DE.

The £5m fee was certainly a bit of an albatross around Gallagher's neck. If we'd bought him for £500k you'd say he did quite alright for us over the years. £5m though, especially back then, was a lot of money and at this level should mean somebody able to come in and have an instant and sustained impact. But yeah, playing him out of position likely held his development back quite a bit. He was never going to be an effective wide man. He didn't have the skillset for that. He should have been coached in how to use his frame to good effect up top. He was never going to be a lethal scorer, but he had the potential to be a nightmare for defenders to deal with. Instead he just drifted into mediocrity before injuries done him in towards the end. Diaz would have been worth the £7m to Venky's if we'd sold him for profit (and it's down to pure incompetence that we didn't). From the team/fans pov I'm not sure he was ever really worth that. He did have two very strong half-season purple patches, but when he lost confidence he was hopeless. A £7m player in the championship simply can't be a confidence player, they have to be effective regardless. When he was lacking confidence he barely registered a goal or assist for multiple games. You'd also expect a £7m player to be able to pull a team up by the bootstraps and he didn't do that either. If the team played badly, so did he. Again, if we'd paid less for him you'd say he did alright for us in the end. £7m for two half season purple patches, though... not so much. With that said, some fans made a lot of money from his 20 goal half season, so I'm sure they consider him a success!

Hearts apparently the first team to win four consecutive games against the Old Firm since the mid-80s. Fair play. One of the biggest obstacles for any underdog team to overcome is dealing with the pressure of facing a team with a big reputation. It's a psychological barrier rather than strictly talent or even form related. Definitely suggests they're the real deal this season.

I see Frank has been reduced to tantrums over referees and VAR already. I would humbly suggest your team just needs to be a bit more disciplined.

I think there was a player there in SG. His attributes could have been moulded into something useful. Not necessarily a traditional footballer but certainly a thorn in the side of the opposition. Allardyce could have made something out of Gallagher. He just needed someone to teach him how to use his build effectively and what positions to take up during specific passages of play. I don't think Mowbray or JDT were the right kind of managers for him. Eustace might have been, but by that point he was injury prone and his time here was coming to an end.

This is exactly it. Gudjohnsen just has that striker's instinct. He knows where to be and the movement needed to get there. Gallagher simply does not have this, and he'll never be a proper goalscorer as a result. Mowbray shunted him out on the right to try and make use of his work ethic, but even then his technical limitations made him fairly ineffective. It was rare that I felt Gallagher didn't put the effort in, but during his entire tenure here it never felt like there was a position he was truly comfortable in. I think his best bet would have been as part of a two up top, but we rarely played that way.

I would have rather kept Buckley than sign Tavares, especially if we actually paid money for the latter (for my own sanity I will assume the £2m reported fee is dependent on many clauses). Bucko didn't turn out to be anywhere near as good as was hyped up, but he's still a better Championship player than Tavares. One imagines signing a striker would be dependent on shifting Gueye, which may be difficult. Especially when there are videos being released of his own team mates mocking him.

Yeah, but even so, they were ahead and the sending off (which was a poor tackle and a deserved red) was a problem of their own making. Lampard pretty much admitted post-match he'd been riled up by the crowd, hence his reaction at the end.

Seems weird for Lampard to be bigging it up over a 1-1 draw. Assume there was more to it than just celebrating a point.

Just seen Millwall have -6 goal difference. You have to go all the way down to Portsmouth in 21st to find a team with worse GD (Swansea in 19th also have -6). Bizarre that they are somehow 6th.

Would take that over Gestede and Owen lumbering us with more rubbish tbh.

Tbf they're on track to become the worst premier league team in history. Fair that the fans might be a bit disgruntled imo.

Why waste money on terrible players like De Neve, Tavares and Henriksson when our academy is surely producing footballers that are far better? Is it just so that we're seen to be "spending" to "improve" the team rather than the perception being that we're selling senior players and replacing them with academy players?

Couple of goals and a clean sheet, can't complain. Well done to Litherland. Good to see Tronstad and Pickering back in the starting eleven. One can only wonder why the latter has been frozen out for so long in favour of De Neve and Ribeiro, if he can in fact be selected. Nice to see the below on the BBC match report: "For some Blackburn fans, the welcome victory, Rovers' first in six games, only papers over the cracks and they are calling for owners Venky's to sell up and for a boycott of the home match against Watford on 24 January."

