We went in The Arkles near Anfield last time and it was pretty good. In fact, I think you were there as well!! If I remember rightly you spent most of the time "playing" with Waggy jnr.

I'd be delighted with that - I'd take it now no problem. Given that Savage will probably be unfit, Bothroyd is definately unfit, Dickov may be unfit and Gally isn't up to it, the line-up could be unusual on Sunday. And do we bring Todd back? It would be harsh on Mokoena who I thought played well yesterday.

I realise you've got to stick up for Bothroyd as you've championed him in the past but the only thing he "troubled" last night was the Rovers fans collective patience. He looked disinterested to me and his first touch was abysmal. Whether that was due to the injury or not is hard to tell because he looked exactly the same the last time I saw him play. I agree with you that Gally isn't up to it at the mo but to give up on him completely would be silly. He's got the touch and technique in his locker to be a useful player for us, he's just off form. Like all young players he's inconsistent but will get better with time. And like most of our strikers, he'd look a lot better playing alongside a target man or someone with real pace.

I'm 33 years old and I've never seen us lose to Burnley. According to the history books we've lost 5 times to them during my lifetime - but they all occured before I was 8 and I didn't see them. We lined up with the same team that played at Burnley except Mokoena replaced the suspended Todd. That meant Gallagher started up front again - something I wasn't too pleased about beforehand - but it also meant that Savage and Dickov were fit. The game started poorly, it was just a scrap to be honest, and neither team could get the ball down and pass it for any length of time. Burnley's 5 man midfield snapped into their tackles and closed down well, and we didn't show the necessary skill or technique to get past it. Savage managed to get booked after about 3 minutes as well but, watching it again on TV, he was a little unlucky as the Burnley player threw himself onto the floor like he'd been shot. Still, it was a daft, late challange so early in the game. Slowly but surely though we started to exert some pressure and gradually gained control of the game without ever looking brilliant. A period of sustained pressure around the half hour mark saw us win a corner and, via a couple of clearances and a blocked shot from Emerton, the ball fell to Tugay about 35 yards out. He controlled the ball, moved forward a few yards, and hit a decent low shot towards goal. The ball headed straight towards Burnley's Micah Hyde on the edge of the box and, instead of standing tall and blocking it, he tried to shy away and the ball deflected off him into the corner of the net. Ewood rejoiced. Unfortunately though, instead of kicking on and going for the kill, we appeared to sit back and looked like we were playing for half-time. Burnley seemed to sense this and had their best spell of the game. A period of pressure resulted in a throw in to Burnley near the corner flag, an exchange of passes while our defenders looked on seemingly uninterested, and a cracking turn and shot from the corner of the area by Micah Hyde. Boy did he make up for his softness earlier - it was a terrific goal. Burnley went in at half-time bouncing, we looked deflated. Flitcroft came on for Savage at half-time which I guess means that Savage's groin injury is worse than the club are letting on. I'd be surprised if he plays at Everton this weekend. The second half was crap really. We had most of the possession but lacked the creativity or skill to do anything with it. Burnley worked their socks off, passed the ball around neatly in midfield when they did have it, but created absolutely nothing. Not a sausage. Bothroyd came on for Gallagher after an hour, and then went off again fifteen minutes later presumably injured. He contributed nothing during that time. In the meantime we continued to squander possession and run into blind alleys whenever we reached the final third. Emerton in particular put in one of his frustrating performances. Our only threats came from set pieces and Pedersen's delivery. Nelsen could, and perhaps should, have scopred twice from free headers. Sadly though he headed one straight at the keeper and headed the other into the ground and over the bar when it seemed easier to score. Just when it seemed inevitable that extra time would be needed along came Pedersen. He'd switched wings with Emerton about ten minutes earlier and, when fed a ball down the right channel, he attempted a cross. The ball was blocked by Sinclair, Pedersen beat a tired-looking Burnley defender to the rebound, and then lashed a fantastic right-footed shot into the roof of the net from an acute angle. Their keeper got his hands to it but it was hit with such venom that it would be harsh to criticise him. If Ewood rejoiced after Tugay's goal this time the fans had kittens. I particularly enjoyed MGP's celebration right in front of the Darwen End, and I'm sure the Burnley hoardes appreciated it as well!! For the last five minutes we started to play like the Harlem Globetrotters, all neat passes and fancy flicks. Burnley looked, understandably, dead on their feet and Emerton should really have capitalised and got a third goal. Still, no matter, we won. OK, here's the credit to Burnley paragraph. They worked their socks off and their system, five men in midfield and full-backs who rarely venture past the halfway line, means they are difficult to break down. For much of the game they contained us comfortably, looked as neat on the ball as we did, and defended what little we did create well. Thanks to their work-rate and tenacity they didn't really deserve to lose the game and it would have been fair if it had gone to extra time. But that's what separates Premiership and Championship sides. Premiership teams have players like Pedersen who can produce that moment of class when it really matters to change a game. Our defence was great throughout. Mokoena looked much more composed alongside a commanding centre-half like Nelsen, and Nelsen was just fantastic. What a player we may have. He won everything, was a threat at every set piece, and used the ball intelligently most of the time. He cost us nothing! Tugay was closed down quickly and struggled to cope most of the time. Savage did ok without being his usual self - clearly the injury, and I suppose the early booking, hampered him. Flitcroft came on and was solid enough but gave the ball away as well. Emerton was back to his annoying best and MGP, while being our biggest threat (mainly at set-pieces), didn't impose himself enough for me. Cracking winner though and I wouldn't mind now if we named a stand after him! Dickov was disappointing up front, his control let him down time and time again, and Gallagher just wasn't good enough - again. I guess Hughes has decided to give Gally a run of games but it's just not working. Stead and Jansen are far bigger threats and need to be brought back into the squad for the Everton game. It was a cup-tie and the result is all that really matters. Burnley fans will go away saying they matched us on the pitch, outsung us in the stands, and will be playing us in the Premiership within a year or two. The truth is that, while Burnley did indeed match us for most of the time on the pitch, they only created one chance in 180 minutes of play - and that was a wonder strike. In terms of singing, we out-sung them for much of the first half until they scored, and they out-sung us for much of the second-half until we scored. The atmosphere at Ewood was far better than the Turf Moor atmosphere imo. And Burnley will not get promoted until they increase the depth of their squad and add more flair to their midfield. The bottom line is that we're still the Pride of Lancashire and we're in the quarter finals of the FA Cup.

