It's just inexcusable that Mowbray is persisting with false 9 formations. It has rarely worked with Dolan and never worked with anyone else. Unless the team is exceptional in possession, it merely emboldens the opposition to push up and press the opposition higher up the field. Edit: We should, however, recognise that Fulham are far superior to us. Mitrovic, Decordova-Reid, Seri are technically amongst the best in the league and, at times, didn't look out of place in the Premiership, though, they didn't have enough as a team to succeed. And, Cairney off the bench shows their strength.

Let's not forget that Jan Paul van Hecke, Khadra, Poveda and Clarkson will return to their respective clubs toughened up and with some first team experience, ready to offer more to their clubs - it's not all negative! Fulham were always going to far superior to us, so we needed to play with men behind the ball, rather than go in with three forwards. I say that in hindsight but I think most of us knew this beforehand. I don't see Mowbray going. He has the excuse that Fulham are one of the best teams in the league.

My guess is that Buckley will be right forward and either Dolan or Brereton central. I think Khadra would be better suited but will wait and see.

Perhaps, it's simply a reality of where we now are as a club, but to read quotes from Mowbray praising how clever Brighton are in allowing Jan Paul van Hecke to come to Rovers and toughen up and develop is quite jarring. It's not nice to accept we're playing a feeder role for Premier League teams. I'd much rather Mowbray keep quiet and then try to sign the player if he does well - if it's a possibility. (No doubt Brighton have their scouts checking in on him, so, maybe I'm overplaying how influential Mowbray's comments are). Playing this developmental role for other clubs would be more sustainable if, we had our own youngsters developing at other clubs. However, there is no-one from our development or fringe players, currently, out there at a decent level (aside from Chapman who is leaving). The last ones I think who had successful loan to first team progression were Wharton, Lenihan and Raya. Carter has been on the fringes after his Burton loan too. This season looks like a missed opportunity.

Newly promoted Ipswich Town finished 5th and 3 points off the Champions League under George Burley. I believe that was the best a newly promoted club had done since Forest in 94/95. Whilst it is an anomaly and the Premier League has been dominated by a few clubs, Souness' newly promoted Rovers finished 7th, I believe. Concentration of money is making it a lot harder. Perhaps, promoted sides being raided of players before a ball is kicked, as Norwich were with Buendia, will become the norm. Clubs will accept relegation from the start and look to absorb money so they can return next time. Correction - Rovers finished 10th in 2001-02, on promotion and 6th, the following year, as Mattyblue clarified.

I would not be surprised if the Newcastle takeover influenced Conte's decision, after he turned down Spurs in the summer. The Premier League bought some of the best Serie A players from last season - Lukaku, Ronaldo and Romero. Now, with Newcastle's Saudi money, the Premier League will completely wipe the floor with the other leagues for years - at least, in terms of transfers. Perhaps, I'm just jaded, but the professional game is increasingly boring me with its hyperbole and short-termism. Consider the Championship top ten goalscorers, currently: Mitrovic, Brereton, Solanke, Gyökeres, Swift and Joël Piroe. I know very little about some of them but looking at the ones I know of, it gives me little hope for the clubs that get promoted. The elite game is increasingly being rigged by money and losing touch with the rest of the football pyramid. It's been like that for decades but it's now even more extreme. Conte's Spurs will flash some money and before long, he'll be off to another club. There was renewed momentum towards public demand for a degree of fan ownership in British clubs after the Super League debacle, but that seems to have been washed away by the wild investment. The self-serving authorities are blinding fans with financial wealth as the game is being killed. Edit: I think some gains were made at Man U and Chelsea regarding fan participation in decision-making after the Super League protests.

I would need to see more of Brereton's career to be sure of this but my impression was that he couldn't strike a ball very well. I always thought of the same about Emile Heskey, who had a lot to his game but, I suspect barely scored a goal in his career from outside of the box (would need to check the records about that). I wonder if something has clicked with his kicking technique - as well as his confidence, to enable this improvement. Edit: Quick search shows that Heskey did score some spectacular goals from the edge of the box or outside, so maybe, not the best comparison. I say it again, however, that Brereton has been immensely fortunate with the opportunities that he's got. Other players might get a handful of games to make the grade before losing their place.

Good win with Palace featuring some experienced players. The Wharton brothers played together, according the line-up. No Stergiakis or McBride. Edit: A couple of Palace fans' views posted on their online forum to praise the Rovers team for, what sounds like a counter-attacking game - and, also Eastham, who made a number of saves.

