Why wouldn't he be the 'right fit' for our club? He would be given control of recruitment and need to assemble a new squad given the disaster Mowbray has overseen so he could quickly get players in that would be the 'right fit'. You don't win two automatic promotions and finish in the play-offs twice in 4 Championship seasons by being 'far too negative tactical wise' (whatever that means). Do you have any reason at all for suggesting Hughton would not use our academy players? The guy knows how to get promoted and quickly. Serious clubs see that and would trust him to do it, with or without academy players. The focus should be on promotion not the academy. Development of academy players is the job of the academy coaches.

If Hughton is 'yesterdays man' then what the hell does that make Mowbray who has been drifting along going nowhere for over a decade. Interesting those referencing his style of play as though what we churn out can be described as better or attractive to watch. Myth number one of Mowbray's career is that his sides play entertaining football. Also interesting that the side that beat Forest today - Cardiff - are now managed by another so-called dinosaur - the same folk calling Hughton boring and finished now were saying the same about McCarthy this time last year. He's lost 5 in 29 since taking over there. Some dinosaur. Anyone who knows anything about the Championship knows that they way for the clubs with less resources to get out of this league is to be organised and solid. McCarthy, Hughton, Dyche, Warnock, Bruce - there's a reason they've been around so long at so many clubs whilst the 'attractive' managers come and go. It isn't rocket science as much as some would want to believe. I'll also predict now that if Mowbray and Hughton last the full season at their clubs that Forest will finish higher than Rovers. Unlike some I'm not convinced by our start to the season and won't be hailing success or labelling failures after a measly 6 games.

The board for 5 minutes injury time went up during the stoppage when the referee was on the floor. So the time shouldn't start until play has resumed which on my clock was 3 minutes 30 seconds into added time. They scored comfortably within the 5 minutes allocated. No complaints from me.

Blackpool and Millwall showing that it is of course entirely achievable to obtain results against the better sides in this league like WBA and Fulham. It seems to be a local attitude that because they are decent that nobody can take anything off them.

Luton are a difficult side to deal with. I wasn't confident of a win in advance of the game because if you look through their away form they don't lose that many. I think their manager is one of the most loathsome individuals in football but he has clearly instilled an attitude in his team that they don't give in. Only a few weeks ago they looked well beaten at West Brom but came back with two late goals to set up a nervy finish. So having got ourselves in the driving seat and supposedly in control at half time it was especially frustrating to watch that second half unfold. I don't think we were ever really in control of the game. Even at 2-0 I wasn't confident of us holding on. I very rarely am under this manager. Others have referenced it - I don't think he has a clue how to manage games out and keep hold of leads. I'm not just talking tactical decisions and substitutions. I'm talking about mentality and gamesmanship. As an example - taking free kicks quickly because this thing supposedly suits our game, yet from my viewing more often it results in the opposition winning possession back quickly and breaking causing us problems. I'd rather see us waste time away on free kicks. When we went to Luton season before last all their ball boys disappeared once they were ahead. Yet we are happy to keep the game moving quickly. There needs to be more of the dark arts but Mowbray thinks he is too good and too nice for that. On the occasions we do hold on I think it is as much down to wastefulness from the opposition and good fortune than it is good management. I've lost count of the number of times we've been hanging on desperately protecting a 1 goal lead at Ewood - even against poor League One sides - never calm, comfortable or organised. It is a recurring theme despite different leagues, opposition and players at our disposal. Comes back to the common denominator - the dugout. So not in the slightest surprised to see the equaliser come. More a case of when rather than if and at best we were going to camp in our penalty area and do the usual routine hoping to eke out the last few minutes. I've seen people say that the dropped points are why we won't be a play-off team. That used to be the case perhaps but I'm more concerned with getting to 50 points and don't think we are going to have an easy time getting there so letting 2 slip at home in the last minute is a major concern. We might be regretting these come May if we are fighting the drop. Boring Mowbray has all his excuses ready to go. Presumably nothing at all to do with his changes and tactics and everything to do with the players not understanding his tactical genius and the referee causing us problems. Having seen the Lenihan one again we got away with one big time there. After the dust has settled and the pain subsided I'll watch their equaliser again because there seems to be an issue there defensively that I would not expect with 3 CBs in the middle and trying to protect a 1 goal lead. In the end this is Mowbray's way. Used to it now and it won't change so I'm past the point of getting annoyed about it.

