All a very sorry read. - The manager was never ever going, lots of "ITK's" not really knowing what they claimed, or getting duff information. - Absolutely nothing in the way of critical feedback from the looks of it, Waggott and co getting the easiest of easy rides. - A worrying vagueness to the embargo and no guarantee of avoiding it. - Further proof that the statement that Venkys are "willing to sign any cheque" is a load of bollocks. - A forum attendee with clearly an agenda with his comments about moving the training ground. - Again contrary to popular belief, the budget still to be finalised. - Contract negotiations not going well.

This definitely was amateurish to be fair I agree and something that didnt initially spring to mind. There were also occasions whereby replays were shown when the game was ongoing but they tended to be fairly rare. In regards to the matchday experience though, I think the biggest step could be simply to get in a better duo of commentators, the current 2 dont seem popular at all, I dont like them, none of my friends do and indeed everything I see on here on social media suggests that we are not alone. They are biased to the point of being beyond merely impartial, transfixed with referees, pretty boring and indeed I appreciate that they have to somewhat toe the line but they go well beyond that. I do wonder how feasible financially the new proposal could possibly be. If fans are allowed, will they still be allowed to stream every game in this country?

I suppose the demand for such a service will massively nosedive anyway assuming that fans are allowed back in from the start of the new season, for those in the UK it seemingly was mainly the best possible substitute. I do wonder if full live streams will remain indefinitely as they could affect attendances going forward. Things like under 23 coverage and extensive interviews I personally have no interest in so wouldnt pay just for that but of course if theres a market for that by all means we need to provide for it. For what its worth, I have never had any issues with ifollow in terms of functionality, my main issue was with the really poor choice of commentators who I would presume will remain on the new platform, I think they seem to be unpopular across the board. Not sure that the new flexibility of the potential service is something to be happy about because we know about the club and specifically Waggotts' repeated failure to understand the target market so im sure it will see a sharp price rise.

Why are things in general said at the fans forum "in confidence?"

Even the fact that we "ranked considerably higher in every attacking and defensive metric" is a flawed sentence IMO in that a level of context has been lost when stretching out these individual stats. For example, does having more possession mean that you are performing better? I would suggest not at all necessarily (we and Huddersfield are proof) yet such reliance on metrics out of context naturally implies that. Expected goals again is flawed in so many ways but another thing I would flag up is that last season (19/20) we scored a lot of early goals whereas this season we have conceded the first goal a lot, that will surely naturally lead to our expected goals to go up more often if we are chasing games. One thing that I hadnt really factored in is that the data itself could not be as accurate as physically possible dependant on its source which only adds further problems. You seem to attach a level of expertise to ranking high in certain metrics as ive mentioned but would you not suggest that in any way that your opinion which seems to have aligned quite close to that to which you perceive to be the conclusions (in your opinion) of said data is natural in order to justify it as someone so passionate about it in the first place? Some of the players you flag up on your document are defenders, is there much value in comparing stats which again in isolation are meaningless, ie more tackles may mean good reading of the game or being caught out of position? Also, do you not think that comparing players in different formations performing different roles at different clubs and crucially in different difficulties of leagues makes cross comparison fairly useless?

But even if you imply that an opinion warrants evidence, as soon as that individual stat is taken to justify a more generalised conclusion then it loses all context.

Did anything come of this?

I think its main flaws are not on the assumption that it is used in isolation, that is perhaps a bit of a lazy argument that people use. One of the main flaws is potentially as much about how it is used. There is a common tendency to take what in isolation are objective numbers and still think that they remain objective proof of a certain argument or opinion once that context has been removed. For example, in that recruitment dossier, the common conclusion seems to be that we underperformed compared to our performance level. I would argue that you cannot objectify such a broad argument based on numbers. Us and Huddersfield were 2 of the highest teams in regards to possession for example, both finished near the bottom. My conclusion before and after would be that possession does not determine performance level in any way. The main use would be to save time undoubtedly, but so many of the metrics are so broad that they mean very little. Some stats of things like progressive runs, dribbles etc are hard to define. People are comparing different players playing different roles/even positions at times in different teams in different leagues so you are then comparing apples and pears. Plus especially with defenders, how do you judge a good one? If one makes more tackles, is that good, or does it suggest that hes often out of position? There is also the issue of bias which consciously or subconsciously will affect peoples use of data. To come to general conclusions, even with data, it is just an opinion no more valid than one without data.