Arsenal's improvement has coincided with returning to a more traditional formation of 4-4-2, with Lacazette and Aubamayang up front together, with Saka and Smith-Rowe on the wings. Meanwhile, Man City, with their immense riches and talent, are playing Foden as a lone forward and remain inconsistent - though, no doubt will finish first or second. I don't see enough football to understand the way formations and tactics have shifted in England - inspired, particularly, by Liverpool and, perhaps, City, but I firmly believe that many clubs up and down the country are making a mistake by blindly following the methods of elite clubs.

Thanks for the round-up. Chapman's loan move to Burton hasn't worked out so far, as far as I can tell. I've read a few comments from their fans admiring his workrate and skill but that he's not always been a team player. It's a shame after how well he did at Shrewsbury and then his positive contribution early in the season for Rovers when it seemed that he might stay at the club. Let's not forget, in these times of financial constraint, Rovers paid Boro an undisclosed fee to sign Chapman. I see some of these, initially, short-term non-league loan moves as flawed choices by Rovers, though, I admire Burns and Vale's eagerness to go and play football. Unless they do outstandingly well over a long period, it's hard to see it advancing their development or potential transfer value. And, there is a real risk of returning injured, as Pike has done or with diminished confidence, if they struggle to immediately adapt to the new style of football. Nonetheless, it's good to hear that they're making an impact. Hilton is a very strange one - as with the general 'keeper situation at Rovers. He was given a longer-term deal and has spent his time out on loan mostly but there is no sign he has a Rovers future. Eastham looks to be leaving on a free soon and Stergiakis and Pears, goalies 3 and 2 at the club, have, generally, been unconvincing - though, in their defence, they have not had a run of games to gain form. There doesn't seem to be a clear succession plan for Kaminski, as yet. Moreover, as good as Kaminski is doing, there is no one competing and keeping him on his toes.

Agree, and, meanwhile, the club is behaving as if it will continue to be able to afford a high transfer budget, despite losing key players on free transfers and allowing youth players to stagnate, to the point that they're so desperate for opportunities that they're heading on loan for a month in non-league. I don't think Venky's will continue to provide funds long-term, as they have done and then we'll be in a major crisis. Young players like Dolan, Buckley, Travis, Edun and, perhaps, JRC and Wharton, will be carrying the team soon. So, that's the unhappy but frank context of this positive result. I must say, at least some of these young players are showing some form, which provides hope for staying in the league in the medium term. And, if we play Gallagher central, we might even finish higher than 15th this year.

From the highlights, it looks like Gallagher was the central forward, with Brereton left and Dolan right. If this was the case, perhaps, sanity is prevailing and Mowbray is abandoning his false 9 tactic? Credit to Mowbray, as his Buckley RB move worked out (albeit, against a struggling side), as did bringing Johnson in. I definitely agree with those who say that Travis - and the full backs, needs support defensively in the middle. It's noticeable that as Buckley is surging forward with the ball for the second goal (he played a key role in both goals) I believe Johnson is providing defensive cover in the middle. For Derby's goal, I'm surprised that the defence held such a deep line to allow Derby players to crowd Kaminski. Not being a too knowledgeable about defending, I defer to others, but, I would have thought that you hold a higher line from the free kick. A negative, for me, is the loan trio on the bench. They're not showing much and they're preventing some of Rovers youngsters from developing and staking a claim, such as Butterworth, who has shown glimpses, albeit, was then poor in the recent game.

Mowbray said in August 2021: “In the future moving forward, Lenihan, Nyambe and Rothwell are in similar situations (to Armstrong) and we’ll have to deal with that and see how we go...For me, talking to the club, let’s get this window finished and see if we can address some of the situations, see where we are financially, and if we can’t offer new improved contracts then they are going to run." Unless Mowbray misspoke, which might have happened, it would seem that, at that time, the club's policy was to let these three players' contracts run, if they don't sign new deals. As others have mentioned, if there was an opportunity, it would've made sense to at least sell one, to recoup a fee. I really don't think finances will be the only priority for Lenihan and Co. Amari'i Bell left Rovers this summer and is now, seemingly, a regular player for Luton who may well finish above Rovers. Regardless of finances, Rovers have not shown, for some time, any progress on the pitch. Edit: To correct, as pointed out by Roversfan99, I stated that Bell had rejected a contract offer from Rovers before leaving. But, just checking again, as far as I can see, that wasn't the case and that he was released.

