Against Serbia we was so pedestrian, dull, playing at testimonial pace and regularly just getting Pickford to hoof it long. The attacking players didnt press and we sat really deep. Some put it down to easing our way into the tournament, but today we were miles worse. So frustrating. The onus has to fall on the terrible manager as to why players who thrive for their clubs are a shadow of theirselves for their country. Southgate is such a negative manager and that is proven by how despite boos our players seemed keen to waste time and protect the point at the end. I dont agree that we are an attacking player light, you cant put Bellingham deep in midfield, we would get overrun even more. But its the instructions, we dont look like we have trained how to press as a team, we sit really deep, Pickford keeps lumping it long. Mind you, our squad is overhyped based on names. If you put the calibre of the 11 names today on paper, it compares to most in the tournament. But thats not factoring in the total lack of balance. It is similar to when we had a "golden generation" albeit not as much quality. We keep playing 3 right backs, one as a ridiculous experiment in midfield which has to be stopped and one is 33 and toiling on the wrong side on the left. We have absolutely no left backs, taking Shaw was crazy and I get why the unfit and crap Chilwell was left out but surely Tyrick Mitchell deserved a call up. In midfield we have Rice doing a job he doesnt do for his club and then such a problem beside him. Gallagher is shocking at this level and our other 2 options have barely a seasons worth of top level games under their belts between them. I think Wharton would be as good a choice as any but fear we as Rovers fans are biased in that it would be a huge step up at this stage to expect him to dictate games at the top level. Foden, Bellingham and Kane cant really all co-exist because they all want to be in the same area, and its those 3 why people think our squad is too good. Never will a pre tournament favourite have less chance of winning the tournament.

There is always the odd good player from relegated clubs who could potentially prove to be good signings. Victor Johansson is a good signing for Stoke. But John Ruddy is not one of those potentially good signings and I dont need an alternative list of potential targets to know that.

I am over the fact that he did what are pretty common tactics to get a move to a club in a higher league. We had failed to even make the top 6, Villa were in the Prem, a potential once in a lifetime opportunity to play there, do I like that players do that? No. But I dont hold a grudge a decade on. The sole issue with the appointment is that he has absolutely no experience in such a job and has got it because he was a former player.

@chaddyrovers It is crazy that you cannot suggest that a well known player would be a poor signing unless you can delve into your expert scouting knowledge of world football and of availability/finances to offer up a shortlist of potential alternatives. You mentioned Iversen. He was very good at Preston but has spent 2 seasons in which he hasnt played that much, and didnt impress that much at Stoke. And crucially, I imagine any fee (I dont want a loan, we have brought in loads of money so I would suggest any normal club would be able to facilitate spending a couple of million on a keeper of a decent age, mind you we arent normal so I dont expect that) and potential wages at Leicester might prove difficult to hit. Perhaps there is better value either domestically or abroad, ideally not in a poor league like Wahlstedt. I am not a scout so I couldnt possibly comment. But in terms of type of signing, ie his age, the fact that he has shown capability at this level, the fact he wont be on the decline, spending a bit of money on a number 1 for the short and long term. That would be the type of signing if permanent that would make much more sense as opposed to a nearly 38 year old declining player recently released by a relegated club.

Who has had a meltdown specifically over a potential target? The primary frustration seems to be more at things that have happened in the past or people trying to justify things that may or may not happen in the future. I couldnt possibly say who we should sign because I dont have the indepth scouting knowledge across the world so how can I possibly know. I just know that I think Ruddy would be a very poor, desperate and cheap signing. I dont necessarily think we will sign him, ìf we do I would be unhappy with the signing. You dont have to be armed with a shortlist of potential targets to give an opinion of a player you do know about. Its not a case of if you dont know loads of potentially good signings then you cant comment.