If you're the manager of a club like Luton, or plenty of other sides in the Championship, and you come up against a club in Rovers losing £15-20 million a year every year then you are right to describe us as having a big budget. All that cash goes somewhere, just a shame most of it is squandered due to mismanagement and we've nothing to show for it.

'Kids in a man's league'. Is this Coventry 2016 or Rovers 2021? Common denominator?

Again, I'm not being argumentative for the sake of it but there are a few things I don't fully agree with here. I do think we agree on several things but: I don't accept that the club has had 'hardly any income' for the last 18 months. In the period affected by Covid - March 2020 to August 2021 - we had a reduced income - as did everyone else in the country. But people need to recall that as a low end attended Championship side the bulk of our income comes from media, commercial and sponsorship, rather than people buying match tickets. As I understand it Sky Sports covered their full payments due under the media deal through that time, grants were also provided. Rovers also had full season ticket money for the 2019-20 season which they refused to refund people on whereas almost every other club offered the option of refunds. Given we sell so few matchday tickets the impact of losing that income ought to have been less than say a Derby, Forest or Norwich able to fill their grounds most weeks. So not ideal but I fail to see how this has affected Rovers more seriously than any other club. It is also something that Rovers have chosen to do nothing about - for example not selling season tickets for 2020-21 until September when rivals were busy selling them through the summer and then callously increasing prices. Again - our wages to turnover ratio is high but that is the case at every club at this level. The real way to resolve this is to increase turnover, not slash wages right back and hope for the best whilst cobbling together a squad built on loans each year. I don't think the club can be run more sustainably under these owners as I don't think they have the capability to do it.

I think it is obvious how the owners benefit from not spending the Armstrong cash. You've explained it yourself - it covers the cash they put in for deals previously, or alternatively can be used to fund the club for the next 12 months saving them the trouble of pumping other cash in. Of course that's their decision and their right to decide but most billionaires desperate to see their club succeed would ensure funds were reinvested to rebuild, strengthen and go again. Conveniently we haven't done. Just like we didn't after the Rhodes dosh came in. Lightning strikes twice it seems. I'm not saying they'll be cracking open the champagne about Armstrong going or spending the cash on themselves, but it certainly helps them in terms of getting back the cash they 'invested' previously or at the very least saves them the trouble of having to fund losses for a while. Again it comes back to ambition and what they are in this for. If their interest is solely to balance the books, keep the club as a going concern then some would say it is sensible to spend next to nothing and use it to plug losses. But if there's any ambition to grow assets, improve, get promoted then cash needs reinvesting and excuses really won't cut it no matter which version of events is believed. I'm not going to credit them for signing so many players each window when one of the main reasons for that is the chaotic and short term approach they have chosen to take. Next summer is another - we will have to sign double figures just to have a squad at our disposal. I will not be hailing the owners if those are all cheapo loans and frees cobbled together with little strategy other than to grab whoever is easiest and cheapest like the policy this summer seems to have been. The Armstrong money, coupled with the Raya cash and other bits and pieces - compensation fees - see us in profit now for the last 4 years on transfer fees. Which I think has always been their intention - they seem happy or comfortable with sustaining a wage bill and annual losses on the debt mountain but when it comes to coughing up cash for investments it seems to only be on the basis they are going to be able to get it back in the not too distant future.

Pleased they have done it, wanted something like this for a while, though I would have preferred a more prominent spot either along the top of the Riverside or between tiers on the Jack Walker. As it is visiting fans will barely be able to see it, especially as people at the back of the BBE stand up during the game.

