If you say so. Not a clue on the logistics, but I am sure they can work around it. We are ill prepared for the season so the sooner we improve the squad the better. There will always be at least a game a week now.

The Berget link seems an obvious one, whether it is people putting 2 and 2 together or a genuine link seems unclear, Rich Sharpe seems particularly off the pulse lately and he put that comment about half an hour after it was suggested on here. We need to have as many attacking options as we can with the option of 5 subs available which if we are to press could be even more important, whether Berget will be able to press as much as the years go by, I don't know. There definitely could be value in Tomasson taking someone that he knows and trusts at the start of his reign, many managers do similar. His versatility could also be useful. Few if any of us will have seen much of of him I guess, but some of the previously raised questions stand, is he immediately obtainable due to the Champions League qualifiers, his age is a plus and a minus as we need experience but about to turn 32 as an attacking player could be an issue physically, and his CV suggests that he has struggled away from Malmo. We could do with getting a few in this week to get players settled but I won't be holding my breath.

And neither obviously means it quite as literally as that, as if positions are never mentioned, and indeed as if either is stuck to one formation indefinitely. Just the usual typical managerial soundbites about philosophies, styles and adaptability.

I don't get how you can know that either way or even have an opinion on it at this stage.

I would even say though that neither of those unsuccessful loanees who ultimately did not improve of us still didn't impede anyone's development. Branthwaite came along with Harwood-Bellis when we had an injury crisis when January came around, the former was clearly inferior and soon lost his place. Clarkson came, wasn't very good but Buckley continued to keep his place and we sent Clarkson back as soon as possible. Sometimes especially when as often is the case our budget is minimal or non-existent, a loan can improve our team temporarily whilst allowing one of our own youngsters who is still a rookie to play week in week out and prove themselves a division or two below rather than be 3rd/4th/5th choice here. The question when analysing a potential loanee is is his better than what he is coming into replace in the immediate future. It should be as straightforward as that but I do feel that there is the additional difficulty in justifying loanees on simply whether they are good players are not.

Equally, how do you know they are not rubbish? Loads of teams are being linked with Khadra, Alan Nixon we know has history of hedging his bets, 4 teams linked including the easy one to the club he spent last season at, seems like he has got many tickets in the raffle to be able to say "I told you so" or indeed "aye." The Sky Sports link with Davies again has more than once club which always makes you suspicious that is is an eager agent testing the market, throw in the fact that he is left footed and I would find it illogical to see our main CB signing to be left footed. My point was that previous success as a player does not necessarily automatically mean that a manager will be any more or indeed any less respected. I had already heard of Tomasson from his playing career but I am older than most of the squad, plus of course I had read about his managerial career but that wouldn't in itself cause me to have loads and loads more respect for him than another manager. He will have to earn respect by how he is as a manager, and I am not saying that he isn't capable of that.

Even if he is, my point is that footballing ability alone isn't enough to merit respect in modern day football as other managers with glittering playing CV's have proven. I am not saying that he won't command respect to clarify, just not to automatically assume that he will.

It's absolutely bizarre and seems to become more and more prevalent as time goes on sadly.

I did notice that Edun had 7 on his training kit so I suspect that is a genuine change. I have noticed in the past that youngsters without numbers temporarily take the ones that are vacated during pre-season so not convinced they will stay that way,

Seems like both links today are rubbish. Khadra I am split on, a decent player and perhaps slightly ahead of Dolan, and it would give us 2 right footers on the left and vice versa. But it seems like Nixon has just plonked our name as a former club on the end of a "link" where he has spread his bets again in a desperate attempt to get a pack on the back. Ben Davies is a left footed centre back so I can't see that, not withstanding his massive wages, as good a defender as he is at this level. Also @chaddyrovers just because Tomasson was a big name player doesn't mean that players will automatically listen to him. He is probably a little before the memory spans of the majority of the squad for a start.

I didn't watch yesterdays game so I of course take your word that the pair impressed. But you are making gigantic conclusions based on a 60 minute friendly at the very start of pre-season against a changed Stanley side. You cannot possibly state with such assertiveness that they are "good enough players" at Championship level at this stage. If they prove not to be quite ready then you are in a position whereby you could need to keep playing them if either/both of the main 2 (Buckley himself hasn't proved himself deeper in first team football) even if they are struggling. Even if you had one or both of them around the squad, we would still need a couple ahead of them, they will get game time if they are good enough or failing that, send either/both out loan like with Carter and Wharton, get a better temporary replacement and if they do well, get them back in a year and then put them in with something to back it up. You mention promotion implying that it isn't a realistic target or something to be strived for. Let's not put all of our eggs in the one basket of expecting kids with no senior experience to both instantly settle and thrive.

Had the manager been allowed to sell and reinvest, had chose to and we fell out of promotion contention as we did then Mowbray definitely would have been blamed for it, and that blame would have been totally justified.

Bennett? And before him Mulgrew.

There is one common denominator over the last 12 years that has constantly caused delays and you still seemingly haven't twigged. Ince seemingly hoarding rubbish.

Hull have signed Seri, a brilliant signing.

Dack is injured again.

We have had delays throughout the last 12 years with things needing to be signed off in India.

Waggott is definitely not up to task but I love how he is being deemed to be the bottleneck. Over 12 years there has been one bottleneck and there will continue to be until they stop owning us.

Those who are saying that are doing so to feed the narrative that Rovers fans are a specifically impatient and demanding fanbase.

Why do those keen to make out Rovers fans to be an impatient angry mob repeatedly say that surely we would be better getting the right players? It implies that getting some players in to acclimatise in pre-season and signing the quality targets that you want are mutually exclusive objectives and that some have been suggested that we sign inferior players out of impatience.

Fair enough, so £6m if he stays and a further £4-5m of any Brereton proceeds? Do you think we will spend what you think we need as outlined above? I would be pleasantly surprised by that spend. I dont see a window where Brereton says but I would be amazed if we spent £10m even though that would still be a considerable profit overall. I personally have no reason to believe the rumour but even if it is true, as others have said it may have been the lure of first team football rather than the doomsday scenario that drove you to drink that you was implying.

Assuming he does go, what would you consider a reasonable spend to back up your optimism over the owners? Would it require spending beyond any Brereton fee?

He was trying to provoke by implying that we are losing out on players to Derby.

I dont agree with writing off the season essentially as a transitional one. The reason we surely appointed Tomasson was to progress and the nature of the Championship means that with a constant churn of players and teams often being reliant on loanees that it isnt really geared to writing seasons off as the start of a long process. We saw last season that sometimes things can align and therefore you should always be aiming to finish as high as possible. The process of trying to buy assets cheap and then potentially sell them on if we dont go up should be continious which is another area where our owners let us down. But my suggestion is very much to sign a few potential assets include one in midfield to go with 2 we already have as well as a more experienced head to try and finish as high as possible. If we dont go up, we would still have 3 assets in there and I dont see why someone of Hourihane's age couldnt do a second year

I think a potential asset would be good but not every player needs to be with a view to sell on. An experienced freebie as well as an asset with the likes of Travis and Buckley already here would make the most sense to me personally.