It's not the short corners specifically that bothers me, it is the actual routines. The short pass, receive back and then float in a ball to be easily headed away at the front post was repeated numerous times to the point that in the end we didn't even get a cross in. Also that rubbish floater to the edge of the box (think Pedersen to Tugay but shit) in the first half which doesn't even lead to the ball entering the box and was on show a couple of times earlier in the season. The actual routines throughout this season have abysmal, and that goes back to the training ground. We actually had some extra height in Hirst too.

That would be piss poor. Have any other away sides had such low allocations there this season @longsiders1882

How terrible were the corners again today? Stupid routines including the one to the edge of the box in the first half and the numerous short ones in the second, none of which we ever looked like scoring from. The managers responsibility.

I don't compute how such a poor performance and result that was even described as "disappointing" by the poster in question led to a detailed report in which no individual received any criticism. Aside from one pass to Brereton, Vale was typically ineffective. What does he do well? Slow, weak, technically poor, not a goal threat. Not his fault, just playing well, well above his level. He certainly isn't ready, he is so far off it is untrue. There were alternative solutions available that could have been used.

Who was that from? And how many away tickets?

Considering that both the performance and result was crap, did no individual warrant any criticism from you?

Hirst looks raw and weedy and doesn't seem like a capable focal point, he struggled to bring players into play and had a lot of similarities to Gallagher, quite quick, runs the channels, didn't hold it up, loose touch, didn't link play. That may be the case on Mola but he is very capable at centre back according to quotes this week so surely him there and Carter at right back is better than having Travis there. I get the fact that it isn't ideal but had Mowbray declined to use a new centre back both initially and then to change things on accordance of him needing to settle in then he would have been lambasted. There are alternative solutions to playing Vale there who couldn't score in non league and is so far off the level. Markanday if fit should have been on the bench ahead of him. Alternatively, Hedges should have been left on knowing that Hirst wouldn't last and either he or Dolan could go centrally. Dack should have been left on too.

I'm not saying that he doesn't get time to bed in but equally when Tomasson makes poor team sections, employs flawed tactics, makes illogical substitutions and signings under his watch struggle then he gets criticism. People cannot quit the habit of criticising Mowbray when poor decisions lead to a poor performance and a defeat. Not that I am aware of but I may be wrong. Even so, Vale is a pointless sub, may as well keep Hirst on for the 90.

It was the referee who had seen that a goal had shown on his watch.

For how long will any poor performance in the Tomasson reign be blamed back on Mowbray? Tomasson got his team wrong and his subs wrong. He had his "main striker target" up front and he was crap. He had a centre back he signed this week on the bench when we needed him, had Mowbray mentioned the "bedding him in" rhetoric he would have somewhat justifiably been criticised.

An absolute shambles for the second home game running and some real worrying signs both from the players and from the manager. Tomasson got his team selection wrong today, Travis at right back was an ongoing disaster, he signed a centre back this week but even if you say right he has gone unchanged from Wednesday, his subs and decision making on the back of that were shocking. Defensively, Hyam was the best although his part in their first was really naive. Not sure what game the person who awarded the man of the match was watching, Carter was somewhat out of his depth including a ludicrous pass in the second half that put Wells in. Pickering is an easy scapegoat at the moment, he was neither particularly good nor one of our very worst performers and Travis as mentioned was a massive liability throughout. Both of the midfield two really struggled, Wharton's touch was off and he kept slipping and/or losing it and Morton was horrendous, kept giving the ball away and trying stupid passes. Hedges often takes one touch too many, neither him and Dack were great but why take them off at half time? Brereton was really poor but did again score and also made runs that repeatedly weren't found. The 2 forwards, wow. Hirst aside from one decent run in the first minute had a very poor debut, he kept getting caught offside, he was weak, he couldn't hold it up and he never looked like scoring. And Jack Vale, why he keeps getting minutes under a manager who had such a great history as a striker himself is scandalous, he has literally nothing good to his game, no pace, no strength, technically poor, summed up by that shot at the end. Why is Markanday behind him?! And the subs made no sense, there was a blatant weakness in our defence that was ignored at half time, we had a Tomasson signed centre back on the bench, why ignore him? Dolan had an impact but Buckley was not an upgrade on Dack.