Just more excuses and backside covering from the resident excuse maker in chief. A recurring theme here of deadline day transfer disappointment followed by a succession of reasons why things didn't get done. To be totally honest I'm not really bothered what the truth of it is. Ultimately it doesn't matter - he could have had Ronaldo and Messi sat in his office but the deals didn't get done and so Rovers are left short, again. I think this is as close as Mowbray has been or will be to lashing out at the owners cohorts. He's quick as usual to absolve himself and his chums of any responsibility - he did his bit (so he says) and got everything done and our 'hard working' (heard that before?) head of recruitment did his job but nobody came in. Familiar story. Boring. Maybe it is because the owners wouldn't sanction funds. Maybe it is because they won't let Mowbray spend. Maybe it is because Mr Invisible is upsetting the Coventry boys happy camp. I'm not really interested any more. I used to be fascinated by the inner wranglings and would hope that this is a sign the manager's days are numbered but I don't believe it and don't even care if they are. It is a dysfunctional mess and I am perplexed that there remain people out there who seem to believe that this sort of behaviour is normal or acceptable for a professional football club. Like selling a 25+ goal a season striker for 8 figures then spending nothing replacing him. Not normal, not acceptable, not justifiable no matter how you want to dress it up. What is the outcome of all these shenanigans? Well the Armstrong money disappears. Who benefits from that? Well not me, not Rovers, not the squad, not even the manager but Venkys do. Which tells me all I need to know. The theory that Venkys are fed up with Mowbray and aren't backing him any more, waiting for his contract to run down. That again is more of a concern than a reassurance. That they are so desperate to avoid coughing up compo to get rid of him and bring in a new manager that they will happily sit back and let the club drift towards the rocks for the next 12 months, wasting another few million going nowhere and risking us being in even worse state next summer just doesn't make any sense.

Just the 13 of that lot out of contract or returning to parent clubs come the end of the season. Disgraceful. Accy Stanley are in better shape.

Will there be another Forum meeting? I thought with Covid around the Club wasn't able to host such events due to risk. AKA Waggott doesn't fancy sitting through uncomfortable questions and will come up with any excuse going to avoid it.

Waggott got his job - massive salary and prestige of being 'top dog' at a big club in the Championship and without question the most prestigious position he has ever held - because he or Mowbray perhaps persuaded the owners that his appointment was in their interests and would benefit them in some way. I think since that day, coming up on 4 years now, his sole remit and focus has been on justifying his continued employment and position by doing whatever he can do get more cash through the tills and cut overheads. So at the annual review he can turn up with his spreadsheets, drop them on Mr Desai's desk and show how he has increased income/reduced the need for Venkys to dig as deep into their own pockets. Waggott's position has never been about growing the club/fanbase, developing the club in any way, strengthening the club or the medium to long term health of the club. All those things take time, effort, money, patience and ability to achieve. He and we don't have that here, where the entire operation limps along on a year by year review and owners whim. I'm not necessarily talking about subsidising cheap tickets, giving things away or offering freebies to get people back, but a stop to the relentless price hikes and squeezes on the regulars might be helpful in stopping a year on year decline in attendances. Waggott works on the numbers and will no doubt think he's doing a good job for the owners - also by not asking them for cash to replace the dilapidated pitch or cleaning the decaying stadium - good for the figures and his position - bad for the Club. Anyhow, he's about 67 now, last big payday here, maybe hang on as long as he can whilst his chum handles the football side and then they can both stroll of into the sunset and retirement leaving a rundown, overstretched mess of a club that has done nothing to try and even keep the fans it has let alone get more people in over the last 10 years. There's only so long that can carry on before it becomes terminal. Not that Waggott will ever be seen at Ewood again. I wonder when he last paid for a ticket?

There's a clue in that these changes are being introduced now. Already three games into the season and with match 4 in just 3 days time. Indicates that this is a Club operating on a whim, disorganised and with no strategy other than scrambling around desperately trying to unearth new ways to squeeze more cash out of regular fans. Maybe this is the reason our grand a day CEO has been so quiet recently, putting his time to use on a strategy for the club. Back of fag packet stuff, a busy component of the operation = squeeze for more, zero interest in the consequences of the decision. Don't like it then cough up for a membership or go elsewhere. End result likely to be the same as with attendances at Ewood. Decline but with those going paying substantially more it will be easier to operate and probably similar cash at the end of the day. Obviously a coherent operation would have introduced these changes months ago and publicised them before the season started rather than introducing them 3 days before our third home league game but then again I suspect Waggott knows he's in bother having demolished the attendances with his pricing so he's now responding to that with this.