Personally my opinion is that he is talented but so inconsistent and nowhere near productive enough. Regarding your logic though, that would imply that recruitment in football is a perfect science. Surely Brereton is worth 7m if we paid that? The links to Sheffield United were mere transfer tittle tattle that probably like most rumours had no truth in it, and even if they are true and he leaves, he undoubtedly has ability, but it wouldnt change the inconsistency and lack of productivity that have marred his Rovers career. I don't really understand the toys being thrown out of the pram here. An agenda doesnt have to carry negative connotations and indeed the motive that I and others suspected proved true; Andy admitted soon after that he had intentions of trying to get into professional football which I believe may well alter the way that he analyses things, even subconsciously because it would be counterproductive to be too publically critical of anyone within football. That's not a negative reaction. The line in bold seems needlessly patronising. People see data as important to varying degrees, and those who find using it lots to be flawed doesnt mean that those people are ignorant to its uses. I feel like I understand it but also that so much of it is flawed, both the actual data and the way that it is used. For example, making such an in-depth document, I think that there will always be an element of trying to justify the data and what you perceive that it is showing, especially when you are so passionate about it, which is risky in itself. The conclusion that there were performance based positives for example, I did not see them having watched all of the games last season and things like possession, expected goals (a particularly controversial metric) etc, I like to take a step back and think, does ranking high in such things warrant being considered as a performance based positive, and I would personally question that. Andy has come on here and kindly explained plenty behind the background of making the document, he seemingly knows as well as any that people will have various questions and indeed believe in the data to varying degrees, something which he acknowledges.

Perhaps in certain areas, mainly out wide where we have loads of options. You think back to the centre backs back then and even central midfield with Gerrard, Scholes, Lampard, Carrick, Hargreaves, Butt etc, far better then.

I know that data is in general, im saying that we have no ideas as to whether it would be of any use to clubs in this specific format, to this level of detail, all this document is a mere discussion topic between fans, not in any way something that football clubs are or will be using, and its important to remember that. Of course, whether its purely based on data, watching random highlights, whatever, his opinion on who we should sign is just as valid as anyone else, no more, no less. Ive not seen most play enough if at all to comment and a few of the foreign ones I have never heard of, so couldnt possibly comment. To be honest, I am struggling to find any enthusiasm towards who we will sign in a summer in which our underperforming manager will remain and our best player will likely leave too. 100% agree. Data can be useful but is merely a tool, and a tool that can very easily be misused and manipulated.

There is always a post season lull and wall of silence, everyone on holiday and every single aspect of the club (season tickets, kits, signings, budgets) all left until the last possible moment. Dont torture yourself would be my advice.

I didnt mean motive in anything other than a sincere way, and indeed said motive was as suspected and shown above; to try and showcase what he can do with a view to getting involved in professional football. The document be made quite clearly took a lot of time and effort and is very well presented, so its in no way offensive to suggest that he may be doing it with an ambition to get involved into football on the back of such work. His stance on Mowbray has been fairly uncommital compared to the vast, vast majority, with a huge focus on "performances" although I dont think you can make performance objective even with data and indeed having watched every game this season, my opinion certainly wouldnt match the implication that we finished considerably below where our performances would have merited, no matter how many possession, progressive passes, expected goals stats or any other metrics you could throw at me. I do wonder if there is a risk when heavily focused in data of using your opinion to justify the data rather than vice versa, and I did also suggest that his unwillingness to be too critical of the manager was with a view of potentially getting involved with Rovers or indeed any club, something which may well be true and if so probably a very wise move. @chaddyrovers I have not criticised his work so I am unsure why you have come to that conclusion. Although even if I had, I presume that if he has genuine ambitions of getting into football then he wouldnt be wise expecting only praise and no criticism. We have no idea if this work in its current format would be genuinely used by a professional football club, something he implies and admits himself on the first page. Either way, I gave it a quick read myself and it was fairly interesting. All I merely did was make a suggestion regarding his motive which he indirectly admitted within hours. Nothing wrong with that.

