where did I say he deserved racist abuse? You didn't. But you did seem to be implying that Yorke deserved what he got because of where he warmed up and the amount of time he took doing it.

It doesn't matter where Yorke warmed up, how long he warmed up for, or what kind of warm up he did. He should not be subjected to racist abuse. Hopefully the culprits have now been caught and will be punished, if guilty, accordingly and we can all move on.

See here McClarky. I'll be in the Eight Bells myself at around 11ish (again, planes, trains etc willing).

Right that's it. Just play him Hughes FFS. Just so the whining can stop for a week. Rover6, we know what you think. You repeat it after every match. Repeatedly. No-one else agrees though, except his agent Cuidado who isn't even a Rovers fan. Reid and Emerton have been our best players in recent weeks. Who are you going to drop? If Reid gets a ban then I guess MGP will get his chance. He'll have to take it or Reid will come back in. But we're not going to drop one of our two form players to let a lightweight youngster in who's shown absolutely nothing yet to deserve a place in the team. God knows why I'm replying though - you don't listen and I'm sure you're just on a wind up anyway.

I don't agree so I'm a girl. Marvellous. Well, if I'm a girl you smell of poo.

Ever considered a sense of humour transplant Scotty? You should. btw You're not 'Marvin the Paranoid Android' are you? If only I could be as funny as you Theno.

Like Tris I'm desperately sad that this has happened. Our name has been tarnished now throughout the country - and it's completely unjustified. Today at work a colleague of mine (a Liverpool fan) "joked" as I approach him: "Watch out - here's the racist!". He meant no harm, it was supposed to be a laugh, he knows I'm not racist, but that's what stupid people who don't know me are going to think now. On a sidenote, another sad consequence of all this is that I have to read the pathetic ramblings of Thenodrog and Blue Phil et al on this board. Normally their mis-guided, yet frequently repeated, views are kept to the ICBINF board where I just tend to ignore them.

I thought Dunn played well yesterday, especially considering it was his first game back after a long lay-off.

The tabloids were always going to jump on something like this and it looks like a couple of low-lifes have handed it to them on a plate. However, this could be an opportunity for the club to lead the way against racism and make a firm stand. If the culprits (assuming the story is true) can be identified and severly punished then Blackburn can claim to have a zero-tolerance against this sort of behaviour and lead the way for other clubs to follow.

Personally, I find these messageboard arguments very childish. You'd never catch me getting into one.