I'm sorry to hear that. I recall he got a bad injury at Rovers when meant he needed nose reconstruction surgery after a sickening collision, a few years ago. On another note, Jason Steele played for Brighton in their league cup loss on penalties to Leicester. He had a poor game, it seems, though, it might be harsh to fault him too much here as I think he rarely plays. However, he seems to have a charmed life as a goalkeeper, as his standard has not been particularly impressive for years.

From the line-up, it looked as if we started with 3-5-2 and then switched to four at the back when Brennan came on. Anyone know if this was the case?

Sad to read that Zak Gilsenan suffered an anterior cruciate ligament injury whilst on international youth duty with Ireland. Hope he can come back from it. As for the U23 game versus Liverpool, I think the loanee attacking trio should be involved and some other fringe players to try to build their confidence and form. Maybe, even van Hecke, for the fitness. I was surprised to read the quote from Mowbray: “I had a difficult discussion with Jan Paul this week about how he had to sit on the bench because we were planning on playing this game with a different shape against these particular opponents." I don't want to read too much into a single sentence quote without full context and I'm sure van Hecke will improve with games, but he shouldn't be expecting a starting place at the moment.

I'm concerned to read news that police are investigating after an anti-PIF/Saudi regime/Premiership bosses banner was unfurled by Palace fans in their game against Newcastle. Croydon Met Police have said they they “received a report of an offensive banner displayed by Crystal Palace fans”. They added: “Officers are assessing the information and carrying out inquiries. Any allegations of racist abuse will be taken very seriously.” Whilst there's no suggestion yet of any charge being brought against the Palace supporters group responsible for the protest, Holmesdale Fanatics, the fact that this is even being commented upon by police in these terms and investigated is a threat to free speech. The poster features a cartoon man in traditional Saudi male costume wielding a sword and clearly identifies the character as representing PIF, the Saudi-backed organisation that has bought out Newcastle. It also targets the Premier League by listing widely acknowledged Saudi regime human rights' abuses under the heading of "Premier League Owners Test". The banner is accurate in its accusations against the Saudi regime, down to the symbol of execution, as Saudi Arabia does perform executions. By clearly labelling the Saudi male character with "P.I.F" on his midriff, the banner very obviously seeks to avoid a generalisation aimed at Saudi or Arab males and specify the target to the organisation and its backers, including the crown prince ruler of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman (MBS). In fact, the Saudi character representing PIF on the banner may well be intended to be MBS. I fear, we are seeing a silencing of free speech and right to protest and debate under extremely weak claims of offensiveness and racism. Even if, as I expect they will, the police don't take this further, the talk of investigation is likely to have a chilling effect on other efforts to publicly comment on the takeover. I disagree with singling out PIF or Newcastle, for whilst it might be the most egregious example of owners connected, in some way, to human rights abuses, it's not the only such case. However, I strongly believe in not just the right but the need to have this debate publicly and to have the free speech right to criticise the Saudi regime and, especially, their UK collaborators, including the government, no matter how much they are investing in the country. Wood26: Perhaps, that could happen in the current format. If sufficient financial gap builds up between the Premiership contenders and the rest? Effectively, then, you'd have a 24/25 club Super League with no relegation, if you treated the Premier League and the top of the Championship together. In a sense, I agree that such is the gulf building up, the European Super League will continue to be pushed. I think the insidious way that it's being done is to expand the Champions's League with more clubs.

The inequality within the Premier League, despite the increased investment all round, is summed up, for me, by the fact that Southampton's current two star players, Broja and Livramento, are Chelsea loanees, in a sense. Livramento might technically be a full Saints player but Chelsea will surely seek to exercise the £25 million buy-back before it expires, if he continues his incredible form. I think Norwich, Leeds and Saints' struggles are showing that competing by playing attacking and passing football, as they are trying to do, is harder than ever given the dominance and strength of the wealthiest clubs.

Khadra, as well as Davenport, haven't made Mowbray's bench lately. There's been no talk of injury or any other reason for enforced absence so I presume it's the managers choice. I disagree with leaving them out. But I expect Mowbray to show he has a plan by continuing to leave them out and persisting with the others. The worst thing to do is to alternate players by fielding them and then excluding them. It confuses and gives no-one a chance to build some form and confidence. A few games ago Davenport came off the bench and then the following week isn't on the bench and then Clarkson is in the team. If Mowbray has the courage of his conviction, he'll give Clarkson a run, rather than vacillating. I hope we see a defender on the bench. We can't expect Johnson to be back-up, as he has been. Edit: Thanks chaddyrovers for the info that Khadra has been out with illness. I suppose, then, he will be on the bench rather than Poveda, though, I'd like to see him start in a 442.