I'm flummoxed by the Chapman stuff. It has been quite clear since the day he arrived here, even on loan in League One, that Mowbray doesn't like, trust, rate him enough to play him with regularity in our team. Fair enough, you win some you lose some. So why on earth was he given a new 12 month contract only a couple of months ago? I've no idea how much he is on but suspect we are talking 5k a week territory. A 12 month deal must be worth a quarter of a million easy. Why do that and then loan him out to League One again? For what purpose? I could see some business logic to it if we had extended his deal and then sold him on for a fee - that would be understandable although unlikely as any sensible buyer would have got in there first and told him not to sign a new deal here. I wonder if he was another with a 12 month extension option in the club's favour and someone (not Mowbray) decided to activate it in the hope of recouping some value in him....then as the window went on and there was no interest and to make space on the wage bill for the Brighton loan lad we decide to send him off to Burton for a few months. I don't think Burton will be paying his wages in full so we are back to subsidising a loan for him to play elsewhere.

Define mid table and do you really think that is acceptable in return for 4.5 years in the job and 9 transfer windows?

The Club have claimed that they cannot convene a shareholders meeting this year because of Covid. Meanwhile in the very same building they have been promoting and holding comedy nights, bingo, England EURO games and of course allowing thousands of fans to attend fixtures and hospitality. I think this sums up the contempt, lack of respect and ignorance they have for the supporters and giving them a platform to ask important questions.

Wasn't long ago we were pointing at Wigan and Bolton as examples of local clubs that we could end up like if Venkys walked away. Now they are spending more than us in the division below and getting more on watching. Wasn't long ago we were being told that we were doing things differently to the past and were building slowly but sustainably, ensuring the club had assets to fall back on. That now looks like a sick joke when you consider what we have left under rapidly expiring contracts and complete dependence on cheap loans to fill out the squad. Wasn't long ago Mowbray was talking about taking a few years to get us into shape for promotion to the Prem. Now I think most of us would be relieved if we limped our way to survival and even the most optimistic have set their ambitions at 'mid table'. Wasn't long ago we were being told that our new, steady, sensible, sustainable approach was the right thing to do to put us in good shape for the future and protect the club from the perils of FFP, whilst all those other silly clubs spending big money would suffer the consequences of sanctions. Here were are having been under an embargo and then since being released from that embargo have effectively been under a self-imposed embargo resulting in an inability to address glaring issues in the squad. Ever get the feeling that you've been had hook, line and sinker? The only folks to profit from the last 3 years appear to be Mowbray, Waggott, the staff and favoured players lavished with lucrative contracts. The club and fans certainly don't have much to show for it. Unless dire football and bottom half Championship is your thing.

I've seen a few saying that it is difficult to get deals done. So? What does the club pay these people for? Isn't the very function of a professional football club to be able to recruit and strengthen? The trouble we have here is that since the day we got promoted back to the Championship neither Mowbray or Waggott have been under any sort of pressure. They are left to set their own targets, carry on even if they miss them and there are no consequences to them. The media lap up all their excuses. Anywhere else they would have a board setting targets and if they weren't hit they would be fired. On that basis there would be a lot more urgency and pressure to get bodies in and strengthen. Here - who cares? Not going up either way, probably have enough to limp to survival either way. Not worth kicking up a fuss over. Mowbray will still be here and getting paid come next summer unless he packs it in.