I'm sure I read someone earlier say that midfield was not a problem for Rovers today. Good grief, how badly can you read a game? All Birmingham's goals came as a result of their midfield running past ours into space. Ferguson and Tugay were pathetic defensively in the first half. They may be quality when they have the ball but without it they are a liability. Sorry, had to get that off my chest! Anyway, we started the match like a house on fire. Some terrific football saw Reid attacking down the right (a recurring theme this) and playing a clever low cross into the middle. Dickov's step-over bought enough space for Jansen to smash the ball in and put us 1 up inside 5 minutes. For a while we looked as good as we have all season. We looked confident, knocked the ball around with no small amount of skill, and had the likes of Emerton, Reid and Dickov making driving runs at the Brum defence. Just as I was starting to enjoy myself Birmingham scored from their first real attack. A decent ball to Morrison caught our defence square. His cut-back found its way to Anderton on the edge of the six-yard box who finished easily. Anderton had run 30 yards to get into that position and no Rovers player came even close to tracking him. Suddenly we looked a different team, all our early confidence drained away and we started losing possession and our composure. Birmingham stepped up a gear and got at us down their right. Melchiot ran past McEveley like he wasn't there for Birmingham's second goal, crossed low into the box, Reid ballsed up the clearance, and Savage finished in style. It was noticable how many players Birmingham had in the box compared to us. Again, none of our midfielders (except Reid) bothered to track back. Five minutes later they got their third in an almost carbon-copy manner. Melchiot again ran past McEveley (who'd decided to go on a wander), again he crossed low into the box, but this time it was Dunn who applied the finish. He had masses of space. Half time was a relief, it could have been any score if the half had gone on much longer. Gallagher replaced the injured Jansen at half-time and we started to look better straight away. Dunn had dropped deeper into midfield at the start of the second half and you sensed that Birmingham were happy to protect what they had rather than kick on and put the game safe. This played into our hands as it meant that Ferguson in particular could get a grip on the game without having to worry too much about defending. Still, it took the substitiution of Tugay for Thompson to act as the catalyst for our recovery. Thompson's first touch put Reid away clear on the right. He took his time and hit the shot well, but the goal owed a lot to a deflection. Who cares - we were back in the game. It was all Rovers now and it was no surprise at all when the equaliser came. Thompson hit a long ball through the centre of Birmingham's defence for Dickov to run onto. Dickov got there first, held off the defender, but scuffed the finish. No matter, Gally was on hand to force the ball over the line from about a yard out. We continued to dominate and Thompson, Reid (twice) and Ferguson all had chances to score. About ten minutes from the end though we started to look nervous, as if we weren't sure whether to defend what we had or push on for another goal. This allowed Brum back into it and the last few minutes were just like schoolboys football. Savage hit the post, both teams had numerous corners and free-kicks, and the ball flew from one end to the other with increasing speed. Just as we'd settled for a draw, Dickov was put through at the death one-on-one with the keeper. The keeper saved but Dickov really should have done better. It would have been hard on Birmingham though - perhaps a draw was a fair result. We defended shockingly at times in the first half, but to just blame our defence misses the point. After saying that though, our defenders were poor today. McEveley can only be in the team ahead of Gray because Hughes and his staff think he's a better defender, as McEveley gives us very little going forward. Well today McEveley gave us very little in defence. He looked very raw and inexperienced today and was at fault for two of Brum's goals. All three goals were scored from the centre of the penalty area, an area of the pitch where our centre-halves should be dominating. And as I've said previously, all three goals came either directly or indirectly as a result of their midfielders running off ours. Oh, and Neill was as pants as ever. Ferguson went some way to redeeming himself in the second half with a superb display. He controlled the tempo and flow of our game in that second period and all our good work went through him. Tugay showed some good touches but all too often he also showed some poor ones. He's not consistent enough for the Premiership anymore. Reid was superb throughout - my man of the match. In the past few games he's given us some much needed solidity in midfield but today he also added a real attacking threat to his game. Their left back had a torrid time. He fully deserved his goal. Emerton continued to look like a quality player and was a threat every time he had the ball. His work-rate going forward is outstanding. If I had to criticise one thing though it would be the lack of help he gave young McEveley at left back. I mentioned a couple of days ago that I'd seen nothing from Thompson to convince me that he could play centre-midfield. Well, maybe I did today. He looked class when he came on and gave us some much-needed creativity. However, this was against a team who were sitting back and defending for most of the half - it might be a different story if he plays there against a team who are committed to attacking us. Is he good enough defensively? Only time will tell I guess although I still have my doubts. Jansen took his goal well but looked a little sluggish I thought. Maybe his injury was troubling him. Dickov worked his socks off as ever and improved as the game wore on. He should really have got the winner at the end though. Overall you have to be happy with a point after coming back from two goals down. However, it's wins we need. The team showed it's got a tremendous amount of heart and committment today, but we still lack quality all over the pitch and we're still making daft mistakes that cost silly goals. If we win next week at Fulham then we can say we're on a decent 5 match unbeaten run. Lose and it's a long run without a win - and our confidence will be dented accordingly. It's that tight at the moment.

The last article I linked in my previous post - entitled The Game That Ate Itself - shows that there is more to the decline in Premiership crowds this season than just the difference between the promoted and relegated teams' crowds. The Observer's perceived bias has nothing to do with it. This season is the first with the new TV deal. The new TV deal means there are more early and late kick-offs than before, and there is now the chance for Sky viewers to watch extended highlights of every Premiership game, something that has never been available before. Time will tell whether the current decline in Premiership crowds is just a blip or something more serious. Personally, I think it's the latter. I agree with you that cost is by far the main factor for this decline however, I also think that people would be more inclined to pay the current prices if they didn't have the chance to watch most of the game on TV. I can only speak for myself, but the only Rovers league games I tend not to go to these days are the away games that are on TV. I simply can't justify spending the money when I can watch the game anyway. I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking that, and I'd say I'm one of the more committed fans. I also agree with some of the previous posters who say they are bored with the amount of football on tv. I used to watch virtually every live game that was shown on tv, now I probably only watch 1 or 2 a week. Even then I often find myself switching channels halfway through because I've lost interest. There are a number of things wrong in the game at the moment. Champions League money, league uncompetitiveness, cost of tickets, players behaviour etc are all causing people to lose interest in the game at the highest level. I'd say that too much football on TV is another reason. Not the main one, but it's certainly a factor.

