Personally, while not disagreeing with the comments on his touch and pace, I think many are ignoring his strengths. On the rare occasions when he did have the ball under control, he was hard to shake off e.g. WHU and WBA goals. But his biggest strength was the flick-on header, of which he was the best I have seen at Ewood since Duncan McKenzie. Something Bellamy profited from for several of his goals.

While there are good reasons in isolation for Bellamy, Kuqi and Dickov to have left, the fact remains that collectively, 29 of last season's goals have to be replaced (plus probably 8 of MGP's at this rate) So the question as to whether or not the replacements will rustle up 37 goals is a valid one given what we have seen so far.

We were very much in the game for 80mins which boded well I thought. The Bentley Emerton combo looked very good, as did Neill at LB and Gally when he came on. Hard to judge the front two against such high class opposition, but I was impressed how McCarthy controlled the ball for his chance. Theirs was a blatant penalty wheras ours was just a penalty, so that was the difference for me. Not fair by the bok, but then we don't want to see 20 penalties a game either. Need to start winning though; while being bottom after 3 games doesn't make us relegation favourites, it's still bottom.

Most heart-breaking for me was Liverpool's equaliser, via Super-Atko's left-footed shank, in the late 80's cup game at Ewood. Most damaging I suppose would be Forest's winner at Ewood in the relegation season - that was the goal that signalled we were going down.

Rovers 2 Chelski 3

Rovers 1 Everton 2

That's not a problem with marketing strategy, but with people, or it may just be a mismatch of expectations. Do the club even know he is unhappy? And anyway, BRFC is not Proctor & Gamble; if they have any professional marketing staff at all, those people are not likely to be breathtakingly good. Nor does the football industry come close to embracing the concept of marketing: a good marketing strategy aligns all aspects of the business behind meeting consumer needs based on compelling insights - don't make me larf! Rovers need to focus on selling the impressive facilities bequeathed by Jack and then exceeeding expectations to those they have sold to, with emphasis on the latter. If they aren't doing either of those, they need better leadership in the commercial dept, not a new marketing strategy.

Couldn't agree more. Since the clubs have been enthusiastic participants in training supporters to enjoy watching football on telly via the last 15 yeras or so of Sky deals, they should not be surprised that enterprising landlords want to access that market by testing the limits of the spurious regional copyrights. It being OK to watch a Rovers home game in the pub if it's screened by Sky, but not if it's beamed over by Al Jazeera does not support Mr William's complaint, which I find hypocritical in the extreme.

Didn't Clayton and Duggie have a joint one at the end of the 68-69 season?

Totally agree. But when did football clubs ever think beyond the end of next week? Of course the club has a duty to maximise revenue, but the key point being debated is over what time horizon? 36 quid will no doubt be maximising revenue for the first home game, but will such an approach, if continued, be maximising revenue for the season? I think not. Why do Tesco do Buy One Get One Free's when they could sell both at the usual price? To protect and grow their customer base, and revenue, over the long haul. While lower prices don't increase crowds, higher prices do seem to reduce them, as we have seen over the past 5 years. While season tickets may be reasonably priced, they do not appeal to the many fans who won't, for whatever reason, be attending every game. The club won't grow the season ticket base without first growing the walk ons

Justification for the prices tends to go no further than the oft-quoted "among the cheapest in the premiership." But this is irrelevant on two counts. Firstly, it assumes that prices should be comparable, i.e. there is some sort of national market for premiership footy, whereas, apart from maybe Man Yoo, there isn't; it is a series of local markets. It is completely irrelevant what another club charges when they are in a more affluent region with a completely different level of underlying demand. Pricing is the mechanism to balance supply and demand, and given that supply is relatively fixed (we all have the same fixtures and stadium capacities don't change in the short term), pricing should therefore correlate with the level of demand and the ground capacity fill-rate. We have by far the lowest in both. The second reason for ignoring the price comparison justification is that the claim that we need to charge the same to compete for the same players just doesn't stack up when most of our income comes from Sky matches shown, league placing and commercial. A third factor for me is that I do not buy into the view that real fans should turn up regardless when the clubs themselves have conspired to train their customers to accept the perfectly reasonable alternative of following football from home or in the pub. I'm not sure that "being there" is worth the massive price premium over watching remotely, eihter live or delayed, when watching footy in the pub is such an obviously enjoyable experience. It's cheap, you don't have to pre-book, you can sit where you like, you can drink, you can stand up and so on. You simply cannot blame customers who choose not to buy your product or service when you ignore local market conditions.

But they weren't in their pomp until Souness changed things up. Who came in to buy any of them when we went down? Duff was more often that not a round-shouldered back-passer to the LB, Jansen was a ball-hogging show-pony and Dunn had had a very inauspiscious start to his first team career. They all did sod-all in our first year down. I am no fan of the Souness of the latter years, but to deny the impact he had on at least two of those players is re-writing history. I think he will do well with Palace, as he did with us until the Grabbi signing.