Don't talk to me like I'm some sort of numpty. My maths is fine thanks and just because I disagree with your opinion doesn't make me instantly thick. I'm not saying that the club could have met the total demand on Tuesday, I'm saying they could have done more than they did. And the same for Wednesday and the same for Thursday. Now, either argue in an intelligent way or feck off to the official message board with the other numptys. Ouch....must have touched a raw nerve there Scotty... Anyway if you are such a mathematical hot-shot perhaps you could explain to us how you would have managed a situation in which you had a limited number of input ports (say for arguments sake ten) and a twitchy customer base in excess of ten thousand? And for an encore perhaps you could feed the five thousand peolple on that hill over there with these couple of fishes and a loaf of bread! Dead easy ES. A few more staff plus a few extra hours. Dead easy - no fishes allowed.

Don't talk to me like I'm some sort of numpty. My maths is fine thanks and just because I disagree with your opinion doesn't make me instantly thick. I'm not saying that the club could have met the total demand on Tuesday, I'm saying they could have done more than they did. And the same for Wednesday and the same for Thursday. Now, either argue in an intelligent way or feck off to the official message board with the other numptys.

Because Rovers didn't anticipate the demand for tickets. I know it's hard for some people to accept, but occasionally the club get things wrong. It's not the end of the world, but I think it's useful to point out when it happens.

Couldn't agree more. And I think the ticket office normally do a great job. I just think they got it wrong this time.

I see the rational debate couldn't continue and you've descended to your usual level. If the club had been proactive there wouldn't have been the same amount of problems there were on Tuesday, Wednesday & Thursday. Fair play to the club for extending their hours, but they should have done that from the off.

And yet initially it seems Rovers did absolutely nothing different to meet that demand. From the outside it looks like they were prepared to let their normal processes and procedures handle the situation - processes and procedures that are normally used to handling no more than 5000 sales a week. It doesn't take a lot of foresight to see that something extra was required in this case. A few extra operators, longer opening hours, on-line ticketing, whatever. Unfortunately though it looks like Rovers have reacted to the demand rather than been proactive, and if that prevents even a single fan attending the game that otherwise would have then it's one fan too many.

We normally have about 18-20k home fans for an average league game. There's no way there will be any less than that for this game. The only question is whether we can sell the extra 4-5k tickets.

