It's not clear from what Mowbray said as to whether the contract has been terminated. You would think so, but it could conceivably be the case that Holtby is now on paid leave, if he has a basic salary. I don't understand why Holtby was on the bench for Huddersfield. Mowbray has stated he wants to give young players a chance like Buckley and yet, has not started him lately, and would rather leave a gap on the bench than put someone like McBride, Burns, Butterworth, Whitehall, Garrett or Barnes there. On a different note, I'd be glad to know the last time a veteran ex-Prem 'star' or from top tier football elsewhere, player succeeded at Rovers. To varying extents, Holtby, Danny Murphy, Stewart Downing and Peter Whittingham have been relative flops. It makes me wonder whether the style of play in the modern game makes it harder for such players to make an impact in the lower leagues late in their careers.

Tyler Magloire is getting game time at Motherwell but has not impressed the fans it seems, so far. He seemed to be at fault for a free header, after Motherwell had failed to stop a cross, in their Scottish Cup QF defeat to Hibs. Hoping he does improve as we might need him and Carter next season.

Nice to win but rather empty given our league position and form and the fact some of our better performers likely won't stay next year. Moreover, Huddersfield's risk taking at the back, with lack of numbers getting back seemed reminiscent of our defending in recent times. Their goalie was at fault for a few. Hopefully, we may be approaching a settled side with Rothwell (who got an assist with a right footed corner) playing in an attacking mid role, covered by Travis and one other. I would keep Bell in the team. His confidence is likely low given his being left out so often and he was weak for their first goal but he at least has pace compared to Douglas.

It makes no sense to continually drop Bell out of the match day squads and then bring him into the team. He's already struggling and now his confidence must be very low, making a good performance even more difficult. Then, add the fact that Gallagher is likely to be his main protection against opposition winger and full back - and you have a recipe for difficulties and, invariably, Bell will get a lot of blame. In the last match, Holtby, was dropped out of the match day squad and Mowbray said it was to give young lads like Buckley a chance to be on the bench. Yet, Holtby is back on the bench today. His commitment and confidence will no doubt have been affected negatively. Though, I suppose, given his age, injury problems and his likely departure, he probably will not be affected as much. Also - there are 5 central midfield options on the bench, if you include Bennett. No striker (Dolan and Elliot aren't strikers). These matches are a perfect opportunity to give game time to McBride or, even, one of the other reserve forwards who have done very well this year.

It looked like a 4-4-2 to me, but, I must say, wasn't the clearest camera angle. It looked like Butterworth and Burns up top. Cirino does look promising from what I've seen. On the other hand, Pike stands out as strong and with the physique of someone older but on the ball, he hasn't impressed me and defensively looks a bit slow. But, I do accept that I haven't seen anywhere near enough to reach a definite judgment. If he is 5 '8, might explain why he's right back rather than centre back. Edit: Watched more of the match recording and correct myself, it was a 4-3-3 type formation - but in effect, the way that Durrant, especially, and Butterworth, tracked back, it was often a 4-5-1. I think that is the way the formation should be played, with a disciplined 4-5-1 off the ball.