I agree with Rev - no other team in the prem would have gone with him as #1 choice striker. Having said that, I quite liked him for a while before I became obsessed with the number of free kicks he gave to the oppostion through his patented reverse grab-around and his complete ignorance of the offside law - at least 10 a game.

Good to see Arsenal in the final, but it was without doubt the worst major game I can remember seeing. It must be a first for a team to have no shots at all in a game. Villarreal had good quality when it can to controlling the ball but were woeful passers and finishers. And that penalty taker had an expression on his face when waiting to take it of "Why me?"

Same here - everyone thinks he is amazing

I think you are right, and it's been increasingly visible for a while. He has started to explore the outer reaches of the area and now makes himself big when facing the shooter. But even so, I was gobsmacked he came to the edge of the area to punch it in the first half; he hasn't done that for years. Fast off his line for the Heskey offside as well. Of course everyone will tell you he was always that good, but I agree with you there clearly has been some serious coaching going on. And why not, or why bother employing a goalkeeping coach? (Is that still Tunks, or does Eddie moonlight from his day job?)

Silly me, it was 70 mins. Poor do tonight. What with no wingers until Peter came on and with Bellamy not scoring stunners, we look lower mid-table. Terrific flick on by Kuqi for our goal though, we looked miles better after he came on. Defending was weak and their winner came from a god-awful clearance by Bentley. 2 points out of 12 in the charge for Europe - how very Rovers

We have been under-whelming again so far. Since our charge for Europe became official we've hardly registered a shot on goal in the last 4 games. I like the look of Bentley playing in the hole - it gives us options to pass the ball up the pitch we don't have with @#/?. Terrible open goal miss by Sutty and another couple of good chances for Brum. Glad Pennant has gone off though. Wouldn't mind him instead of the overgrown Koala Bear lumbering around on the right wing. We're lucky to be evens.

I think Gray is paying the belated price for his debacle at Pompey, and maybe losing his new contract in the process. Emerton's 17th last chance to prove himself tonight - let's see if he can break his habit of reverting from his energetic sub's performance back to the usual lethargic 72 mins and then subbed starting performance. On telly here -Woo-hoo! C'mon lads! Bentley and Bellers a brace each

Coming from the sage who had a teeny weeny hobby horse about Souness, that's a good one! But anyway, irrespective of the technicalities, Rovers do indeed need TV money more than anyone else, but the Premier Leagues grossly distorted differential pricing between domestic and foreign rights in a world where staellite technology is no respecter of national borders will be its undoing. The PL will soon be threatening to prosecute every pub in the country and somewill will decide that the courts system shouldn't be clogged up with this petty problem of their own making. Market forces always win in the long run

I for one am surprised that Sky didn't see this coming, being the innovators of satellite TV. These dodgy channels BOUGHT the feeds fair and square, and to try and impose national boudaries on their footrpint is bizarre when the whole point of satellite is its ability to broadcast far and wide. Unfortunatley for Sky and footy in general, the Murdoch model has been to sell to Johnny Foreigner at the marginal cost of transmission plus a margin. That's why you schlubs pay hundreds of pounds in the UK for the same broadcast matches I get here for $3 a month. I can watch 6 full games a week here for 25p each. You're paying for the Sky money that goes to clubs, I'm just paying Murdoch a bit of jam on top. Sky are pissing in the wind trying to stop it as there is no crime - everyone is paying the asking price. Sky may own copyright but Turkish TV are paying what Murdoch charges, the Jolly Cripple is paying what Turkish TV charges, and the pub punters are paying what the landlord charges for his ale. And of course Rovers get paid a handsome sum when the game gest shown, far more than they lose on the gate. So no surprise that it goes on. I agree with Waggy - fans will be let in for nothing eventually. I can go and see Major League Baseball in Toronto for three quid, even when it's the Yankees or Red Sox in town, because TV fees pay for everything.

Well done Hughes for giving Gray the hook at half-time, and hopefully his contract for next year with it. Also good to take off MGP though 10 mins earlier would have been better. Very surprised that Kuqi didn't come on for @#/?. Half the team didn't turn up today though, so we ain't going to unseat Spurs and/or Arsenal that way. Tugay has to come back in and whatever Pongy has done to upset the gaffer, he needs to play the last 4 games (assuming he can't against 'Pool)

Gray awful, Pederson not much better, Dickov doing nowt. There's only Bellamy, Nelson and Brad contributing to the cause so far. No doubt after pumping endless high balls to our diminutive front two, we'll bring Shefki on and start playing it into his feet. C'mon Rovers, it's crunch time

Mexico

Right now, I would gladly swap a tap in and a flick on for all the fancy footwork we displayed at Spurs. Goals win matches and Kuqi has the good habit of slotting them in and laying them on. When presented with chances, he's put away a very decent percentage of them. So what that he can't cross - Bellamy can't head so no loss there. I was much more upset last night that Bentley couldn't cross.