Sacking Dyche would be idiocy of the highest order. Please do it Burnley.

Its not fair to not give credit to Mowbray when we win games. If we get in the play offs which I doubt, our last 4 games involve at least 3 teams (assuming Bournemouth arent up early) who have nothing to play for. Would they also be dismissed? You still have to win those games. That season we went down, I think its obvious that Coyle gets much of the blame but Mowbray had a difficult task that he ultimately didnt succeed in. You can criticise that without having to void points won.

To be fair, Pickering for much of the season especially prior to his injury was good and a noticeable upgrade on Bell who put in performances similar to Pickering yesterday throughout his time here. Pickering was really poor yesterday and has correctly been criticised for it. Giles was really poor when he came on, he looked like a rabbit in the headlights and had no urgency at all, often he just eventually kicked the ball aimlessly forward.

2 more home games left, are Venkys still going to grace us with their presence?

Paul Mani said last week that Mowbray has a deal signed with another Championship club for next season and has tapped up all 3 out of contract players to join him, and even speculated that he may be saving Dack for a summer bid. He also said that teams were looking at Buckley for 10m and that Venkys never refuse to sign a cheque. A Mercer-esque track record.

Are there any examples of managers being appointed so late and getting teams up? Its a job to all managers, the 1995 comment was just him asked an awkward question after a defeat and getting all crabby and defensive as managers often do when trying to justify poor results. If he wanted to be elsewhere he would. Hes always been how he is now, reserved and fairly dour.

The thing is though, we would have to really rush through the process of appointing a manager and would be potentially eliminating options that are more likely to be available in the summer for the sake of giving him a few games before the summer, with a squad of which many will be off. Even if we could get someone appropriate in and quickly, I dont think much could be learnt in at most 5 games, but most likely less. The focus should purely be on this season anyway, there is no point focusing on next season when as much as it is an outside chance, we are 7th going into the final 5 games. We shouldnt throw in the towel now as unlikely as it seems. I get why a roll of the dice for this season would be wanted but I dont think a new manager could have an impact with less than a month to go. Short term, I doubt it would work and you are going to struggle to get someone in for just 5 games. Longer term, you are rushing through an appointment with a potentially limited shortlist due to managers having contracts/jobs to do elsewhere in the remaining games. I dont get the clamour for Ainsworth but perfect example, hes 7th in League 1, would he want to leave that early, and would it be much costlier even if he is willing to pay compensation?

He's won the Championship twice hasn't he?

Ainsworth wouldn't be mentioned if he wasn't a Rovers fan. The problem at the moment isn't a lack of effort, we don't need a manager "who knows the club" as if the remit is noticeably different here compared to elsewhere. We need the most competent man to get the best results, nothing to do with who they support. I personally don't see the point in appointing anyone new now, I get why people would want to roll the dice but by the time someone has been selected, brought in and settled in, the season is over.

Whoever that was sounds like they were pretty spot on today.

No different from what he has ever been like. He has never been one to jump around on the touchline, hes not that type of person and to be honest it doesnt matter either way.

7 out of 10?! Very generous. He was shit like most of the team.

Understandable to an extent considering the anger and frustration of todays performance. But some absolute drivel on here again, unfavourable comparisons to Kean, worst pound for pound manager ever, have a word with yourselves.

Terrible today, everyone seemed to freeze in the second half. They should have had 2 from terrible mistakes by Wharton and Lenihan. Brereton was miles off it as was Dolan who is overrated IMO. Pickering was crap, Giles was terrible when he came on and Venkys shouldnt have interfered to insist that Rothwell stayed. The bizarre formation we used in the second half made no sense either.

Who keeps telling you this information? A substantial budget that Mowbray presumably chose not to spend? Utter rubbish. But the thing is that it is impossible to disprove. I asked the other day, has anything come from those promising whispers you heard in regards to the owners earlier this season? You think the owners are that proactive? Even if there is no chance of a new deal here, it is in his best interests to get us in the play offs or even promoted as it would be brilliant for his CV. Dont confuse a lack of care and issues regarding competence, for example his strange tactics in the second half. Hes quite a dour, reserved man in general.

Winning games based on a Mowbray signing scoring goals in games we won with clean sheets? He also didn't have an equal say regarding Chile, if Chile call him up, nothing we can do. Again, like many you seem well beyond the point of judging Mowbray from a fair base, which is your choice.

