All hypothetical, but had all of those players been sold, then we almost certainly wouldn't have been anything close to where we are in the table at the moment, with a genuine chance of a promotion.

Why is the only alternative to frugality a reckless spending spree?! It is a commonly repeated, strawman argument. No one has asked for wild, multi million pound spending! Why has there been no interest in him, according to the manager? He will surely be available right now at a cheaper value.

I know that it is cyclical, I mentioned as such. But with the current situation, I would be amazed if the addition of the 2022 year wouldn't IMPROVE the current cycle compared to the year that it knocks off, what with the factors that I mentioned, notably the considerable Armstrong sale. That is without considering the notable wage decrease expected. Therefore, that improvement gives a bit of flexibility for a bit of reinvestment. Out of interest, do you think that what you have perceived to be the current plan of actions shows genuine signs of bearing fruit? I personally think that the inflexibility to get key assets signed and the lack of consistency regarding its application means that it is not going to be successful any time soon.

Thats a totally hypothetical scenario. I don't think for one moment that a Premier League team would have Rothwell for 10m, I mean they could probably get him for much less right now yet no one seems keen to. But ultimately, being perhaps over stringent and not allowing the flexibility to tie him down ultimately throws to one side any potential income from a sale which is obviously the natural end to the "polishing" of an asset. So it becomes a case of if my aunty had bollocks she would be my aunty. I don't think that Kaminski and Wharton are at this moment in this market multi million pound players, especially the former due to his contract.

It's not about "ignoring the rules," and that is the part that those so keen to defend the owners don't seem to understand, the 2 choices are not stringent spending v wild, unplanned spending. I don't think that anyone has suggested wreckless spending that would see us go miles over FFP regulations, why would they. The thing is, the June 2021 year seemingly was particularly problematic, hence the training ground sale to get around the FFP rules. Even if it is cyclical, the June 2022 accounting year will surely be considerably healthier compared to the last few years. The wage bill will be much lower, the Armstrong sale will be in this year too, and we will have a full year of ticket sales for the first time in 3 years.

Im not having personally that we are still right on the brink of FFP regulations.

Does Balaji's son support/attend Rovers games? Which reminds me, Venkys promised to attend a game this season. I wonder if they will follow through on that promise.

It won't work unless its a continuous process, and Venkys have never shown signs that they have the willingness or competence to make it a continuous process.

Doesn't sound good at all. Acceptance that we may not strengthen, implications of very little money being available and that we are struggling to get deals done, and a reluctant mention of the loan market. I can't say that I expected Venkys to give it a go in such as strong opportunity, and if we bring in nobody there is a big danger of us getting into a rut as and when injuries really tighten their grip.

The squad as it will do at times without reinforcement is starting to creak, and we already have seen the dependence on the first 11. We need Venkys to get their cheque book out because we don't have enough quality. With Brereton also out of Luton, we could do with at least one attacker before then. No excuses now. It is not that straightforward, as it isn't a 2 horse race for second spot, it is far too simplistic to talk about chalking off our losses. QPR won who are really in form and could leap frog us if they win their game in hand, a big if I know. West Brom also won who will also fancy their chances for 2nd, and Huddersfield further established themselves as a top 6 contender. Forest and Sheffield United are also threats for the play offs and both won. Plus obviously Fulham have pushed further away even in the absence of Mitrovic. Conversely, Stoke and Coventry lost too. Ultimately there are probably 4 or 5 teams with a genuine chance of 2nd, and quite a few with a chance of the top 6. Until as and when a genuine 2 horse race materialises, it is just about us, every time we win, we will almost certainly gain on at least a couple of teams, every time we drop points, teams will make ground/push ahead of us. Win tomorrow and we have pushed ahead of Bournemouth, and added to the distance between Boro, Stoke and Coventry. Don't win and the likes of QPR, West Brom, Huddersfield and further back Forest and Sheffield United again will have made ground on us, plus potentially Boro if they beat us.

This talk about playing the EFL "at their own game" seems misguided. There are now specific rules in place, perhaps people can take issue with those rules, 14 available including 1 keeper. We presumably have more than that so we can't do anything, end of. The EFL isn't against Rovers either, you can question its competence and whether its rules etc are fit for purpose but they aren't against us.

Close to Brockhall as in someone that works for Rovers or just nearby?

Agreed, lets hope as it sounds that it is nonsense. It seems that much of the information that spills out is false; there was one day in the summer when it was announced on here that Rothwell was leaving that very day and Adam Reach was joining. Neither happened.

Surely in the absence of attackers, Chapman will be on the bench on Monday.

Why would the issue with Rothwell be getting his wages off the books? If there was financial motivation it would be surely to get value before his contract expires, his contract is the one he signed after signing from Oxford so I doubt it is hefty and Stephens will be on more in the Premier League.

Where did you hear it from? Makes no sense at all, seems a little far fetched.

Whilst the current rules are questionable to say the least, it isnt a case of just asking to call it off. I am unsure if it is the same rule across the EFL but isnt it that you need 14 players (including one keeper) to be fit and available, including anyone who has played a senior game? Obviously we do so we cant call it off, end of.

True. But I suppose neither does Markanday yet its assumed across the board that not having him available for selection weakens our options overall.

Of course but if you take a main goalscorer out of any team, you weaken them as a result. We would rather he was available and I don't think we have much goal threat.

I meant as in available. I acknowledged that we will be more solid again which is key but it is equally valid to question our attacking side which is massively depleted with our main goalscorer out (as well as a couple of other attacking players) and we are weaker as a result.

It is definitely a big worry going into Monday wondering where we will score goals without Brereton, especially with Markanday and Dolan out, not that either of them are proven goalscorers but it further reduces the options available. Gallagher is a donkey as we all know and Khadra is never a prolific scorer. You contrast that to Boro who have 2 new additions in forward areas ready to go. Nyambe and Travis should come straight back in which should make us more solid however. Boro have an excellent manager at this level who will make them more than the sum of their parts, that being said, it is probably partly indicative of a league of poor quality; I don't think that Boro's squad is anything remarkable. Crooks will be a huge physical danger from deep and they will play a lot through Jones down the right hand side. But it would be hasty to right off our chances at home even without our primary goal threat.

Huge blow, we now need 2 new attackers rather than just the one. Maybe one loan and one permanent.

I don't get why it is a "joke." From Leeds perspective, to cancel the loan would merely be stopping an agreement that will see them continue to receive contribution towards his wage; that may be a small contribution, but even if its 5 grand a week for 20 weeks, it is 100 grand they otherwise wouldn't have. From the players perspective, he can still do his rehabilitation at Leeds so they certainly aren't neglecting him, and from their perspective, the alternatives are take him back and keep him when he clearly isn't close to a Premier League squad, try and loan him elsewhere which will be impossible due to his injury or keep him here whereby even if it is an outside chance, he may well have his only chance of first team football this season.

Away fans across the board tend to be more boisterous but as Mattyblue said, the fans have been great at Ewood and a big help in recent weeks. Time to bring that home? It is already home.

You say that a season is 46 games, not 20 and obviously I agree but you chose to constantly focus on 17 games last season rather than the final league position, which to me was damning enough. And also why are you also setting specific buffers for brief runs of form if you truly believe in that 46 game motto? It seems like that only applies when we are doing well. If Mowbray got us promoted which is less than 50% likely, then how would he be deemed to be "not good enough for the Championship?" If we went up, big if, then the job overall that he would have done here would go from ok to brilliant so it would be so so hard to justify his dismissal. That being said, I get the scope for a potentially brilliant opportunity regarding a new manager but it would take someone remarkable.