It may have changed, but I doubt it - you can't charge away fans more than your lowest pricing for home fans, regardless of stand. It's to stop them getting milked, or overcharged to keep numbers down. Basically to ensure fair treatment of away fans. Like you say, the prices therefore stay high to maximise profit from away fans and the home fans are just collateral damage.

Thinking that same team could then win a total of 28 on the bounce is beyond the realms of realism though.

Not going to happen.

It was as easy to score as pass though, so the percentages work out fine for me. End of the day, what went wrong is he completely mishit the ball.

I assume we mean the sitter at the end. No striker is passing that, I'd question their goal lust. The problem wasn't that he shot, the problem was it was an easy chance he fluffed terribly. If he had hit a pass with the same level of skill he would have fluffed that too!

You're right, it's not an 'excuse', it's a fact. The lads were fine and a totally legitimate goal was unfairly ruled out. It would have only taken a couple of seconds to see they were fine, that won't change anything for an injured party. And as I said, nobody heard his whistle clearly, so it was also a crap blow. He should have been whistling like a madman well before that ball nestled in the net. 'Advantage' doesn't even come into it, that's an entirely different rule. It wasn't our lad down. If you could get the game stopped the instant a player is holding their head as you suggest (well actually you said 'the minute' which I wouldn't object to), that would be highly exploitable to stop goals. Btw an actual referee on this forum already said it was a bollocks decision. I think the word he used was 'baffling'.

If it was every time a referee had an awful performance, yes. But this is one decision that was a top 3 worst against Rovers in my lifetime IMO, as far as I'm remembering, and that doesn't happen every week. Overall standard is diabolical though and has been for years. I'm sure the first time we came down from the Prem at the end of the 90s the officials actually seemed better than the Prem ones.

I don't think he's that type of tackler, especially for RWB. He excels at nicking the ball off defenders passing it a bit too casually at the back or centre of the park. He can take a risk up there too because if he fails at a tackle it's usually no big deal. That liberty isn't there in defensive areas, so the same gambling could be detrimental. He would also generally be up against more skilful, faster players. Further, I don't think he has the speed for RWB and although he is much stronger than last season he still got brushed off the ball far too easily at least once tonight. I like him just where he is right now, Dack or no Dack.

Hard disagree. He blew way too early, not that anyone even seemed to hear it. It was one of the absolute worst decisions I've ever seen, and it nearly cost us, so it's baffling for me to see someone defend it as though it wasn't even the worst decision he made on the night. Right up there with the Berg red card and the Tevez goal for me. He shouldn't be allowed to referee at this level again.

Agree with every word. Very good, balanced post.

Don't apologise. The other link was the Daily Fail and I was never going to help them with a click. Glad you posted an alternate site.

It will still be very light though, as with that injury record it's basically signing half a player in squad depth terms.

Probably right they will park the bus. That could be a problem as we are a counter attacking side and this could force a change of game plan. Just have to hope our quality is enough to get through them and we don't get caught on a counter ourselves.

Moreover, they approved the postponement. They would essentially be criticising themselves. Some minor fine is the best that can realistically be expected. If there is a fine it should be distributed to the fans who travelled, but you can bet your arse it wouldn't be. More likely outcome though is nothing.

I think he meant he doesn't care how much we win by as long as we win.

This is literally all I needed to know about him, thanks. It's a resounding 'hell no' from me.

Not a fact whatsoever. In fact it's just wrong as I've seen fans of other teams take notice of him in the past. Not in his best form this season though, granted.

Disagree, though not entirely. But not like we're going to shop top drawer if we go up. I'd anticipate we just elevate our current model and buy some of the better players from the Championship instead of from League One. Probably one or two from Scotland though, yeh, just at the higher end of quality from there. And probably one or two out of contract Premiership players.

That's not the point. The point is that for the past 3 seasons we have consistently scored far more points when we don't have the most possession. It doesn't suit our personnel or our manager to try to dominate possession. Changing from that has been a key ingredient in our upturn in form. The change to a back 3/5 (that actually works this time) has been a factor in our recent form and is really working now, but we were already doing better than we have in most seasons before that change.

Playing possession quite clearly has tons to do with it. The evidence of both eyes and the data is blatant. Even the manager has talked about how our current style suits us.

To an extent. I don't think the problem is that they are desperate to get out of the club though. They're not playing that way. They just want more money on their contract. I think the fear of them leaving in January is more about the club trying to cash in whilst they still have value (and yes, we are stupid enough to do that, Waggott even said that's what we will do in Jan if they don't sign...maybe that picture has changed since our high position, but we all know he is enough of a penny pinching prick to still do it if allowed). My worry has always been us rushing them out to avoid them leaving for free, or them leaving for free in the summer. In either of those scenarios, this incentive changes nothing really. In the scenario that I don't see happening, of them forcing a move in Jan, sure.

Except I should think they will be eligible for it even if they walk for nothing in the summer.

I'm not sure how it incentivises our want out wannabes? Won't they still get the money whether they sign on or not?

Interesting...my mate has just been offered a decent-paying job there, double what I earn. Non-footballing capacity. He knows the owner has that reputation though.

What publication is that in? I don't see how it will make any difference signing on the out of contract players as is implied, as presumably they will get it anyway. Perhaps they mean they won't feel disconnected from the promotion charge, though tbh I wasn't worrying about that. In fact as I said previously I'd have been offering large promotion bonuses in new contract offers, and this seems to negate that possibility, to a meaningful extent anyway. Apart from that, I think it's a very good move if true. Be a shame to lose 10 million as soon as we go up, but well worth it if it gets us over the line to the jackpot in the first place.