Not claiming any moral victory. Just preempting the ‘only cause we didn’t win jibes’. Looking it objectively, our success and failure today was down to Dack. He was in fine form in the first half and faded second. The midfield line up wasn’t right. Before the game I wasn’t the only fan astonished at Evans displacing Bennett from the centre of midfield. Top of the table clash and we didn’t play to our strengths, we played to nullify a threat. But for Dack it could well have been 0-0 in the first half. We are over-reliant on him and he has been sparing potential blushes for us this season. Payne may not have been the answer but Evans definitely wasn’t - and changing things to accommodate the latter cost us today. It wasn’t until Evans went off that we halted the slide. Can’t believe he is an international footballer. I can only assume that he has to play him fairly regularly to make the match postponements credible.

Bennett is our best CM at the moment - IMHO. I like Travis but he is raw and I’m not convinced he is the answer to our midfield question. Although it would be interesting to see him play at RB if the opportunity came up.

Something that the “hindsighted” amongst us were saying before the game. We should be looking to shore things up with DMs, with the game sewn up, not start them and the later bring on attackers. It’s a negative tactic which plans for failure. Without Dack we’d have struggled today.

Looked great on his trial debut. Looked a little more raw in the last game. Hopefully he can find a way through. Could go either way though.

One of the few things to respect Burnley for is their clawing their way to the PL on a relative shoestring. Them becoming a Man-City-lite would stick in the craw. I wouldn’t wish a Venkys-style ownership on anyone but if someone could ? their ? that would be fine with me.

Does scan though.

Don’t worry you’ll be able to moan about VAR instead.

Not for every goal. Only where there is some genuine contention that the referee is unsure or unsighted on. Have you never been at Ewood and seen a goal given (or disallowed) and thought that the ref got it wrong? Wouldn’t it be good for those goals to be referred and correctly ruled? Yes, they need to involve the crowd better, with a little imagination it could be a feature. The Americans would make a great show of it. Imagine if VAR had existed when West Ham and Tevez cheated their way past us all those years ago. That goal should never have stood in a million years. Didn’t you feel aggrieved? I did. And Sheffield United certainly did. 11 years later they still haven’t recovered.

Good post. The financial / sponsorship angle has some merit. For football to survive in its current format - especially the PL - they need to increase revenue streams. VAR could provide that platform. From an accuracy point of view the impact of a mistake - or misinterpretation of a rule - could have major financial consequences for businesses... football clubs... businesses. The pressure on referees is now immense. What they need to do is much like they do now in cricket is only use VAR as an opportunity for the ref to say “I’ve given this decision unless you can categorically confirm otherwise” with the ref getting the benefit of any doubt - used as a second pair of eyes or alternative angle rather than to decide for him. For me, let play continue and only review if a goal is scored. Then only if there is a proven infringement in the phase leading up to the goal should there be a decision challenge. Anything off the ball could be decided after the game has finished with the same referee given an opportunity to review concerns raised by managers or players and/or that he deems worthy of review. Post game awarding or rescinding of cards to follow.

This

I noticed that last week. Our row is generally covered enough but it was saturated. I wondered if it was the sprinklers or hosing.

For a dead rubber game, both sides didn’t half go for it tonight. Some very tasty challenges, decent football at times but ultimately a stalemate. Special mention for Charlie Albinson who did very very well with some great stops that he had no right to save. Possibly aided by poor finishing but he stood firm. Organised the back four and never stopped talking - date I say looked like a future captain. Nothing to play for by either team ultimately and it finished 0-0 due to both Albinson and a missed penalty by Hardcastle. Keeper got down very well to his bottom left corner to keep out what wasn’t a terrible penalty.

Nope. Pitch is good. Although Joe Grayson has been stretchered off in the first minute. Didn’t see the (any) challenge so he may disagree.

“Yet another reason why playing music after a goal has been scored should be banned from stadiums…” http://www.givemesport.com/1263838-fan-footage-explains-what-happened-to-duisberg-keeper-that-conceded-whilst-having-a-drink

Agreed. But he plays out wide and gives it his all without complaining. Looks to have a good attitude. That’s the point I was originally trying to make.

A striker who converted to a winger, no?

I’m not sure he is the kind of player who will do well with Mowbray’s “squad game” regime. He looks to have a bit of an ego, like most strikers, but needs a run of games. He fell out of form quite early in that campaign and Nuttall came in and stated well. Then Mowbray dropped Nuttall and brought Samuel back. Not sure this has helped either player. Unless a player is a clear stand out (and fan favourite) like Dack, Smallwood and Graham, or an easier drop like Caddis and Gladwin, then they are on a rotation schedule. At times he can’t even decide who to drop e.g. Bell and Williams. We have an embarrassment of riches at the moment and have to hope that Mowbray is being extremely cute in this rotation policy and that he now has a strong squad of first team regulars to cope with injuries or suspensions. However, the consequence is that the rhythm of the team changes week after week and we seem to grind out results due our ability to concede soft goals and lack of organisation at corners, in particular. Confidence players like Samuel, who I’m not especially fond of, will struggle in this set up whereas grafting, utility players like Antonsson or, even, Bennett will do well. Besides I’m not sure any striker wants to be dropped, they usually want to be the main man.

Course it did champ. Couldn’t resist a peek could you...

I agree. VAR has become a necessary part of a sport that now has £1bn+ TV contracts. Personally I’m in favour as the big clubs have been given the ‘benefit of the doubt’ on decisions for far too long. They just need to make it part of the match day experience.

?

Looked good first half but seemed to fade. The hunger seemed to be there, it was just one of those nights. The best team won.

Struggling tonight against a strong looking Brighton side. 2-0 down after 23 mins. No clear cut chances for Rovers. A lot for Johnson to talk about. Least said about Leutweiler the better. Hope Fisher is on the bench on Monday...!

Looked lively last week.

We already have three development squad keepers on the books.

Ideal is a strong word. Of the players available, and in the theoretical world where all players are fit and not threatened with suspension, my preference would be... First team Raya Nyambe Mulgrew Lenihan Bell Payne Bennett* Smallwood Armstrong Dack Graham Second team Fisher Travis Downing J Doyle (or Platt) Williams Conway Tomlinson Evans Antonsson Chapman** Nuttall Out in the cold Leutweiler (meh, convinced he was bought to allow us to postpone games when Mulgrew is called up) Samuel (not impressed with him - third choice out and out striker on the books imv) Whittingham (just about trust Evans over him) Caddis (thanks to Travis’ versatility) Gladwin (because Gladwin) Feeney (he should have contributed at this level but he is part of our failure last season) *I think Bennett is a massive player for this team. Wears his heart on his sleeve and seems to drive the team on. Leads by example. If it wasn’t for this I’d promote Tomlinson and have Bennett as another player who has the ability and versatility to cover a few positions. ** Chapman is a like-for-like Dack replacement and should he used as such. An in-form Dack would take the number 10 spot but a tiring defender would have a fit if he saw him being replaced by Chapman on 70 mins.