jim mk2

ahem....

Normal players who could give or take a tackle - as stated We need a definition of hard men - real hard men.

Key in an article in the Times said England had suffered from "concentrating too much on Tests" in the recent years to the detriment of the 1-day game To which the answer must be, why not both? Other countries seem to manage it and the ECB have far more resources than most other countries It doesn't matter that England have done well in ODIs in recent years. England have let us down - badly

You could say the same of any of Speight, Neill, Nelsen, Gayle, Reid, Hendry, Berg, Givet, Baptiste, Jones, Salgado or Mokoena.

What's the difference between a hard man and a thug?. If you're going down that route Neill was a thug too. I think we need a definition of "hard" and most of those I wouldn't classify as "hard" at all, just normal players who could give and take a tackle. Is that hard? I don't think so.

John Bray frightened the life out of me - and that was standing watching from the safety of the terraces. I'd have hated to play against him We've had some hard lads over the years - Keeley and McNamee were in a class of their own, but the likes of Fazackerley, Branagan, Mail, Todd and Savage were hard too. Every team needs an enforcer, and we don't have one at the moment. Preston showed why we do.

FFS, not them, anyone but them. Even India. This is thoroughly depressing and highlights even further England's miserable, pathetic effort

Still think he’s an “excellent” player? He gets worse with every game.

If Ennis was seen as a risk or a gamble, and they weren't sure about him, then why hand him a 4-year contract? Like alot of stuff at Ewood it doesn't make sense. As it stands, he's a waste of a wage and a place in the squad and is offering nothing of value to the club or the team whatsoever. So far, Broughton's solution to the striker problem has turned up Hirst, Ennis and Telelovic (sp?). This is where the problem lies

I woz there, but not in the queue because my dad already had tickets. 42,000 on Ewood, it was dangerous

Watching the Chelsea-Rovers game at Stamford Bridge apart from Sterling, James and Gallagher I didn't really know any of their players. Same with most Prem teams - I can name one or two in most teams but the rest are just a blank. It's not just getting older and a declining interest - I just don't identify with these teams in the same way we did 30-40 years ago

Sums it up and confirming what many of us have been saying in here Wet-behind-the-ears young lads against tough, experienced Championship pros

Potts is big, strong and fast. I'd like him in the Rovers team. In fact, there's a number of Preston players who would improve ours just for their physicality. It's been said many times before, but we're soft.

Nonsense. The owners and the executives aren't responsible for performances on the pitch. That the job of Tomasson, who has to pick the team and formation and get the players ready for the match. It's also his job to coach the players - and therein lies the problem. Tomasson is too dogmatic in that he has Rovers playing only one way - a high tempo, pressing, passing game that is pleasing on the eye and takes apart similar teams such as Norwich but comes unstuck against strong, well-drilled and organised team like Preston. He needs to be more pragmatic - changing tactics to suit different teams.

Wolves come back to beat Spuds in extra time. What a good appointment O'Neil was and Bournemouth must regret letting him go now. Perhaps his name wasn't foreign enough. Tomasson would do well to look at O'Neil's pragmatic approach - attractive possession football isn't everything. Even Guardiola's City go long sometimes.

And Preston possibly this year too. Preston were derided last night for the way they played but they won. Pretty football is nice to watch but doesn't necessarily win football matches

What a weird stance. The owners didn’t give Preston 3 points. The owners don’t pick the team, the owners don’t dictate how the team play and the the owners are not responsible for us continually conceding late goals. That’s down to the managers, the coaches and the players, and Tomasson in particular because he is ultimately responsible for results. Weird.

So why do we keep conceding late goals Den? Tony’s teams did it too. We’re such a small side, we get bullied too much. Potts is my type of player, big, fast, strong. Moran (not for the first time) couldn’t cope with him. I agree we’re good to watch but we’ve no steel running through the team. We’ve lost 5 at home - and it’s only November. I’d say opposition managers have worked us out. Basically we’re a soft touch

All true but you have to look at the nature of the players too. It’s been said before but Tomasson has a load of “nice” lads playing for him and the same was true under Mowbray Many of these Championship teams have tough battlers who love a muck and nettles scrap and it seems to me our lads often get bullied and retreat into their shells when the going gets tough and the chips are down - like in the last 10 minutes of matches

So what’s the reasons for consistently conceding late goals? It’s not just under Tomasson, it happened regularly under Mowbray too.

Nothing's made up, apart from your weird stance

It was on the TV and anyone could see they were a solid side full of experienced pros that had too much nous for our team. Making up a load of ifs and buts about their goals is a weird stance to take.

double post

Their fans will say they were easily the better side. Pinned us back for long periods and created plenty of chances. I’d be surprised if they don’t make the playoffs

I’ve seen enough of Leonard thanks, the truth is the lad isn’t good enough at the moment. I said Preston were solid, nothing more. It’s solid teams that play the percentages that win promotion