Poor performance. Basic defending let us down again.

Some observations.

Jansen's feet look as though they are stuck in cement. Still way off the pace.

Emerton is a worse crosser of a ball than Gillespie - either too long or too short or hit against a defender.

Neill continues to go to sleep at vital moments - viz the goal.

Stead worked hard but we're toothless in attack.

Charlton take the lead from El Karkouri's header from a corner. Went through brad's legs. I'm losing paticence with Brad!

What about the free header from anothet set piece? Poor defending.

....

Flitcroft hit post when it was easier to score

Jim - I think the main problem with getting Keith Newton selected, is the fact that he was primarily a right back. That hampered his selection from day one.

Jim do you not read what keeps being said.

If you can be bothered to read back you will realise that I have kept saying Newton was so good that he should be selected at left back.

Jim, I said in the first post on this topic that the formation would be 4-4-2. That goes even more against Le Saux, then!

Apologies. In that case, former England captain and wing half Ronnie Clayton, legendary winger Bryan Douglas and great inside forwards such as Roy Vernon, Peter Dobing and Andy McEvoy have no chance.

I give in.

Douglas right wing, Clayton midfield, McEvoy striker, what's the problem Jim?

They've as much chance as anyone else.

As the positions are announced, if you want any player included, just say so.

Arrgghh! You're talking about a different era.

Douglas was a beautiful winger who could beat any full back in the world: can you imagine him "tracking back" (in modern parlance) to defend on the right side of a 4-4-2?

Clayton was a classic wing half who linked up with the inside right and right winger and probably wouldn't know what midfield means. McEvoy, Vernon and Dobing, like all good inside forwards, were made in heaven. Striker is too ugly a word for players like them.

Jim, I said in the first post on this topic that the formation would be 4-4-2. That goes even more against Le Saux, then!

Apologies. In that case, former England captain and wing half Ronnie Clayton, legendary winger Bryan Douglas and great inside forwards such as Roy Vernon, Peter Dobing and Andy McEvoy have no chance.

I give in.

Interesting points Dave. The era that Bill played in could also restrict his appeal. In those days, as someone else pointed out earlier, full backs tended to stay back. Because the winger waited on the half way line, the full back couldn't get froward. [you might tell me differently with Bill, I don't know, I didn't see him].

So there's an argument for Le Saux? An all-round player who has far more to his game - or would 'eck have been better given the opportunity of modern coaching.

Conversely, in that era EVERY team had two wingers. Eckersley was brilliant at defending and did not venture forward because full backs of that era were not expected to. Newton was an excellent defender too but also supported the attack in the modern manner.

My gripe with Le Saux is that he is not really a full back but a wing back. How many orthodox right wingers did Le Saux play against? Not many that I can think of, which gave him more scope to go forward like the converted winger he was. I repeat what I said before: I do not think Le Saux, for all his attacking qualities, was a particularly good defender.

What should have been decided before the start of this exercise was the formation of the all-time XI. A contemporary 4-4-2 or 4-3-3 might contain a completely different set of players to an old-fashioned 2-3-5 containing traditional full backs, wing halves, inside forwards and two wingers.

all the votes for le saux must have come from supporters unlucky enough not to have seen eckersley in action.

or Newton.

You don't play for England as often as he did without being great,

Nonsense. Just because he played for England does not make a "great". Carlton Palmer anyone? Equally, Simon Garner qualifies as a Rovers "great", but he never came anywhere near a senior England cap.

No one is "deriding" Le Saux and you are probably right that he was the best left back in the league at that time. But he is not the best left back to play for Rovers, not by a long way.

. Whilst Sauxy is a great player,

..... good player, not great. In the modern era, Bailey was his equal in my opinion.

The greats are the likes of Eckersley and Newton.

[unfortunately Jim, most people share my opinion that you can only vote for people you've seen play.

.

Then the whole thing is a waste of time.

Grammar? I thought that died with WWII?

Just wait till you apply for a (decent) job, matey.

Then you'll find out.

... Newton, Clayton, Douglas etc. Whilst all very fine players in their own rights from what I've heard and seen, I don't see that they are that far above the other contenders for the greatest eleven Rovers players of all time.

Condemned by his own hand, showing the extent of his footballing knowledge and his understanding of Blackburn Rovers history.

Nil.

In terms of ability, I'd vote for Le Saux, but is this the only criteria?

Unbelieveable.

If ability were the only criteria (or longevity, or loyalty, or honesty, or character), Le Saux would be bottom of the list and Newton and Eckersley near the top of it.

Le Saux's lead in this vote is a farce and makes the whole exercise a waste of time.

Perhaps you might care to attend remedial classes at "Uni".

Not to be picky, but periods should go before ending quotations, even if the quotation is not for the whole sentence. For a journo, you sure make a lot of grammar mistakes on here, Jimbo.

Pardon?

Can you rewrite that in English please?

... Can you believe that Shaun Wright-Phillips was rejected by Nottingham Forest because he was too small? If that sort of idiotic stereotyping/discrimination can occur, racial discrimination can do so too.

.

Not idiotic at all.

There is a saying in sport that a "good big 'un will always beat a good little 'un" and it is usually true. It doesn't always work but nine times out of ten the big guy comes out on top. Forest probably had to make a choice and they went for the big 'un.

You only have to look at Arsenal and Chelsea now; full of athletic 6 footers. The Rovers championship-winning side was a big strong team. Martin O'Neill has always had big teams - look at his side at Leicester and the way his Celtic team outmuscled Rovers at Ewood. Men against boys.

Football is littered with stories of players who were rejected because of their size. Back in the 1960s, Bolton rejected Alan Ball (one of best players to wear an England shirt) because of his size; Rovers turned down Tony Green, a skilful Scottish inside forward, for the same reason. Both players were taken on by Blackpool.

Generally, though, they are the exceptions that prove the rule. Forest rejecting Wright-Phillips because he was small was not "idiotic" and had nothing to do with stereotyping or discrimination. The odds were that he would not make the grade.

Im so glad I have moved away from Accrington and to the bright lights of University.

Its good being educated

I can certainly bet that the majority who have posted here are not.

I have never heard more self obsessed (us whites we have it so bad ) and uneducated tripe in all of my life.

I note that you are so well educated that you do not know how to use apostrophes, hyphens, capital letters or full stops.

Perhaps you might care to attend remedial classes at "Uni".

I thought Highbury was known as the "Highbury Library"?

Would disagree with your statement anyway. Ewood is no quieter or loud then any other ground in the country.

Doling out free shirts to kids is all very well but supporting Rovers for life requires an act of faith that is sorely tested at the best of times.

Pity the Rovers kids who have to go to school today to be taunted by their peers about losing to Bournemouth. Little wonder they take the easy option and support teams like United who win far more matches than they lose!

rovers out.

Home to Cardiff next (if we win)

Gallagher 91st min

Bournemouth scored.

Of course Sir Keith became a Claret in his latter playing days but despite his Blackburn upbringing managed to impress even the footballing afficiandos (sp?) at Turf Moor.

Read this:

http://www.clarets-mad.co.uk/news/loadsngl...=ED95&id=114394

and this:

http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/Track/6...les/newton.html

and here is a picture of him.

http://www.justcatnaps.com/collection/pict...newtonkeith.jpg