I do think that it further highlights the limitations of data, especially when comparing players in defensive positions. The stats assume a natural consistency across the comparisons which doesnt exist. For example, Trippier plays in a totally different league. Alexander Arnold (and Robertson) both play in a back 4 but almost in a unique way in quite how forward they play and what their primary jobs are in the team. Reece James is often played as a wing back rather than in a back 4 although has recently played a few games as one of the 3 centre backs. I think full backs are a very subjective area to judge upon. For example, is having the most tackles a good thing or does it indicate an increased likelihood of being caught of position? If for example Liverpool get caught out of position, would the fact that Alexander Arnold will likely be so far forward as per their tactics mean that he is less likely to be dribbled around as he is already so far forward? Back to the England squad, I do hope that Southgate cuts 2 from the 4 in the extended squad rather than avoiding the tough decision and taking 3 or 4, as although all 4 have their merits, right back is not a position you need so many of.

I suppose the thing with tournament football is that unlike in a League, the best team doesnt necessarily always win, one off day against a big team and you are on the plane home.

Very much so. I dont really understand the motive behind what is clearly a report that has taken a lot of time and to be fair is presented very well. Is it a case of someone not currently within the recruitment department of a football club creating what is essentially a portfolio to try and earn himself paid work? And if so, would that in any way explain his continued insistence to justify the "performance over results" rhetoric to defend Mowbray, wary of burning bridges ahead of what he hopes will eventually see him get a paid job? The line about Rovers recruitment team doing an excellent job did make me chuckle! I havent seen many of the players play very often although Trybull is perhaps the perfect example of how data can mislead, presumably his passing stats are good yet they dont account for how slow he does everything stunting the momentum in any attack, not a player I want to see return.

No chance of some of them! You think that Luke Shaw would dislodge Ashley Cole, and that Stones could dislodge 2 from Campbell, Ferdinand and Terry?! Gary Neville was as reliable a right back as you could wish to see too, none of the current crop would get in over that back 4. I would agree with those who think that Rashford is overrated, ive never been his biggest fan, I prefer Sterling although hes been poor for a number of months, neither would start the tournament in my opinion. Mount has grown on me but there is no way that he dislodges Lampard, Scholes or Gerrard in an already overcrowded central midfield back then. Going back, that England side was mainly lacking in goal and out wide, and Pickford is certainly no upgrade. I would put Sancho and Foden in who would be my first pick in those roles this summer. Kane would obviously have a very good shout of starting, with Rooney and Owen it wouldnt be a guarantee but I would agree on Kane. The 2004 England side also lacked depth in a few areas.

I think we need to sign in wide areas anyway, with Elliott gone and potentially Armstrong and/or Rothwell leaving, I think we need to sign players to replace them, we dont have the answers to such holes internally. If we do try to do that, we will be in even more trouble.

Maybe an idea would be if Chapman was to stay would be to have him here around the first team and to loan Dolan out to League 1, ideal world in a year is that Chapman has established himself and Dolan is on the back of a season full of goals and assists ready to challenge as well.

Seems like other Championship clubs are starting to sign players, albeit fairly underwhelming ones. Cardiff have signed James Collins, QPR have signed Sam Field permanently, Middlesbrough have signed Lumley from QPR and Huddersfield have signed Pearson on a free from Luton.

