Pick the strongest possible starting X1, bench a few after an hour when the game is hopefully won. Can't underestimate how important momentum is.

He was also extremely reluctant to hand Wahlstedt a start and we soon saw why.

Are you annoyed that the manager you don't like because he says "you know" in his interviews has started well or something Eddie? As for recruitment, just because the modern trend is to go down the DOF/Head Coach/ Data led approach that doesn't mean the standard of recruitment in general is any better than it was under the "old fashioned" approach. Brighton and Brentford are two Clubs who appear to do spectacularly well with their recruitment but there are a lot more you can point at whose recruitment appears to be pretty terrible.

You're on your own with that one. Let it go.

I'm not particularly aware of the links to the others and apart from Ruddy I've no real view on whether I'd want them or whether they'd be any good or not. So far we've signed zero former Birmingham players so let's see what happens. I'm rather more worried we'll sign no-one at all than where they'll be coming g from if we do sign them.

Ex player brigade is a bit of an exaggeration isn't it. We've been linked with a grand total of 2 of his former players. I'm guessing then you were similarly dismissive when Souness signed Neill, Tugay and Friedel? Sometimes a manager signing a player he knows well works out well, sometimes it doesn't.

It's thanks to relying on a DOF and recruitment team that we ended up with garbage like Ennis, Hirst, Telalovic and Wahlstedt. It's probably best that the coach has the overall say on incomings imo. He has to work with them ultimately. (Unsurprisingly Ennis has reportedly failed to impress at Stoke and is being offloaded on loan to Barnsley)

Agreed - in an ideal world I'd like 7. Keeper, 2 new full backs, creative midfielder, pacey winger for either side and a quality Szmodics replacement. We obviously won't get anywhere near that. I think we could get by with three, the keeper, midfielder and the Szmodics replacement if they were all permanent and really good quality. A couple of good permanent signings and three really good loans in the right positions (not just the usual pick anyone up who's left at the last minute for the sake of it) would probably be a reasonable compromise. Let's see how we go given Waggott has said quite clearly the owners have reiterated their full backing for the Club and there is no impediment to them providing such. *cough*

He's obviously earned no leeway from you with the way we've started the season then! I do concede though that it's odd he's not all over a cheap punt on another Japanese player the way Ohashi has started the season. Seems a bit like looking a gift horse in the mouth.

He isn't Jon with his boyish good looks and cheeky chappie smile though!

Apart from the Pears chucking one in bit.

Bloody hell that's a bit premature the fixture computer handed them Liverpool and Citeh to start! Lol.

Very kind set of fixtures to start but I think we'd all have been happy with seven points at this stage. That said there seem to have been large spells in each game where we've been very much second best so Eustace, who seems to be doing an admirable job thus far on an extremely frayed shoestring , needs a lot of help in the final week of the window. As for looking better after finally seeing the back of Gallagher; Who'd have thought it? Lol.

Just tuned in - sounds a grim half. Amazed Gueye didnt start. Hedges is dire everytime he plays. Absolutely no change there.

If he was tweeting pro Rovers stuff and views fairly supportive of the owners those would be his actual views as far as I'm aware.

Is it not Gary Smith who was temporarily on the Board of WATR before resigning? He's not a Club plant, based in California as the username suggests, but he is quite sympathetic to Venky's.

By their own admission they've secured the required permissions to fund the Club though. Hoisting themselves by their own petard yet again.

Yeah. They've "secured required permissiona" with conditions attached they don't want to meet. Pull the other one Steve. Or....we're being unduly cynical and harsh and we can expect to see the Szmodics money and then some spent next week. I can't wait.

Can't force him out. If he doesn't want to go, he stays. Not like Eustace will have called him in and said he's not part of his plans either, he's obviously integral to them. Hopefully all bollux anyway if the story has been taken down.

We'd have had quite a few more more if Wahlstedt hadn't come in for Pears.

Can't be true.....Gav doesn't think any of our squad would get into their team LOL. If true what a shocker given the already threadbare nature of the squad and Eustace's stated desire to keep the player. Travis himself wouldn't come out with any credit either after claiming it was JDT's fault he ended up on loan on Ipswich and banging on about how much he loved the Club less than 48 hours ago.

Is Rovers' goalkeeping situation a hot topic of conversation in Malta?

Just have to agree to disagree on whether they can or can't then. If they can but won't it's even worse in my book.

Total guess on my part but I assume they thought "There remains material uncertainty about our ability to fund" (I.e. not in our control) sounds a lot better than 'We don't want to fund because we don't want to provide personal guarantees". Bang on about Waggott. Re: the owners even if they win their case the question remains whether they would return to pre crisis levels of funding or whether they've rather enjoyed not having to put their hands in their pockets. Historically most Club benefactors start off with great enthusiasm, spending money like it's going out of fashion before losing enthusiasm for endlessly flushing money down the pan and eventually withdrawing funding altogether.

Venky's brought the case against the ED, not the other way round so I'm guessing it's about them trying to get the requirement to provide a guarantee removed. I think Herbie got to the crux of the matter and nailed it when he made a throwaway comment about if the V's had to provide personal guarantees it would explain a lot. From the bits of info that are emerging and the In telligent analysis of them on here I now think they can send money if they wish and don't even have to pay a bond which makes it "double bubble". The Court papers however indicate that they have to provide a Bank Guarantee and I suspect that that Guarantee from the Company would have to be reinforced by personal guarantees and that THAT is the reason the flow of money has stopped because they don't want to put a penny of their respective personal fortunes at risk. Hence us trying to scrape by by selling players in the meantime until the matter is finalised. So much to go at Waggott on. And please someone the next time you have an audience with him and he says they've reiterated their commitment to funding the Club blah blah - point out to him there's "funding" it and really funding it. "Funding" it entails doing the bare minimum to keep the lights on as appears to be happening at present. Really funding it entails doing enough to make us a competitive outfit on the pitch and giving us the best chance to thrive in future. Therefore if the manager or recruitment team think they've spotted an absolute gem who would cost £6m but could almost certainly be sold for £20m - £30m a couple of years later then that sort of backing would need to be available and could be recouped at a later date. Rinse and repeat.