Watched the first half, in which Rovers were the stronger team, though, from the reports, Liverpool came back into it in the second. It's a scrappy game with not a lot of playing through the midfield and relying, more on direct balls, which seems to be our style. It seems quite effective and is not the aimless hit it to the big man (there being no big man) but trying to find Sam Burns who takes up clever positions and holds the ball up quite well for a relatively small, stocky player. Interesting that the team seem to play 4-4-2, which will continue to make it harder for any reserve players to adapt to the mess of a formation played by the firsts. That said, it's probably for the best for their development to play in a formation rather than a playground football positional set-up. In the first half, the players that stand out are Sam Burns - a bit of a cross between Dack and Armstrong, though, obviously, not there yet and, I think, perhaps, his shooting needs improvement. Whitehall and Garrett look impressive as a midfield duo, competing and good on the ball. However, with the ball going back to front often, they are not showing their full capability of being on the ball. Barnes in defence looks reliable. Keeper, Stergiakis and full backs, Pike and Cirino disappointed with their distribution. Every time I see Pike, I feel that he is one of the weak links in the team, contrary to hype. He stands out due to his size and his strong challenges but time and again, he looks susceptible to quick wingers and inconsistent passing. I really don't see him making it as a right back, at the moment, but, perhaps, a centre back, with less responsibility with the ball at his feet. That said, he's still young and will develop, so, hopefully, he gets better - and, I must say, I've only seen him on a few occasions on this stream - so not qualified to make definitive judgment. Butterworth didn't get involved much in the first half but, coming back from injury, he'll need time. The team are doing well in what looks like a poor quality league. Liverpool looked very poor in the first half, overall. I'm surprised by this but wonder if it's because their real talent are out on loan around Europe? I would like Rovers to make an effort to mix up the play more and utilise the abilities of Garrett and Whitehall in the middle to pass the ball around. If they want to make it at higher levels, they need to develop this ability.

Agree with RoverDom, above. Without reform and regulation, including fan ownership and representation on boards, things will continue towards the precipice. However, such a move will only happen with a unified fans' movement. If clubs leave for the ESL, more will follow. There will be an ESL 2 and so on, with the next tier of clubs. It is just like the creation of the Premier League, which brought in a new era of inequality, only worse, due to it being formally, a relative closed shop. If a club qualifies somehow to be one of the fodder for the ESL and, presumably, almost guaranteed to go down, two things will happen. They will be grossly enriched, so the Premier League will be even more uncompetitive and, they will look for some way that they can boost their income to compete with the ESL. The apathetic and the supporters of this proposal are asking for the destruction of professional football, including anyone from non-ESL Premier League clubs who fancy being the new Man Utd.

I don't think you're thinking through your defence. This proposed economic coup grabs and reserves a bigger market share amongst a cartel, which will mean most levels of European football, especially, televised or streamed, lose out. The creation of the Premier League, as exploitative as it was, at least reserved a formal meritocracy and distribution and opportunity for the rest of the football league to join them. The economic reality is that it is rigged by wealth but there was some redistribution of wealth allowed by the cup tournaments, the movement of clubs between leagues and collective TV/stream deals.

Ironically, British football needs the people of the rest of the world to help them stop it. If supporters' clubs in China, Australia, the US and so on, joined a boycott of the any new league, that would make the protagonists think. After all, isn't it the streaming/TV deals that is the biggest commercial revenue potential of this idea?

That's an interesting point. The coup clubs have the financial sway because without them, the domestic elite TV/digital money will, I guess, slump and the Prem will need a bailout and massive refinancing. I think - perhaps, the Champ too. I wonder how much the coup clubs need their domestic leagues. I suppose, it would be a huge risk to sever ties, so, perhaps, the authorities do have some leverage. Perhaps, Europe's second tier will feel the need to set up a European Championship...? I hope, globally, fans oppose this. An international campaign is needed to stop it and reform football. It has become grotesquely unequal and unaccountable for years in the UK.

I'm really surprised that the clubs are pushing this so far, knowing their fans will oppose it. Either, they are desperate or it is brinkmanship negotiating tactics to get what they want from the authorities, under the current system. Does anyone know if there is any kind of threat over the current TV/digital deals and their value? I don't know much about it but there's always been rumblings and now there are more markets, has this changed things? Or has the pandemic's effect on finances hastened this 'coup'. Edit; Then, as Plc's, some will be under a legal obligation to maximise profit, regardless of all else.