Just the extortionate price and the lack of value. I personally wouldnt buy a football shirt unless I was playing 5/6 a side in it, I dont wear them when I go but I get that some like to. But £50+ for a shirt which goes out of date in a year is very expensive.

Totally take your point on the stats in fairness. I think with stats, the main ones to take notice of is goals and (to a slightly lesser extent) assists for players along the front line, mainly strikers, once you go further back, stats dont tell a full story by any means. To go off on a tangent, with a holding midfielder or a defender, things like interceptions, tackles etc could just mean that a player is out of position more often. But any way, my point is very much a subjective one, and coming into this season I would have been more inclined to agree with the idea that he just needs game time centrally in a way that suits him and then he would have no reason not to really flourish. That has happened this season, in terms of where he has played and how often he couldnt have asked much more, yet to me, he has continued to frustrate and disappoint aside from occasional brilliance. He definitely has talent, maybe thats why I expect more, but some of the supposed barriers have been removed and he still in my opinion is not doing enough. Maybe he will just have a career as one of so many players who has obvious talent but can never piece it together on a regular enough basis. Or maybe he will push on either elsewhere or hopefully here and become far more consistent.

I have acknowledged that perhaps Rothwell may argue that he could have been coached better and indeed he may go elsewhere and take his career up a notch, but there is no acknowledgement that indeed he has been played regularly this season in his preferred position and has still not really done much, proving to be very inconsistent. King is a different situation, and one in which he didnt play because the 2 playing ahead of him were both 20+ goalscorers, and King also frequently spent time on the treatment table. You could go through a host of players from the past that people felt at the time could do more and for whatever reason, including under various managers, they werent performing consistently, some will have moved on and gone up a notch, some will have vanished into obscurity and many will be inbetween. Rothwell has never had a season where he has particularly excelled hence why I am not prepared to nail my colours to the mast and suggest that he has it in him to really perform consistently at this level or indeed the level above. There is no pissing contest between Armstrong and Rothwell because at a younger age the former has conclusively shown far more than the latter although your prediction is sadly fairly likely. For what its worth, I would be happy to keep him but I just think people are using his inconsistency as a symbol to slate the manager when in this situation, its not clear cut. Besides, the managers overall performance more than merits a P45 and has for a while.

2 more excuses for Rothwell, not being consistently played on the back of a season when he played regularly from a preferred area of the pitch, and of course the nonsense about the team being purposely set up to make Armstrong look good, which I dont want to get into again. Either way, no personal responsibility towards the player even though the first excuse has this season been invalidated. The problem is that criticising a player seems to be perceived as backing of the manager which is nonsensical because Mowbray signed him anyway so either way the blame goes back to him.

Its not that I dont rate him and indeed I said that I would be happy to see him stay and if the next season started tomorrow I would start him. I just feel that he is regularly made out to be hard done by, when in fact hes 26 and has never consistently performed here and wasnt scoring and assisting loads prior to the last 3 years. I feel like its almost symbolic to be able to put his lack of consistent performance and end product onto the already vast fire of evidence that points to Mowbray needing to be sacked, but even playing regularly centrally this season as he wishes, I dont think hes done anywhere near enough. Contributing with goals and assists is a little more clear cut than things like "progressive runs" "pass completion" and things like that, goals and assists are the important thing and the bread and butter. Youve compared him to Evans for example, he is a defensive midfielder deemed not good enough for us so its an irrelevant comparison. Rothwells driving runs almost exclusively end in him losing the ball or messing up the end bit. I dont doubt that he has ability and certain attributes but his all round game is in my opinion no better than mid table Championship standard. I dont hate any Rovers players, I just get frustrated by quite a few of what I consider to be a pretty poor squad built by Mowbray. With a number(some have thankfully left) such as Bennett, Bell etc they frustrate me because they arent up to it and they cost my team. Rothwell is more complex, I dont have that same feeling of doom when I see his name because he unlike some others has something about him but he almost exclusively frustrates yet hides behind excuses, needs to play in this position, would do better in this team, has been poorly coached etc.