The only things to surprise me today are the number of people who expected us to go and bring in a permanent striker today, and the curveball of then spending a fee on another LB, low down our list of priorities. I've always believed they were having us on and once again for all the talk there's little action to back it up. In my opinion, it was always an extremely unrealistic prospect and the people at Rovers knew this from the outset. Mowbray said as much for weeks on end until suddenly performing an about turn and claiming, bizarrely, that there might be some cash but that it would only be available for a CF. More nonsensical comments given we have now spent for the second window running on a LB but nowhere else in the team. Laughable when you look at the number of outgoings and cash brought in. All in all a complete failure of a transfer window, overseen by charlatans in Mowbray and Waggott. The sum total of their efforts is to bring in a LB from League 1 and 4 kids on loan. That is an absolute shambles both from a squad strength and business perspective, combined with failure on new contracts leaves us staring down the barrel. Even if we survive in the Championship this season we will reach next summer with no squad, few assets and an impossible task. A disgrace and a dereliction of duty from those running the club in allowing this situation to develop. All hail the Venkys though, at least they haven't left us like Bolton and Wigan (both of whom have spent more than us this summer). The icing on the cake now will be the sneaking out of Mowbray's contract extension. It is bound to happen. Anything other than a relegation battle this season will be portayed as a managerial masterpiece on Mowbray's part, next summer will require another huge rebuild and he will be painted as the best and only man deserving of that opportunity. He's the perfect manager for these wretched owners. Covers for them, praises them, never moans, gets on with it grateful for a job, will work with whatever rubbish they decide, play the 'leasing players' game and even hoodwink people into believing they are trying to spend but unable to.

Late interest in a cash purchase striker of Championship pedigree only to be thwarted at the last minute and have to settle for a loan or nothing instead? Where have I heard that one before?

Since those figures we have released Williams, Mulgrew, Bell, Bennett, Evans, Holtby, Downing and Armstrong, along with last season's raft of loans. We haven't signed anyone, nor have we even so much as signed any senior player up to new and improved terms. Our ticket prices are now among the highest in the league. Until recently our crowds were actually similar to quite a few others (though won't be for long at this rate). So something doesn't add up. There's no argument that we had a relatively high wages to turnover ratio last year, but with those departures that really shouldn't be the case any longer. If it is there is something wrong. Even if the issue here is restrictions and the ratio being too high for comfort, that doesn't stop permanent deals being done. This notion that any permanent transfer is prohibitively expensive and comes with massive demands from players and agents just isn't correct. But we seem so far behind the curve we are going backwards on bringing in the decent free agents. Probably because we are months behind others in planning and preparation.

Hoban was an injury prone loan signing. Shame for him but if he was seriously considered as a 'replacement' for Hanley or Duffy I think my point has been proven. The only circumstances in which I would support selling Nyambe this window would be if a new manager came in and either decided he didn't want Nyambe or Nyambe didn't want a new contract. I don't believe he has been offered a new contract or if he has that his offer has been remotely reasonable for a player of his importance or ability. Shame he's not Smallwood or Gladwin and gets good terms to sit out the months not playing. I've already dealt with the new contracts issued this summer. Those deals were not senior players. Their wages miniscule in the scheme of things and very easy deals to do. I'm amazed you are bringing up the Forest signing of Max Lowe. Experience at Derby, Sheff Utd and Aberdeen. Even those sort of signings are pipe dreams for us now with our Brighton and Leeds reserves. We've effectively become what Blackpool were 5-6 years ago under Oyston or what Stanley were in the time before their owner took over. Reliant on cheap, easy, generous loans to assemble a squad. If you think that is acceptable for this club then enjoy yourself. I do not think it is acceptable and will not tolerate it, and I don't care if Mowbray and the club have 'decided' that is it.

Its just the latest phase of Mowbray's never ending journey and process. Reading his comments in the Telegraph this morning it almost sounds as though he was unhappy with Armstrong netting 25 times last season and us being so reliant on his goals. He mentions only finishing 15th despite Armstrong's efforts which I think actually serves to remind people just what a poor job Mowbray did though he won't see it that way. Now the latest project he has is to spread the goals around the team more and not be so reliant on one striker. Sounds good but lets be honest this is just him getting ready for another transition and journey whilst the team goes nowhere fast. Then when the loans go back next summer and we lose another 7-8 out of contract and have another massive rebuilding job on our hands he'll come up with some other system, style or team he wants us to follow and it all starts again. Doesn't actually get the club anywhere because we are getting further away from the top 6 the longer he's at it and whatever assets we have are losing value or set to leave for nothing and nothing else is being brought in. But hey it sounds good, keeps him and his chums in good work and keeps a lot of supporters quiet so on it goes.