This may be a way of testing the waters in preparation for a less extreme plan. However, what is not talked about enough is the oligarchy we have now which is making football increasing noncompetitive. Unless a club has a wealthy backer - and, these days, it has to be more than a Jack Walker - what chance do they have in the Premier League? Leicester were exceptional and continue to invest well but they too have wealthy backers in a Thai billionaire family, I believe. As much as I support Rovers, it does cross my mind as to why I should wish them to get into the topflight. There's little chance of doing anything for any length time. The best that can be hoped for is cup success and maybe, sneaking into Europe. Otherwise, it's a case of slogging it out near the bottom of the league with incredibly overpaid and overpriced players taking part in a game riven by fear and dependence on money, which is driving skilful play and risk-taking out of the game. We already have that in the second tier but Premier League is multiplied greatly. The long-term model for any club of Rovers size will be to be a yo-yo club between Premier League and Championship - and that's aspirational. That is all that can be reasonably expected, barring a financial takeover or a Burnley situation with an exceptional manager. And, even Burnley will no doubt be relegated in the near future - perhaps, when Dyche moved on. Reform is needed of the status quo but it's not talked about much.

Nyambe does come very narrow and play like a third CB, at times, I think, because of his pace and the lack of it in the centre backs and left back - but, in this case, he does seem to have come in to pick up an unmarked attacker, so I don't think he was at fault there. When the Rovers centre back rushes out to close down the second cross, Bradley Johnson or Nyambe, should have picked up Lawrence, coming back, I think, from an offside position, but weren't being attentive. I would suggest that Bradley Johnson was most culpable, as he was closest to Lawrence. If anyone saw the game, did Gallagher and Armstrong rotate between the left forward position? It looks like it in a moment in the highlights, but, perhaps, that was just an isolated incident.

I suppose Brett Emerton deserves to be in that team but he was incredibly frustrating for much of his time at Rovers. He lacked something, perhaps, confidence, to run at defenders when, it seemed as if he had the beating of them. He was also inconsistent with his crossing. Then, if he had that in his game, he probably would've been on the Damien Duff level and not stayed for as long as he did. It's probably why he was more of a wing back or right back before he joined Rovers. On Tugay, he was superb for us, at times. I seem to remember a European cup game when he helped Rovers play Celtic off the park. (We went on to lose the tie in the second leg, I think). However, whilst he deserves to be remembered as a hero - we mustn't forget that he gave the ball away a lot, when not on form. A bit like Gamst - his "Hollywood" moments were talked up and he deserves a lot of praise for his natural talent, but he was not immune from heavy criticism from Rovers fans and, I do think we sometimes remember them by forgetting this.

I suspect he won't break into the Liverpool side but will have a very good career. Just needs the right team and formation, which, I have a feeling, allows him to play deeper, in a Beckham-esque type position or, maybe, in central midfield, with a bit of time to play a pass and options to pass to. He has linked up, at times, with Armstrong, from deep, playing a raking pass through the defence.

I had a look at a Shrewsbury forum and it's not clear to me why he's been on the bench recently. Their fans rate him very highly, describing him as one of the most gifted players at the club in a while. However, there are a few mentions of his attitude and an incident of refusing a handshake from management on being subbed. Then, Chapman acknowledged that his fitness was short a few weeks ago, with some fatigue, after playing a number of games consecutively. He's played as a No.10, it seems, centrally, hence the regular goals. It seems the Shrews have a few options in that area. However, the team seems to have been struggling of late. They seemed to have tried him as both as part of a midfield three and, more recently, as a second forward. It's clear they want their club to sign him but expect him to move elsewhere. (And not happy that Mowbray described scoring 'a few goals for Shrewsbury' in League One as being next to meaningless as an indicator for the Champ, which is "a million miles" up.)

Full back has become, perhaps, the most important and the most difficult outfield position in the era of 4-3-3. You're expected to be Cafu, virtually being able to be in two places at the same time. And, if your defensive midfielder isn't helping you out, then, it's nigh on impossible, I think. Which makes me think that Pickering, next year, will struggle if we continue to play as we do.