I know, my point was that the fact that we will receive any Wharton fee in installments is irrelevant because any fees would also be paid in installments. Seems like you are trawling through Birmingham fan comments on twitter which is an interesting thing to do for someone who has no time for supporter opinions. He is past it, hes being released by relegated Birmingham at the age of nearly 38. He was shocking at Ewood and suspect whenever else I saw Birmingham on tv. You are doing the groundwork to welcome him because you think he will sign. First the stuff about Eustace knowing him well and now this. Would you actually say that Ruddy would be a signing that you are HAPPY with? I would like a goalkeeper who isnt so old and who isnt on the decline. Its not too much to ask for. https://xvalue.ai/stats/en/league/championship/players/stat/xGoals_prevented If you want stats, he ranks terribly in expected saves which "measures" what a goalkeeper would be expected to keep out against what he actually keeps out. Conceding 3.44 more goals than expected.

The timing of the Wharton money is irrelevant, unless we as a standalone club pay every penny up front of any deals we do.

Why do you place so much importance on Eustace knowing Ruddy well? He managed him prior to last season when his performances declined to the point that Birmingham fans wanted shut of him. He was the worst keeper not in a Rovers shirt to come to Ewood last season in the league. He is about to turn 38 years old. Who gives a shit how well he knows him. Just would scream of a really lazy, cheap and desperate signing when we are crying out for a proper number 1 who doesnt keep throwing points away and/or is about to collect their pension. We have generated loads of money lately. Its not too big of an ask to expect better than John Ruddy. And how do you know that McFadzean is a competent coach? Lets see what happens on Fleck? Hes broken his leg twice and has a bloody plate in his leg, which lasted 17 minutes of competitive football. Even if he makes it through a bit of training and maybe a friendly or two, so what. The standards of this football club have never been lower. Linked with signing a soon to be 38 year old keeper released by a relegated side? Oh well, at least hes mates with Eustace. Signing a soon to be 38 year old centre back who requires a total change in shape and style to accomodate? Yeah get him in, player coach. Signing an almost 33 year old midfielder who has barely played in 2 or 3 years having suffered 2 broken legs and now has a plate which couldnt even sustain 20 minutes of competitive action? Oh well, maybe a bit of pre season training without breaking down will disprove all of those concerns. Forget the players not far off 40 years old, forget the players who have suffered a series of injuries which they clearly havent fully recovered from. We deserve better.

Regular for his club last season - that team went down. Eustace knows him very well - so what? @tomphil you are right regarding potential change of "plan." Last year we didnt have a player over 28 years old. That was counterproductive. Those keen to defend the club at all costs will say, we are signing experience and people are still moaning but there is a middle ground between no experience and just signing old fogeys ready for retirement. McFadzean did what we needed from him but another year is very short sighted. He turns 38 this season and to play him, we have to play 5 yards deeper and with 2 other centre backs to cover him. Fleck has had 2 broken legs and a plate in his leg lasted 17 minutes in a Rovers shirt, yet we are in discussions over an extention. If we are actually interested in Ruddy, big if, hes another hasbeen who Birmingham fans seem keen to move on, he had a poor season with age catching up and we saw that at Ewood. Surely there is a middle ground, players maybe just ticking over 30 that still have plenty in the legs.

I dont think he would have ever become a regular here.

He never really showed enough to suggest a career above the lower leagues, nothing about him stood out.

Does he really have that much talent?

Please, no John Ruddy. Hes past it.

Mbappe is booked in for emergency surgery on his broken nose. He is the one they really need to keep fit because as much as they have good alternatives, there isnt another Mbappe. Usually you see players with a mask on soon after such an injury so I am guessing that is a possibility.

They seem to have moved away from in previous tournaments where they played Griezmann high up off Giroud. Having him deeper and Thuram adding additional pace just meant they had pace right across and especially in the knockout rounds that will be so difficult to stop. They also have Coman, Barcola and Kolo Muani on the bench as well as Tchouameni, Fofana and Camavinga so plenty more pace and energy when they want to change it up. They have the best balance in the tournament with a full squad of players whereby you swap a player and they can carry on as normal.

The issue seems to be with the rule rather than allowing the ref a chance to view it again. I think it was harsh.