Considering the team we have out there, Millwall have been abysmal so far. Alex Neil will be raging at half time, you'd imagine. They look like they should be down scrapping with us, not 4th. It's obvious the division is a bit of a joke this year, but still... Actually scoring two goals in a match is a sign of progress from our perspective at least. Can we announce a protest/boycott every couple of weeks? Seems like every time we do the next match is a guaranteed win. Not that I'm counting the proverbial chickens yet, mind. If they get one back I can see us collapsing, especially as the game goes on and we have no talent to introduce from the bench. Clean sheet would be a big statement today and possibly a necessity.

He's basically just a poacher. Instinctively knows where to be and can finish. Not sure we can expect much more than that considering the market we operate in these days tbh.

The quality across the division is extremely similar. If there's one division you'd avoid putting a bet on, it's the Championship, as there is absolutely no consistency beyond Sheffield Wednesday losing and Coventry winning (up until recently anyway). Boro also been fairly consistent despite the Rob Edwards situation. That's about it though.

"The Frenchman replaced John Eustace at Ewood Park in February, eventually taking them to within one place of the Championship play-offs last season." A lesson on how phrasing can distort reality. We were in the playoff positions and he took us out of them. That description from the BBC makes it sound like he guided us to the brink from the outside. Can't complain with Ismael's response to the letter, mind. Correctly pointing out that the issues run much deeper than his tenure and isn't just about disappointment in the current campaign. Granted you could argue he's saying that to shirk his own responsibility for current fan unrest, but at the same time he isn't wrong.

Indeed. It costs a fair wedge to put in a bid, and why bother wasting that money when you know Saudi are involved and FIFA are the decision makers?

That's because you are looking at it from the point of view of somebody who wants the team to do well. If Alebiosu comes back with his reputation enhanced and the club can sell for a decent profit, I'm sure they'll be delighted. Onto the next cheap punt/academy player. There is no desire here to keep hold of our best players through increasing salary - we have seen that throughout this year.

Incredible that Coyle got until February. That disastrous lack of urgency essentially relegated us. Less than two years earlier Bowyer got binned in November, and we were 16th when he left. One can only speculate as to why Coyle in comparison got an extra four months to seal our fate in 16/17. One can also only speculate why ten years ago 16th in November wasn't acceptable, but now 20th in December is fine.

A significant portion of those still attending Ewood will be most loyal / apathetic towards the ownership. The majority of those who have had enough are already boycotting, albeit unofficially. It's why a boycott call now is so difficult for the Coalition - for those who agree with them, you're preaching to the choir and those people are probably, mostly, not attending anyway. That leaves you with the remaining group who will be very hard to convince to take action. It's not an enviable task. Granted there are a few on here who go but would boycott for the cause, as we've seen. I sadly think they are in the minority though - even if we're just talking a single game.

I saw Celtic's chairman resigned today after receiving significant threats. You wonder how a fanbase like that would react to being owned by a distant, immovable object like Venky's.

The only thing I probably would have changed about the original statement would have been the full boycott call. I think it's the right message, but for many who are still going that will be too much to stomach at this point in time. It might have been better to target one specific match to begin with, and go from there. I know Watford has since been designated as the game separately, but not sure if that came from the coalition or from a different entity. I think a single game to begin with would be more tolerable to a larger group of fans, and would give a focus point for both the campaign and the media. I think the reasons to boycott are implicit within the statement released, so I'm not sure it needed to be spelled out any further. Perhaps some bullet points on the specific intent to try and coerce those on the fence, but again, a lot of the reasons are in the statement and if one has read the entire thing it shouldn't be necessary to regurgitate the same points in an appeal to fans who, in all likelihood, will attend no matter what. You'll never get a full boycott from everyone - I'm sure the coalition understands that. There will always be a sizable group that are just going to see a team in blue-and-white playing each week. They concern themselves only with what's happening on the pitch, not the boardroom. No judgement from me on that, we all have our own ways of seeing things. Nonetheless, I think many would put the effort in for one match, and a sparse crowd still sends a message. A lot of the success of a theoretical single-match boycott call would, ultimately, come down to what our results are like leading up to whatever match the boycott is aimed at. Should we be on a winning streak of a few games, you're likely to see less people participate than if our form is as bad as it is right now. Not much anyone can do about that, though - it's just the way things are. Do I think any of the above will change things? Probably not - but why not try? Worst case scenario it has no affect and things stay as they are. Nothing gained, but nothing lost either. Best case scenario it does cause some kind of shift in dynamic, and is the start of some form of change.

Soon to be seven, I fear. Lord knows what this lot will do to us in January.

14 years ago this rhetoric was used when Kean was in charge to "back the boys" during the 2011 Christmas period. The crowd did their part. The team lost every match. Crowd size won't make a difference when we have a shit manager and average players (being kind). The owners showing actual ambition in their running of the club is how things turn around. We'll never see that though, so we're going nowhere whether 300 or 30,000 are at the ground.