I'd hope that the next manager was appointed as part of a plan for the club based on rebuilding and surviving (even, thriving). I don't what that strategy would be exactly, but, with the Premier League being carried into the inflation stratosphere by wealthy owners and Brexit, I believe, potentially affecting overseas recruitment (I have very little knowledge on free movement at the moment, but this is what I understand), the richest picking for lower level clubs with be in young Irish and British players. I'd like Rovers to rekindle their youth scouting in Ireland and Scotland, where, in the past we've found some talent. Disaffected Premier League fringe players would also be an area to add to the first team. And, if we can also have international scout looking out for the next Kaminski, ready-made for the first team, that would add greatly to the team. This is just a small aspect of a potential strategy but, if we have a developed plan along these lines, we can attune the criteria for a manager accordingly. I'd even be tempted to try and bring back Billy Barr, in some senior capacity, given the job he did with the U23s. Alternatively, Damien Johnson as assistant manager, to provide that link with the youth set-up. Edit: An active youth-senior progression strategy is important too, even if, simply to raise transfer fees. Blackpool actually paid money for our ex-reserve strike Joe Nuttall. I suspect it was not just for his Rovers U23 goals - but also, because he had Rovers senior caps.

I wouldn't write off Armstrong. He has pace and positional intelligence and a powerful strike, which are all important attributes. I seem to remember that he struggled at times with Rovers, especially, when starting out in a wide role in our team. Borja is an exceptional talent, so I suspect Armstrong might have to sit it out for a while, if they go with one forward but he'll be in the goals eventually, I guess. And, the homecoming to Newcastle might eventually happen, if he does start scoring.

As an increasingly pessimistic fan, I would be interested to know, do others really want to see Rovers in the lucrative cartel that is the Premier League, without a mega-rich investor owner? Obviously, it would be a huge financial boost but, the cost of players to try to compete would also be astronomical - and even more so as inflation is likely to continue to rise with the latest oligarchs investing. Even then, Rovers would likely be humiliated every other game and get relegated. Efforts to stay up would likely necessitate resort to ultra negative tactics, only to delay the inevitable. It may be the best model for Rovers to try to follow Norwich and Fulham and be a "parachute payment" club that jumps up and down but a season of humiliation in the Premier League barely interests me. Perhaps, I'm being overly pessimistic, for Brentford fans might be quite satisfied at the moment, suggesting that you can compete with the right style. But, I suspect, they will only enjoy it for a season or two. Obviously, these thoughts are far removed from Rovers reality, which is not really in the promotion mix. Edit: I suppose occasionally getting into the Premier League and absorbing the financial injection is a pre-requisite for staying competitive in the Championship and long-term survival as a club. So the answer must be yes to the Premier League, despite everything.

I'm going to add to the negativity, so apologies. However, our first team are performing dreadfully and, meanwhile, our U23s' top scorer has just gone off on a 1 month loan to non-league FC United. It doesn't bode well for our future, at all.

Poor choice by Mowbray not to have a defender on the bench, again. If a CB gets injured or fatigued, then the team will be in trouble. Edit: The team may have to shift to 4 at the back, if it happened.

I'm not sure if there will be any club to pay a transfer fee for Lenihan, Nyambe, Rothwell or Chapman in January, when you merely wait awhile for a free. (Nyambe turns 24 this December, so, as I understand it, that rules out any compensation should he leave on a free). The club would have been wise to sell one of them in the summer - or last - perhaps, Rothwell, who, to my mind, is the least vital to the side, though, now a regular. That's assuming anyone would want to buy him for a real fee, which is no guarantee. Earlier this year, Mowbray said that if the players didn't sign on, they'd see out their contract. Now he is talking about potential sales in January. It seems that there has been no real planning. If anything, the club should be thinking about the next potential batch of exits, in Kaminski and Brereton. I note, also, that Mowbray keeps talking about the pandemic affecting clubs ability to pay transfer fees. I understand the sums paid for Aynsley Pears and Stergiakis are likely comparatively low but the fact remains that in 2020, we did pay reported undisclosed transfer fees for these new signings.