Mowbray definitely said similar about becoming a Premier League side. Easy to forget him having everyone eating from his hand for 2 years. What managers say tend to be similar and its meaningless.

Platitudes indeed. Managers all say very similar stuff and it tends to follow a pattern to those who get wrapped up in what a manager says at the start and how "refreshing" it is are in many cases the ones that pick apart everything and get angry towards the end. Its all self preservation and they say a lot of the same stuff, loads of similarities between what Tomasson is saying now and what Mowbray said the start. All about what happens on the pitch. No fawning for me over what Tomassons says about journeys and projects.

I dont get the obsession of half full and half empty, why do people need to be either, surely there is a middle ground? And Aynslea Pears is a "good keeper?!"

A work in progress whereby at the end of the season, by far your biggest asset leaves and goes for nothing, as do 3 of those signings unless any are signed which will be taken from next seasons budget.

I would love him to never start a game in his natural position all season, but not as a slight on him, because that would mean that Dack is back to playing every game. I think his track record and the Peterborough fans and how blaze they were about him being sold was worrying coupled with a big price tag which perhaps could have been spent more wisely. His finish at Swansea was tidy but otherwise he has barely had a kick and I don't see what stands out, he isn't that quick, technically his touch seems quite poor, he works hard but that isn't enough. He hopefully will kick on though because he could be a big weapon if he does with the 5 sub rule giving more scope for attacking options.

A valuation is not just based on a players quality, its based on his contractual situation. I just don't get why you suspend all critical faculty. A perfect transfer window for anyone is nigh on impossible, it is ok to say I would like x or y without it affecting your support of the club. Of course we are speaking before these players have really started their Rovers careers, none of us have seen any of these players every week, our judgements may be wrong and that is fine. But you don't have to only see the positives in the work we have done. I think we could do with a few more in an ideal world. I would prefer experienced and competent back up to Kaminski. I would prefer to have another actual right back rather than the imbalance caused at the moment when Brittain is out, I would prefer natural competition for Pickering at left back and I would like a more experienced option in central midfield, as well as some genuine pace out wide. Mola may fill either the left back or midfield vacancy mentioned, he seems like a squad filler with his versatility to pad it out. Szmodics is a big question mark, questionable track record especially at this record, no specific attribute has stood out so far and its a big old fee. Hirst I am unsure on too, would prefer a better track record but seems to have good attributes and I am glad we have another striker, Morton looks a tidy player to have about and Hyam and Brittain are the stand out 2 positives for me. Can't get on board with Brereton leaving on a free but short term its good news even if longer term it really isn't at all. There is literally nothing that the club could do differently to avoid these players leaving for free. Apparently.

We did lose a few but we have spent good money to sign 3, have loaned 3 more and have made the huge decision to keep Brereton. He won't be here next season and we won't have any direct money to replace him, so we are already much worse off next season when you think of that build. Tomasson had 2 seasons in Malmo and won the league in both seasons too. It just somewhat flies in the face of the (justified) desperation to get rid of a steady hand for an exciting young manager spending a bit of money to be happy with falling down the league. If we finish 10th say, I am not saying sack him or anything, but we rolled the dice because we want more.

I've outlined why. We have spent relatively speaking a decent level of money on 3 permanent signings, we have signed 3 short term (at least initially) signings and we have decided upon the incredibly short term move of keeping Brereton, who will leave a big hole next season. Mowbray was a safe pair of hands who almost guaranteed safety and provided stability, a solid Championship manager. We have to overachieve to get promoted, so a safe 4 on a dice is not going to do that, hence why it got to the stage where essentially everyone wanted him gone. We've appointed a dynamic new manager with fresh ideas, we have spent a good positive budget on 3 permanent signings at peak age and we have signed 3 short term deals, as well as the Brereton situation. Does that mean that if we finish below 8th that we have badly failed and the manager should go? Of course that is far from being necessary true. But all things considered, say we finish 10th, we are lower than last season which is disappointing IMO with all of the above considered. I am not being impatient and saying it must happen now, but that should be a genuine, serious aim. Mowbray was slagged off for banging on about journeys etc, of course the long term should always be a consideration (and hasnt been with the main issue of the summer) but slow builds don't really work in the hostile economic environment of the Championship.