The 3 games today again were enjoyable with only the England so far in the tournament being boring. Romania were a big surprise, Ukraine have far better individual pedigree but Romania were excellent. Belgium battered Slovakia for long spells but after that early Doku mistake, it just took a mixture of luck and some brilliant defending to cause a big early shock. And the France Austria game I would say was the highest level of any game in terms of quality on both sides, Germany and Spain have stood out as looking very strong but the former were obviously against a terrible Scotland and Croatia looked very leggy and lacking quality at CB and dynamism in attack.

Ah, the old no one is forcing you to watch it routine. The France Austria game was arguably the pick of the first round of fixtures, an important game in a difficult group that was very interesting. There is plenty of England focus and discussion, and I would understand if Neville, Keane and Wright are desperate to give their take, to see a quick 5 minute debate before then focusing on the actual game at hand. When they do talk about whatever game they are covering, its always a bit of chat about 1 or 2 individuals. France are packed full of quality, yet everything is just about Mbappe. And with Austria, in the absence of clearly anyone bothering to do any research, just a minute on how Sabitzer didnt play much at United. They are a good side with lots of good Bundesliga players, and the form under Austria has seen Ragnick come close to the Bayern job. How about more insight into the actual game they are covering and less repetitive England waffle. I dont get this obsession about comparing everyone to England, it must really hinder your enjoyment of the overall tournament and some really enjoyable matches. FWIW, I thought that France looked more in control against an Austria side who are a level up in quality from Serbia. France never look to dominate the ball but they are packed full of pace and energy. There were questions marks over their defence coming into the tournament with Saliba expected to be a sub but clearly the right call was made as he is a brilliant player and showed that tonight. I was surprised that Kante started but his spell in Saudi Arabia didnt show, looks like he is still playing at the top.

Why would I watch the game back? Once was enough, entertainment was scarce and there are 3 games a day of entertaining football that I can spend my time watching. The game became a stodgy game of long ball, partly because Serbia wanted that as it suits them. But partially because Southgate then clearly authorised a procession of long kicks up to Kane against 3 centre backs. We should have had the conviction to continue to play the ball on th ground because initially Serbia couldnt handle it. I dont really care what Wright said. Im sick of the pre match analysis of every game just a constant discussion about England when I want to hear about the game I am about to see so I tend to stop listening. Even if Trent might or might not (neither of us could possibly know what Slot plans to do) he hasnt played there very much at all prior to the tournament and I dont think it worked particularly well. Its a big ask as its a totally different position. We are struggling for balance in the midfield and that Rice partner is a real issue. I think Wharton would give the best balance but again the question is whether hes ready at that level.

One thing that is a real bug bear in terms of the punditry is why they go on and on about England before every game. We all discuss England to death, but international tournaments are fascinating in terms of all the teams. I would much rather see some discussion about the game thats actually coming on, not a constant borefest of England stuff and maybe a couple of minutes on the best player of each team.

Surely the issue is the rule then, not VAR.

Fantastic deal for Venkys.

I think weve had our use from McFadzean. Short term experience but I would have liked to see us moving away from a back 5 and a deep line just to protect how old he is.

If discussion was as straightforward as just either win, draw or lose, it would be pretty boring. The win is obviously the important part but I felt like the tactics were counterproductive and negative and played into the Serbian's hands. Against better sides, I fear that we could come unstuck. You keep using cliches such as slow starters and comparing Kane to Shearer but using Kane as a battering ram seems again like not the way to get the best out of him. We have technical players in attacking areas yet not long after going one up our tactics seemed to change to just sitting in and going long and it didnt work, making the last hour much more hard work than it should have been.

But again, a slow start isnt something to strive for. Its just a pointless cliche. We didnt win Euro 96 either. If we are as good as we think we are then we wouldnt allow Serbia to have the game on their terms for most of the game. Everytime Pickford got the ball he just smashed it high in the air to Kane who more often than not was outjumped by one of 3 giant centre backs. That is not Serbia forcing their style onto us, that was us for some reason playing to their style. We have Saka who is quick and also players on the bench who are quick who offer a threat in behind, Serbia's defence was slow and not the best on the ball so we should have tried to expose them with quick passing and movement. Its not a case of people being annoyed because the football was boring. It is more the fear that playing in such a way does not best suit these players and will cause issues against better sides. Obviously the result isnt a failure but there are red flags in the performance.