What are the bigger issues? He is the manager, figure head, the face of the club to the outside world. At times last night he looked like he was on death row, completely non inspirational.

Referring to the top six quote I meant when everybody is fit. I think a good manager could squeeze enough out of the squad to get us into the top six.

A win is a win however it's achieved and I would certainly take another twenty scabby, ugly wins between now and May. Digging a bit deeper there wasn't one player who played well in my view, the tempo was weak, passing poor and movement pretty non existent. It's games like this were Mowbray really annoys me with his awful body language and gesticulations. From what I saw he was sat down with his shoulders hunched pretty much offering nothing most of the time. His negativity was apparent so the players must feel that. A good manager can really earn his corn in these games by encouraging, cajoling and offering advice to the players. I saw a post earlier where somebody wrote that we have a top six team. Hard to disagree really but we have to countenance that with the fact we have a mid table manager. And that is a big problem.

Artificially adding colour takes something away from the photo for me. Do you know which ground it was played at?

Performance based coach? That's a completely new one and plummets a new depth even for him. What about a results based coach.

Previous articles have stated that all of Johnson's work is done at Brockhall and his match day input is negligible.

We undoubtedly have better players than in previous seasons so what else can it be?

In a few weeks time we will enter our eighth transfer window under Mowbray and really aren't much better off from a positional perspective. There have been pluses along the way and we are in a healthier position player wise so credit to him for that. The real conundrum is can he take us any further. For me it's a resounding no and simply from that point of view we need to replace him with somebody who can give us a better chance. However I don't think there is a cat in hells chance of him leaving, either sacked or of his own volition. We will be mid table, win some, lose some, play well, play poorly, good runs and bad runs but he will be safe. Personally I want more for my football club and Mowbray just isn't the man to deliver it.

It's insulting and arrogant when comments like that are made. Opinions differ.

The glass ceiling syndrome which has affected our top six aspirations for some time now strikes once again. We conspired to lose a game in which we should have comfortably got a point. Whilst we were decent in parts I thought too many players underperformed and we looked jaded in the last fifteen minutes. Elliott and Nyambe I thought were very good but Holtby, Johnson, Douglas, Williams and Ayala looked below par to me. Kaminski too was below the high standard he has set himself. Mowbray looked angry every time the camera panned on him as he barked at several players with, seemingly with no effect. Another tough week coming up now and hopefully we won't spiral on to a familiar run if several successive defeats for which we have previous under Mowbray.

It was a legitimate appeal. For me it didn't tick all the boxes for the denial of an obvious goalscoring opportunity but as I said on Sunday the appeals process can be random and totally depends on the three people making the decision.

I don't think it's incumbent on Rovers to put out a press release. Any updates should be on the FA's website. Do you think Mowbray might be playing a game with Bristol?

In the past clubs have been informed of the decision by Tuesday afternoon if they have a Tuesday night match. Whether or not our Wednesday game is behind the lateness I'm not sure.

Apparently? Somebody should have told Mowbray and Swag when they spunked tens of thousands on contract extensions for players who had no (or very little) chance of playing. Or paying £30k to charter a plane to Cardiff for essentially a dead rubber.

In answer to your question it's down to rank bad management in my view. The agents of these players must be rubbing their hands at the thought of their bargaining position being strengthened by the club. Negligence has been a byword on Waggotts watch.

Nothing semi about it Nick - it's full on 😁😁😁😁 One of the panel they choose from is Stuart Ripley and I understand there are no restrictions on ex players of the appealing club being on the panel. I really think the wording of the appeal is key though. I'd imagine Ian Sylvester is the scribe and he's been around long enough to know the system.

It used to be a £500 bond which was refundable if successful. I would be really surprised if they didn't appeal as I believe there is a strong case. The wording of the evidence will be crucial however.

The norm is appeal by lunchtime on Monday and get to know on Tuesday. There is a panel of ex players, ex managers and administrators from which three are chosen. One acts as chairman and there is an ex referee available to help them with the technical side of the laws. The three then vote and a 2-1 vote either way determines the outcome. Rovers need, in my view to get the wording right on their appeal to give themselves a chance of winning. There is also a bond (used to be £500) to appeal which is returned if the appeal is successful.

It's the 'double jeopardy' change to the laws recently. If the referee deems the challenge to be of a non cynical nature ie two players running and one catches the others heels bringing him down then it is just a penalty and not necessarily a yellow card. Any challenge outside the penalty area which denies an obvious goalscoring opportunity is a mandatory red card.

I would be surprised (and disappointed) if they didn't appeal. To quote the VAR guidelines it's a clear and obvious error.

I don't believe there is a mechanism to issue yellow cards post match which effectively this would be unless something has changed recently.

I would have expected a penalty at the other end so I'm not too critical of the award but the decision to send Lenihan off is certainly worthy of an appeal. In the appeal process you are allowed to show evidence, written and visual of why you don't believe it should have been red. For it to be a sending off the opponent has to be moving to his opponents goal with an obvious goalscoring opportunity. In my view Kaminski would have got to the ball first. If the incident is slowed down and they look at the position of the ball at the moment of contact that should form the basis of the appeal in that it is not an obvious goalscoring opportunity. There is also the 'double jeopardy' law change in which it may be considered that a penalty and yellow card suffice as the challenge wasn't cynical. That however could open a can of worms as Lenihan had been booked and would have got a second yellow. As you cannot appeal against cautions that would have left us with nowhere to go. So as daft as it sounds the red card was better for us as it gives us an opportunity to appeal. Although the appeals process is flawed and random I think we have a chance with this one.

Fair play to Mowbray for bringing Wharton back. I for one didn't think he would recall him but stick with the more experienced Ayala.

Make him smoke 40 a day for the gravel voice too Lenny ???

Credit to Rowett who changed his tactics and pretty much turned the tables in how many of us were expecting them to play. The didn't give us a minute and squeezed play pretty much nullifying our strengths. It took a while for us to come to terms with this but once we did we got our passing going and played more in their half. Lots of decent performances but not really an outstanding one which, when we have won is a really good thing. I was reflecting later that maybe in the recent passed we wouldn't have won this.