The illogicality of our team system meant that, based on the highlights, Bradley Johnson was, often, the one supporting Adam Armstrong in the forward line, as Gallagher was on the left wing. Johnson did nearly score - but it would be preferable to have a specialist forward in that role. We saw what Armstrong's good at, receiving accurate, early passes on the edge of the box and cutting in and having a strike. I think, he'd be best played in a formation with two central strikers. It would free him up to drift and play on the shoulder, rather than having to link play - without having to go too wide, as might be expected if he played as an inside forward. He is a bit like Mason Greenwood, in that he just needs a yard of space to hit a ferocious strike - though obviously not at that level overall.

He really was a great signing by the Allardyce team and spot by whoever identified him as he was playing in an Amiens team that got relegated from Ligue 2 and was bought for £650k, apparently. Would really be interested to know how that signing came about. I wonder if we could have predicted how far he would go, based on his time at Rovers? He was good but he seems to progressed a lot to end up playing for Roma, Seville (winning the Europa League) and Galatasaray and, also, getting into a talented French national squad. I think, if it wasn't for his disciplinary issues, he could've had an even better career and, possibly, played for one of the very top clubs in Europe.

I do not think 4-3-3 can reliably work with our current set of players. As a gamble, I would be tempted to field a 3-5-2, with Nyambe and Bell in the wing back roles and Trybull, Buckley and Elliot or Rothwell as the midfield three and Gallagher and Armstrong as forwards in a central role. Alternately, a 4-5-1 - with Gallagher as the target man and Armstrong on the bench. I don't think Armstrong can play as the lone forward in our team, especially, in the form they're in. And, definitely, agree that McBride should be on the bench with a view to getting some minutes.

Reece James was close to signing for Rovers on loan, a few years ago, apparently, but it didn't happen as he wanted assurances of starting. Well, that is what Mowbray said in an interview - in which he critiqued loan signings: “Rather than you pay the wages or part of the wages of a loan player who goes back to their parent club with an increased value and it’s all win-win for them really whereas you are £1m out of pocket....When you don’t (achieve your goals) it’s a lot of money spent and it’s not even your own player. So you try and recruit your own players, polish them up and create an asset value for the future.” On a different note, the rigid narratives that people create around players was yet again clearly shown by the commentary on BT Sports during the Bayern vs PSG match. Bayern's Choupo-Moting, deputising for Lewandowski, missed a couple of half-chances and finally scored a glancing header from the centre of the penalty box, more-or-less. Later, Thomas Muller, scored a virtually identical header but, perhaps, slightly more difficult, given that the cross from the right had less pace on it. The commentators for the Choupo-Moting goal: "He's not going to miss that. Quality ball in - it's begging to be headed in..." By contrast, when Muller scores in almost the same fashion: "...and he just guides it beautifully..." and use of several superlatives referring to Muller's career. Of course, Muller has been the far greater player but the failure to give due credit to Choupo-Moting for a good header, perfectly guiding a whipped cross, seems to be more than just petty, but an example of embarrassing lack of objectivity. Of course, we see it the other way when highly-rated players do something basic and are praised to the heavens.

Just thought I'd highlight this moment from the match highlights. It's when we're 2-0 down. From what I can tell, Kaminski kicks it long, as you see the ball drop from high, and then, in the highlights, the Bournemouth player wins the header centrally and his team go down the field to almost score a third. I qualify by saying that I have no experience in setting up a football team at any level. However, based on how I've seen other teams play with three forwards, when attacking, they sometimes go two v two at the back, with the full backs pushed up as if wing backs or wingers. At least one defensive midfielder drops in centrally to pick up anyone in the No.10 position and to be in touch with the defence in case of counter attack. The three forwards press the opponents backline and, at least one tries to pull out wide, to stretch the play. With our team, Douglas does not really go wide here, presumably, because he lacks confidence or pace to get back in time. The RB, I think it's Nyambe, though Bennett came on, is does not pull wide, either, rather taking up an almost third centre back role. Perhaps, it's because Lenihan wants to be the sweeper and, perhaps, doesn't trust himself one vs. one. The inside forwards (might by Gallagher and Buckley, but not sure) aren't competing for the header or stretching the play in any way. They seem unsure of where to position themselves, resulting in three forwards in the No.10 area, with Armstrong alone up top. Admittedly, this is at two down, when the formation is going to become irregular as players push up, with not much to lose, and, it's from a possible goal kick, but, nonetheless, I think it's a snapshot of some of the positional and tactical shortcomings of the team. I stand corrected by any reasoned defence of this formation, however, being, as I say, a novice with tactical understanding. Edit: Maybe not mentioned but Bournemouth's second goal was classy - a pirouette to evade a lunging Nyambe, I think, by a player and then the forward nutmegs Lenihan, before scoring. It wasn't great defending but, I'd credit the attackers for that one.