I don't think that the problem since Christmas has been using a back 5, we have been reasonably solid even in the last 3 months but I would certainly agree that certain other tactical choices have been wrong. Buckley as a false 9 went from a crucial part in a winning team to blatantly not working, things like Giles on the right, Gallagher playing too much full stop, there are various things that haven't worked that for me have helped to lead to us not scoring in certain games. But again, our recent form is a perfect example of my point. For a few months we did nothing but win really, his new tactic was working, we won games, he deserves praise. Now it has been leading to draws and losses, he deserves criticism. You can't criticise when we lose and then imply that anyone could have done what he does when we win, in my opinion if you want to judge fairly. Last Saturday, we didn't win or lose, so its much more mixed. Dack and Brereton weren't fit enough to start, the way we played in the second half with Dack central in essentially a 4-3-3 really wrestled back the initiative after a crap first half. I certainly don't think that Mowbray is a genius either.

But any illogical tactics only conspire to make it more difficult for Mowbray to get a positive result, as you touch on. If we give a team a "headstart" and fail to win or indeed lose the game, then he deserves criticism. If we come back and win, he deserves praise, because his overall tactics across the course of 90 minutes have led to victory. Take the Reading game, his tactics and management overall ended up with us losing the game, he didn't play the exact same tactics (for example Johnson wasn't a false 9) and he was limited to an extent due to unavailability but his use of tactics especially after Khadra went off early was strange, we played shit, lost and he got lots of deserved criticism. You don't have anyone saying that must be the players or the assistant that chose them strange tactics, the manager is responsible for the tactics whether we win, draw or lose and should be judged accordingly. Unfortunately, we are well past that point of neutrality. What a strange comparison. If that was the case, I presume that Travis would be praised for his ability to intercept, but heavily criticised for his terrible passing. You've just highlighted a perfect example of how someone can be praised when they get something right/when the end result is positive, and criticised when not. Ultimately that will level out, Travis would be seen as having a very specialist skill but overall would be very limited due to his poor passing, the analysis of Mowbray will or should be judged on where we are after 46 games.

I have never defended the first half tactics, in the quoted post I said "the first half tactics were totally bizarre." I said at the time that against a team that plays the ball out from the back, having an ageing central midfielder as a false 9 couldn't have been more illogical. There have been games this season in which we have been competitive, perhaps missing penalties or whatever and I have been critical of the manager because of the result, which is ultimately the bedrock to any post match analysis. Conversely, when we win a game, that fact can't be totally ignored and/or made out to be something that the manager has contributed to. It seems that with Mowbray, he has gone well past the point of being judged from a neutral standpoint. Mowbray (not Venus or the players) chose to bring on Gallagher and Dack and go 4-2-3-1, high pressing, at half time and we won as a result. We have not won enough games in the last few months to criticise the manager fairly over without needing to refuse to credit him on one of the occasions when we did win. "Caused the players to be on the verge of revolt" is a hyperbolic and speculative stance with nothing to back it up. Johnson's tweet could easily be interpreted as tongue in cheek. The players are still playing for the manager, I think it would be a struggle to suggest otherwise.

The Derby second half changes do have to be credited to Mowbray, no matter how reluctant people are. A big deal is made of supposed arguments at half time, but im sure players often argue when things arent going well. The first half tactics were totally bizarre but rectified quickly enough to go on to win. Mowbray definitely showed a lack of flexibility regarding the Buckley false 9 system though this season. It DID work for months but it was reliant on Brereton running in behind, meaning that Buckley not offering a goal threat wasn't half as much of an issue. Giles has also been used strangely, him on the right is bizarre. I don't necessarily think that Gallagher wide v central is the disparity many make out, he is almost equally poor in either position, and relying on him as our main goal threat was always going to be costly. When he plays central, he doesn't offer more of a goal threat than when wide to be honest, and his inability to bring others into play causes attacks to break down.

Mowbray's cup record is terrible and is somewhat of a curiosity. Take this season, v Morecambe we only made 2 changes if I remember correctly, and v Wigan we went stronger than most of us expected.

I don't see why anyone takes random wages published online seriously, they have probably been taken from Football Manager or similar. Ultimately, even if they were true, there is no way that we won't have been willing to put Nyambe and Rothwell on a much higher wage than they are at the moment, problem being that the raise put forward isn't enough to get them to sign, therefore they remain on terms agreed years and years ago until expiry.

The red carpet being laid out for this Renzo seems to be rubbing people up the wrong way. It seems the Chile novelty has worn off. In 6 games time when Brereton goes elsewhere he will be seeking out another team.

Obviously it is not a literal point but Mowbray being here next season would not cause the majority of the current ST base to not go, leaving a few hundred.

Dolan? Hedges? Could have Giles left, Brereton central, Dolan right and drop Gallagher