Personally, I find it far more annoying when posters take any criticism of the club as some sort of personal insult. There have been many legitimate points made in this thread by Jim and others - to brand them as "moaning" is insulting and slightly pathetic. There are obviously a lot of fans who don't normally attend games who want a ticket for this one. Rovers need to be doing all they can to ensure that (1) they get a ticket, and (2) the experience doesn't put them off wanting to get another one. The club simply cannot afford to put off these fans, these are the fans that we need to attract back regularly if we are to grow as a club. In addition, there are many season ticket holders who are struggling to get their tickets. I'm lucky that my work is relaxed enough at the moment that I can spend an hour on the phone to the ticket office. If it wasn't I'd have been struggling as I live in manchester and would have had to take time off to get to Ewood - or risk not getting my own seat at the weekend. The club seem to have been initially caught out by the demand for this game. They've responded now by extending the TO opening hours but why didn't they see this coming originally? Why weren't additional measures put in place straight away? The demand for a potential replay should have been obvious the second we drew Burnley.

But I'll say again, if we don't sell out because people can't get tickets then the club need to ask themselves whether they've done all they can to sell them. The club cannot afford to put people off attending Ewood - even if it is for a one-off game.

But we have drawn Burnley and consequently demand for tickets is high. The complaints were that the club weren't doing enough to allow fans to get the tickets, something the club have obviously recognised and have now extended the ticket office opening hours in an attempt to cope. As has been pointed out several times, the home cup ticket scheme is not appropriate for everyone, whether the reason be cost or simply that people don't know in the summer whether they'll be able to make the games.

I don't think taking your clothes off is going to make the phone lines go any quicker.

The problem with that attitude though is that you think the fans should be doing all they can to get tickets from the club, when the reality of the situation is that the club should be doing all it can to allow us to buy tickets. Comparing us to other big clubs isn't valid as they sell out every week. We don't, so the club should be doing everything it can to make it as easy as possible to buy tickets. I know the cup ticket scheme is in place but not everyone wants to, or can, commit to that in the summer. I didn't because I wasn't sure whether I'd be able to make games because of work etc. Anyway, if we sell out on Tuesday all this becomes pointless. If we don't, and there are people without tickets who wanted them, then the club has dropped a b0llock.

CUP TICKET SCHEME!!!! SOME PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO BE ON IT

As I said before though, if there are people who want to go but can't get tickets then the club are just losing money - something we can't afford to do. The second the 5th round draw was made arrangements should have started to be put in place to deal with the possibility of a replay. One of these arrangements should have been to ensure that all possible demand for tickets was met as much as possible. I'm not sure that's been done so far.

That's the point isn't it. For once, the club have the prospect of a virtually sold out stadium for the Burnley game. If that doesn't happen because people can't get hold of tickets then the club need to take a serious look at their ticketing arrangements. At the end of the day the club are just stopping themselves from making money.

You're joking. You? You had an argument?? People in glass houses....

I once met Gerald Ashby's daughter on a night out - she was going out with a work colleague of mine at the time. We spent the whole night arguing about that decision. She defended her dad to the last and I, as tactfully as possible, pointed out why I thought her dad was a complete tool. I think I'm right in saying that he's dead now.

That forum just makes your fellow Burnley fans look stupid. Your arguments are obviously starting to show the strain if that's the best you can come up with.

The whole day was a bit of an anti-climax to be honest. The atmosphere was nothing like as good as the last meeting at Turf Moor. Our support seemed as flat as pancakes for most of the game. Too many day-trippers this time around. There was even a large section of our support sat down for the whole match. But Longsider and his numpty mates can have no room to crow as Burnley's support was worse. They only ever reacted to our songs and hardly ever seemed to start their own chants, and when they did sing we could hardly hear them and easily drowned them out. Ewood will be better next week. The match was completely lacking in quality. On a bog of a pitch neither side could pass the ball well enough to create chances and both teams cancelled each other out. We were marginally the better team in the first half, they were marginally the better team in the second. We did, however, have the only real clear-cut chance of the game, but Dickov missed it. After saying that I was reluctantly impressed by Burnley. They tried to play football and reminded me of us - good in defence, neat in midfield, complete lack of cutting edge up front. They are a much better side than the team we met last time around. We defended very well when we had to and restricted Burnley to nothing more than half chances. Nelsen in particular looked top quality again. I also thought Neill had a good game for once. We lost the midfield battle at times against Burnley's extra man but held our own for the most part. Savage was immense again and was our man of the match. Tugay frequently disappeared and both wide men had good spells but flattered to deceive most of the time. We were poor up front again. Gallagher was terrible and looked out of his depth, and Dickov worked hard but failed to hold the ball and link up play well enough. Why was Johnson the only attacking option on the bench? Where was Stead or Jansen? We were poor today but we didn't lose and we're still in the cup. I've no doubt we'll play better in the replay on a proper pitch with our home crowd behind us. The question is can Burnley play better? I'm not sure they can but I guess time will tell.

More press: Observer Independant on Sunday

There you go. Yet more press.