This might be Mowbray's last 'big' job, that is, with a relatively 'established' Championship club. I think, after successive capitulations in his managerial jobs, the shine he had from his West Brom management days, when they, I believe, got promoted into the Premiership playing attractive football, will have long faded. In the least, he will be out of a job for some time, when he does leave, before he is in the running for any upper tier manager job. Moreover, I think his repeated references in the above post-match interview to getting players to "understand" the game, might be a form of sublimation (wild speculation on my part, I concede) and a way of saying that he doesn't understand the game anymore. The game has evolved (not necessarily for the better, in my view), teams are playing with three in the middle, often, and Mowbray hasn't worked out, this season, how to replicate it or counter it. The results of having strikers out wide, defending at full back or swinging in crosses, unsuccessfully, has been embarrassing but not unusual. There is no forward planning. Today, we had four central midfielders (five, if you include Bennett) on the bench. Some of them, likely, won't be here next season. It makes little sense, except, as a favour to senior players or a hapless lack of foresight. Mowbray out isn't enough - it has to Mowbray-ism out. That is, tactical confusion, old pals acts with signings, impetuousness and lack of planning and building of the squad. The sad truth is, Mowbrayism is an endemic part of the English game, so picking a new boss will not be simple. Edit: I should acknowledge that he did get Rovers promoted from League 1 and that will be a positive in his CV when it comes to looking for roles in the future. Might make him attractive to an aspiring League 1/2 side, perhaps.

McBride should be on the bench, instead of one of the four central midfield players.

Ah, yes, I read something about that on his Wiki page. Allegedly, whilst a Juve player at the start of his career, Luciano Moggi insisted Grabbi change his agent to be represented by Alessandro Moggi, his son, and when Grabbi refused, Luciano Moggi warned in the form of a hint that his Juventus career was effectively over. (Ravel Morrison alleges similar conduct by Allardyce, at West Ham, being asked to change agents and then being sent on loan, as if be retribution - though Allardyce denies it). Grabbi went on a number of loans, including at Serie C Modena, where he scored a lot of goals, and then, in 1998, got a transfer to Ternana. What is fascinating to read on Grabbi's Italian Wiki page is the terrible injury record he had. Apparently, at Juve, he suffered from the rare Ledderhose foot disease, from what I read, causes the build up of tissue mass in the foot which affects the ability to bend the foot. Apparently, at times during his career, he had difficulty walking. He had successful surgery, apparently, as a youngster at Juve, but the problem resurfaced, allegedly, near the end of his career - and, by one site I read - during his successful time at Ternana, from where Rovers purchased him. Looking at some Italian sites, he supposedly had numerous foot surgeries and had a number of knee injuries as well, causing him to consider retiring early. These reports are repeated on a number of Italian language sites, which lends some credibility, though, of course, I can't be sure how accurate they are. It does suggest that there was a lot about Corrado Grabbi that Rovers fans didn't know about. I think it's worth pointing out too, that, though Grabbi did have a track record of scoring in Serie C and with Ternana, when he scored some 20 goals in a season, he not only was playing in a front three alongside future Italian national team striker, Miccoli, but he also scored a fair number of penalties and some free kicks.