bit. Another 4-5 games floundering, then alongside last season's terrible ending, we really need to get rid imo.

"It’s early season, I don’t think central defence was a problem. “I thought they applied themselves well. “They all need to develop relationships and when Lenihan gets himself fit and comes back then he will have to compete to get in the team.” Quotes from TM about today's game. Absolutely astounding, showing he has no clue as to what is going on. 3 centre backs, one of whom is very injury prone, and another is on loan, and you don't think this is a problem? We're already down to zero cover. There's no room for injuries, suspension or lack of form. All in all, that TM is happy with this suggests he has completely lost the plot.

How many games would you give out of interest. It's something like 17 points from 19 games, or the other way round. That's a long period of bad form. How much longer do you reckon is fair?

A few thoughts from today's game, albeit from someone who didn't watch it. Firstly, Fulham would've been nervous after last week's loss to Barnsley. All the pressure would have been on them as a team coming down from the prem, one of the promotion favourites, yet having received quite a beating in their first game. Added in Parker's lack of experience, I felt it wasn't a bad time to play them and get something from them, so a bit disappointed we didn't get a point. Secondly, selection and substitutions are odd. why no Cunningham? Bereton on the wing was never going to work. No Travis meant we were always going to struggle to retain the ball, and it would further imbalance us. Downing has never really played left back and was another poor move. Dack isn't a central midfielder. Add in Bennett at right back that meant we ended the game with at least 4 players out of position, and a total imbalance of artists to grafters. The scale of the imbalance and shoehorning people in is ridiculous - I cannot think of a team not in the midst of an injury crisis who would do this. All of which suggests TM has lost the plot. The lack of shots on target is a concern as we rely on our attacking play to get us out of trouble. I appreciate there were a few other chances, but it hardly sounds as if there were tons, and on top of our comical at times defending, you feel it's a recipe for relegation. Overall we need things to change soon, but I feel TM has lost it.

How many players out of position by the end? At least 4. One or two is bad enough but 4 is shooting ourselves in the foot and is seriously unprofessional

Looking for a bit of help regarding Rovers programmes. I've got a load of old programmes from Rovers games dating mainly from 1997-2008 (with a few outliers) which I don't really have the space for anymore Does anyone know where might be a good place to potentially sell them? I'm not exactly sure there's a huge market for Rovers programmes but thought it worth investigating. Any help/advice/interest would be really appreciated.

Voted neither good nor bad. On paper the team looks better but the squad very unbalanced. It obviously does depend how the new signings do but I can't remember a season where it so desperately hinged on a couple of signings doing well. If Tosin and Gally do well.in the short term we are in a better position. If either turn out to be duds however we are totally stuffed.

Either way it doesn't put the manager in a good light. In your scenario either the clique or younger players are influencing TM which isn't a good situation! Funny how by and large good managers are able to manage characters but weaker ones struggle. It's also possible and shows TM didn't manage Charlie well prior to this. However it's a bit odd if TM only decided Mulgrew was past it on Saturday. Surely the writing was on the wall and a summer is the best time to transition? Why keep him as captain if this was the case? Whatever the reasoning it looks like a mismanaged last minute panic. Thank goodness Mulgrew wasn't that good anymore or it'd be an even bigger mess.

Whether it is wages, a fall our or a planned ruthless move by TM on one level it doesn't look good at all. If it's wages we're really stuffed as there's no room to bring anyone in. The budget must be appalling especially given we sold Raya (allegedly on top of the Gally budget). This suggests there's no opportunity to take advantage of the market or to get cover in any emergencies that may occur. Perhaps it's a falling out. In which case I wonder if there's any of the dressing room behind TM. The young players who are slated probably won't be too keen on TM and if he annoys his inner circle as well it could be awkward. Or it was planned. In which case that makes the Charlton game and the captaincy a very odd situation and isn't that planned. Who doesn't replace the leadership and central defender slot when they know it's going? Any way if happened it was a mess. The positive is Mulgrew is finished at this level so it's not a loss on the playing side. Just a sad indictment of how Rovers do things these days...