No - the amount of football shown live on TV is not adversely affecting attendances. Happy ? Over the last ten years, the number of live TV games on all channels and in all competitions has grown and grown. As there have been more and more games live on TV, the number of fans going to games has risen and risen, which makes a total hash of your misguided theory. Total average attendance (Prem, Div1, Div2 and Div3) has gone like this : 1994/5 44,071 1995/6 48,104 1996/7 50,095 1997/8 53,889 1998/9 55,574 1999/0 55,532 2000/1 57,496 2001/2 61,290 2002/3 62,402 2003/4 63,809 Now if - based on one third of the current season - you want to start pontificating that the addition of ONE live PL game per week since this season started has caused that figure of 63,809 to disintegrate, then not only are you "wrong" - you're just plain stupid A.) because it hasn't disintegrated. and B.) beacuse a 10 year trend backed up by hard facts and figures is far more reliable than a few saddos having a dig at tosser Murdoch after 10 weeks of one season. These articles seem to disagree with you Tris. Empty Seats - who cares? Big Turn Off The game that ate itself Most of them have been posted on here before but, as you must not have read them, I'll post them again. Your argument above includes attendance figures for the Coca-Cola Leagues, where football is more affordable and less of it is shown on TV. So their crowds are up. If you just deal with The Premiership though crowds are clearly down and the amount of football shown on TV, along with the associated strange kick-off times, is a major factor. You seem to be the only one who can't see that.

OK, I admit it. I'm really a Spurs fan. That's why I wanted Souness out - I wanted him to join Spurs.

It's bad enough that we have to listen to this rubbish from the United "fans" without hearing it from fellow Rovers as well. We'd have won the title whether Cantona was banned or not.

Are you denying that crowds have been adversly affected by the amount of football on TV? If you are then you're wrong. You seem to have a very one dimensional repertoire when it comes to having a discussion about anything. Like Manchester Blue in another thread, obviously I'm just "wrong" ... even though there is barely a link between what I posted and your "in yer face" reply. Maybe - just maybe - there are other factors which influence attendance figures which are far more influential than having 138 live Premier League games on TV (this season) instead of 106 (last 3 seasons). Of course there are other factors (which is why I put "partly" in brackets on my original statement) but, I'll ask again as you didn't answer, do you seriously believe that the amount of football now shown on TV is not adversely affecting attendances?

I go in The Moorings which is on the other side of the canal further towards Blackburn (near The Infirmary). I think it's best that I stay there - my mum might kill anyone who starting pogoing near her!!

The bottom line is that TV viewers dictate what the broadcasters and the pubs and bars show. Despite the fact that Sky can show more live games than ever before, sports bars all over the country want to screen matches from NC+, AJ2 and the rest. Are you denying that crowds have been adversly affected by the amount of football on TV? If you are then you're wrong.

You're only sore because you know you've made the wrong choice.

I'm sorry in that case I seem to have completely missed the whole point of this topic as I voted for the person in the above list who I thought was best based on a number of criteria, I didn't say Sherwood was great. By your logic no-one can vote for Garner as that would be blinkered because despite his goals he could never ever be termed a 'great' player. See my post above. We'll leave the Garner arguments until it's time for the forwards vote eh.

How do you define greatness? Is it in terms of a player's ability? In that case, how can Sherwood be considered "great" when he wasn't as good a player as Batty? Is it in terms of the contribution they made to the club, regardless of ability? In that case, I'd say there were many midfielders more worthy of "greatness" than Sherwood. Players like Atkins, Parkes and Metcalfe all probably contributed more to their respective Rovers teams than Sherwood did to his. Is it in terms of trophies won? Forrest wins that one hands down then. I honestly don't know how anyone can truthfully call Sherwood a Rovers great.

You're entitled to your opinion. It's just that in this case your opinion is blinkered and wrong. Nonsense once more. I may well be wrong but i'm not blinkered. If I refused to even read the posts and views of others then I would be blinkered, as it happens I just choose to disagree with some and that is entirely different. You can make whatever argument you want. If you think Sherwood is a Rovers great then you're opinion is just blinkered and wrong.

You're entitled to your opinion. It's just that in this case your opinion is blinkered and wrong.

The bottom line is that there's too much football on television now and crowds are decreasing (partly) as a result.

But would they really? How much of the game was about natural talent in those days? It was just about pro and still new as a sport. It wasn't far removed from one village chasing a pig's bladder into another village. Did they even have goal posts and offsides? Hardly anyone in the country played the game at that level whereas today it is the biggest thing in the world. There is just no comparison for me. Might as well just vote for the entire 1995 Championship squad then if we're using that logic.