You're like some kind of Batty-obsessed Candyman. If people mention left-back (just one time though) you appear and suggest Batty.

Absolutely. Only just turned 22, still time to kick on, wages won't be much, contributes (I'd say we've missed him) and I'm certain he would have a market value. The question is whether he should be given a new contract, and that depends on his wage demands as well as how he performs when he comes back into the team.

Extendable.

Just seen Gally's penalty claim...my god that was blatant! The big giveaway is when the player behind tumbles to the ground as well, it can only mean he has collided. Shocking decision.

I fully expected to see us bottom of that table, but what I find additionally concerning is that apart from the Bristol (14th) win over a month ago, all our points in these 10 games came at home against the other 2 teams with the next worst form. We really are easy pickings at the moment.

No I wouldn't say it is. The owners are shit. They fucked up again. If the manager fails, he was ultimately appointed by the owners and those hired by the owners. If the players aren't good enough, they're the ones the owners signed off on, people the owners appointed scouted and selected, and the owners haven't provided the funding to recruit the better ones we need (or even the numbers, really). It's entirely congruous to blame all parties, as long as the acknowledgement is made that the owners are the ultimate responsible party for this clusterfuck. But no it's not a contradiction to see more than one party has flaws, it's just looking at the full picture. I'd argue JDT is less culpable for his failings due to the lack of support in the transfer market of course. His champagne style is being completely undermined - but he has also lacked the tactical acumen to shore up the side of late by using a different style. Today might have been the first shoots of addressing that, even though it only yielded a point. But the other point you make (no coach could work under this restrictions, but JDT should go) is a bit of a contradiction, not entirely though. For example, it could be someone thinks no manager can bring proper success working under this, but there may be another manager who could achieve better results (ie 12th place rather than what's turning into a relegation fight). Especially since there are signs the players' and manager's heads have dropped. Oftentimes a change sparks a honeymoon period which might at least be enough to make sure we stay up. I'm not advocating that yet, but one can make the argument without it being a contradiction. It's a contradiction if you think the whole reason JDT isn't succeeding is the owners, yet want him to go, but not if you see other issues with him whereby you think another manager could do better (but still not get in the playoffs) under this wanktacular regime.

Let you? I can't exactly stop you. There's nothing wrong with a positive mindset, but a balanced one is better.

Ahhh, the ever reliable positivity train trundles into the station.

No, he said what I already said that he said. I'm not going to keep arguing with you about it though, you've clearly forgotten.

Those actually aren't contradictions, all three can simultaneously be true. Ultimately if the manager and/or players aren't good enough, that all boils down to Venkys.

Give over, he said a lot more than that he turned down strikers on loan. He made claims the owners wanted to spend and they had to be reined in. A couple of times he said there was money left in the kitty but they hadn't seen fit to spend it. Whether he was lying or not is up for debate, or if our whimsical owners changed their minds, but it's hardly a 'nonsensical rumour', it's something the manager repeatedly claimed.

It was Mowbray himself who said he didn't spend money available to him. Repeatedly. Whether it's true or not I think it's fair to criticise him on the basis of something he himself claimed.

Back that up by pointing to an excuse I've made for Tomasson today. You're making shit up.

Absolutely not, in no way, ever, no. NO.

Which of the numerous posters who have asked at the end of this match for him to be sacked are you referring to as giving him a 'free ride'?

Sarcasm? Made two saves all game, one of which was a Leo special (tipping it into the danger area) we were lucky to get away with, and led to the corner they scored from. If that qualifies someone for MOTM then everybody else must have really been gash (including our goalscorer).

Christ, I hadn't noticed but yep we've made all 5 of our subs with over 20 minutes remaining, and 3 players on the pitch who are freshly back from injury, in a game with 2 already off through injury... ...what could possibly go wrong? Can't understand, now that there are 5 changes available, why anyone would make all of them with any more than 5 minutes remaining.

I can't watch this game, so which is it lads?

Guess we'd best hope Chrisene comes good then... This is so typical of following Rovers these days. Good start, 1 up, lots of players back and you become foolishly tempted into thinking maybe we can reignite our season. Then an injury, a goal conceded, penalty appeal waved away and another injury. Both injuries looking bad. Couldn't write it.

It's his first game. You don't think it might be a little too early to call?

Villa fans say he's a better CM than LB. So AML shouldn't be too much of a stretch if he is suited to both those other positions. I'd put it down to being new and inexperienced for now.

You can play zonal but have their most dangerous header of the ball be man-marked by your best defensive header of the ball. It's unacceptable for it to end up being reliant on Pickering in that situation.

If they think what Venkys are going through is hard times, they should try being a Rovers fan under their tenure.

Exactly the sort of thing we didn't need...how come every time some cause for optimism emerges, something shit happens? Hopefully nothing serious, it would be frustrating to start losing players as soon as we've started getting some back.

Aye