We dont want 27 year old midfielders to block the pathways, but a young lad playing week in week out on loan from Liverpool will be fine.

How can you say I am being over critical without watching the game?! He was crap again, like having 10 men even before the red card. You always evade giving a straight answer on what he brings to the team because presumably you cant think of anything but want to defend the manager. He is slow, lazy, weak, doesnt hold the ball up, doesnt win headers, doesnt offer a goal threat, doesnt run in behind, nothing. He is a league 2 or conference standard player and in a poor league there isnt a poorer striker playing even semi regularly.

Brereton down the middle or Dolan, in the absence of a striker so far this window and a horrendous attempt at signing one in the summer. If I had to pick between the 2, and I agree it is a terrible choice, Gallagher would score goals in League 2/The Conference so him.

Another borefest, two really poor teams in a poor league serving up an hour and a half I won't get back. Aside from Tomasson and @chaddyrovers surely nobody rates Vale? He is absolute rubbish. Buckley isn't a deep central midfielder either, he is a liability. We don't attack like we ever work on it in training and our set pieces are terrible.

He explained it, I was pointing out how flawed the statement was.

The protests will only ramp up now. Problems far more deep rooted but Lampard is a crap manager.

This isn't any different from any other game, watching Rovers this season has been painful. Such a standard often warrants a £30 charge, let that sink in. Vale is never going to make it, get rid.

100%. I dont agree with sacrificing seasons, it is important to think long term hence why I am so angry about the Brereton situation but the primary focus should always be the next game and the current season. I am pro loans more than most as it can get you quality that you couldnt normally afford as long as they are used effectively and moderately.

You are being purposely obtuse by focusing on the premise of "forcing" him to sign a new deal when we could have sold him to make a profit and avoid losing him on a free.

Nice were reported as bidding £8.4m and Everton with a bid rising to £10m. They may not be what he would warrant with longer than a year but that isn't derisory compared to the inevitable free transfer a year later. If David Brent is Steve Waggott in this instance, then even he isn't to blame. Venkys have actively intervened and rejected any bids. Who has said that we should or could MAKE him sign? And why should owners of a football club consider fan opinions over business sense? We have screwed up, firstly we could have potentially gave him a new deal as he started to improve, and then we have had tangible bids on the table to generate a massive fee for modern day Rovers and a profit on investment and turned them down.

The plan should be to not allow players to run their deals down, selling them prior, giving plenty of scope for reinvestment. Any talk of other plans involving projects and journeys are meaningless as it stands because Venkys are the problem. Broughton can still be judged on what he has done, and his first window was underwhelming (albeit difficult) but the bigger problems are beyond him.

Bang on. We couldn't have forced him to sign but we could have accepted bids for him.

If that is the case, then why dismiss 27 year olds as if they would block a pathway anymore than Morton?

No, hes back.

Broughton wont be "in charge" regarding big sales unless Venkys have a sudden change of heart, as was the case with Rothwell as well as Brereton.

Being so needlessly aggressive with the player would be counter productive, his decision on a new contract wouldnt change and indeed if there was even a slither of a renewal (not the case here) then that would evaporate. Its cutting your nose off to spite your face. Equally allowing him to run his contract down in the way we have is idiotic. A happy medium would have been for the owners to encourage offers and a bidding war in the summer, and take the highest. Instead they seemingly created a random and unrealistic price tag and didnt want to know unless it was met.

Skint. Or all a ploy as @chaddyroverssuggested to make out we have less than we do.

They aren't on a similarly tight budget like we are. This "people would have moaned" argument is constant yet it should play no part whatsoever.

Hyam is out for 3 or 4 weeks. Huge blow and puts emphasis on getting a deal for Porteous done.

It's small change when our main player and asset is being allowed to run his deal down and we are seemingly in the hunt for more loanees! Not consistent with focusing on next season.

I doubt that making big sales are particularly impressive to the owners when they are the ones who block potential sales to the detriment of the football club.

Point being, signing Morton as a loan signing to play every game does NOT fit in with the idea I was quoting about this being a development season with results to come next season. It reduces the game time of Wharton and Garrett when surely if it was a free pass almost, they would play as much as possible. As I said, I hate the idea of writing off seasons anyway so I disagree with this "blocking pathway" bollocks.

It would be easier to get a striker with even £5m over sole reliance on the free transfer market. Seems like that ship has sailed now anyway, hopefully we can get a fee in this window but I doubt it. Piss poor. Regarding Gelhardt, he is going to Wigan anyway. Always hard when you are just fishing for loan deals and the occasional cheap deal, lots of competition.

Very strange comment, but it wasn't Alan Nixon. Someone called Justin Allen.

I think that Undav would seem a more fitting loan signing out of the 2, if we can even do either. I watched Boro v Brighton the other week and he scored with a very good finish, his goal record in general is very good. He is a bit older and we need a number 9 rather than a "flexible" attacker.