Rothwell could have commanded a fee in January but we let him run his contract down again. The LT reported that Stoke had come in for Nyambe last summer. Brereton is another and much more significant case. This notion that "we can't make anyone do anything" is true to an extent but also flawed because we as a club can act more rationally in line with the supposed business model that we are striving for yet acting totally in the opposite way.

That would surely be considered underwhelming.

Unsure if this is the best place to put it, but following the closure of the window, what are peoples expectations this season and have they changed since the window?. Words that have only provoked in the past have been used to describe this season including journey and transition but we have spent £5m+ without recouping fees, have 3 players on loan for a season and have our talisman back fit and our main goalscorer for a season in a move that long term is crazy but short term really makes us stronger. For me, the benchmark is to improve on last season with all that factored in.

Definitely see some sense in it but still we don't know if they will be here beyond May and if they are, they will be decisions made eating into next seasons budget. The Brereton one is the main one though and coupled with the loans, I think this idea that it is down to any individual that we regularly have mass surgery each summer is a flawed one, it is partly circumstance in being a Championship club (especially with our comparative resources but clubs with bigger budgets use loans for example regularly) and the common denominator is Venkys, especially considering how stubborn they are. I think it becomes so difficult to directly compare player for player replacements for many reasons, different manager with a different style, the likes of Dack and Hedges who didn't impact last season back in the mix, there will be players who played important roles last season who will get injuries most likely and have less impact than last season. You have also missed Khadra, Giles and Poveda too. I also don't think that point 5 is necessarily true, Tomasson said we tried for one extra yesterday and also might only have been 6 due to a lack of extra budget rather than anything else. One thing I would ask is that there has been a lot of posts dismissing this season as part of a transition, something due to the way the Championship works always seemed illogical. But we have kept Brereton, (for 1 season) signed loans and spent £5m+ without recouping anything. Surely we can expect to improve on 8th? They aren't directly comparable for many reasons. They don't play the same role for a start, but also the expectation on Szmodics should be much more than Rothwell when he signed because he was the big summer signing whereas Rothwell was for a nominal fee as a squad player initially at a younger age.

I think we could have got more than that had we offered him out, as much of a loss as he would be. Out of interest, say he wasnt currently with us, would you consider a loan deal with a loan fee of £10m for Brereton to be good business? Is there any area of the window that you are unhappy with? Any signings that you are not overly fond of? Do you still wish Brown had been kept? Any areas you think we are lacking in? Needless dig but I am pleasantly surprised at the net spend, but I have never called for a constant positive net spend. I have regularly suggested that we should sell assets and reinvest a large percentage and thats how you grow. In the last 12 months we have sold one of our 2 main assets and reinvested none of that, then the owners blocked a potential 4m sale, and now our remaining main asset is being allowed to run his deal down. It is this inconsistently that infuriates me. Last summer, why not sign a 3-5m striker? Then do likewise with a player upon selling Brereton, and continue the process. Add a player or two with the Rothwell proceeds and a well run club now has 3 or 4 assets on longer deals rather than 1 running it down, as much as I will enjoy watching him for another season. 3 loans and our main asset running his contract down does not suggest a huge change in long term thinking but the limitations come from the top rather than being blamed on any individual. I have many similar views to you and have shared them on the individuals signed. Certainly not a disastrous window, high comparative net spend and some potentially clever additions.

Brilliant owners apparently. People agreeing underneath! Genius move to be so bad and corrupt at the start that standards become so low and even allowing a key asset to run his deal down is a symbol of the owners beimg brilliant.