All about opinions but do you personally think its wise to write off a whole season, not least one in which we started well for such a reason? Why do we need to write it off to show we have or supposedly have a longer term plan? And has our business this season (Brereton running his deal down, use of loanees and game time for younger lads etc) been consistent with this plan?

A name jokingly mentioned a few pages back after the rumour the other year that turned out to be rubbish, but Assombolonga could be being loaned back to the Championship. Im sure it isnt us with Undav and Gelhardt seemingly the more pressing targets but worth a mention.

Today and last weekend gave us 2 away games against poor opposition and 1 point is not good enough ahead of 3 away games to come which we will really have to show something we havent so far to improve our poor away form.

He is clearly useful well above the likes of Vale, Hirst and Butterworth and will chip in with close to double figures but would his all round contribution be considered a managers dream? He works hard but he has a poor touch, jumps lower than he stands, cant hold the ball up and he misses loads of games due to injury.

Dan Butterworth has 2 goals in 16 games for Port Vale. Vale couldnt score goals in the Conference last season. An under funded squad with the owners refusing to allow reinvestment of potential sales means that we have to rely too much on the academy at times to fill the numbers. In successive seasons whereby we have started well, the fact that both have had the amount of minutes that they have and that we are comparing who is the least ineffective is telling.

I always take any supposed ITK titbits with a giant pinch of salt, and Porteous has a game prior to signing for anyone so I am unconvinced. We know that we have a bid in so lets hope that Watford's "interest" doesn't firm up.

Maybe one we will miss out on.

Would you now agree that he deserves to be potted or would you still stick blindly with him?

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.