How have "getting behind the lads" on a matchday and (justifiably) moaning about the owners on on an internet messageboard become mutually exclusive in your head?

In general? Definitely 4 at the back, and 100% with Phil Foden in the team, he is the player miles above the rest of our (talented) attacking midfielders. The question is where do you play him because he is so good in so many position, but I like him further forward because he tends to score and assist so much. We are in a bit of a strange situation with many of our attacking players out of form at the moment, Grealish I think has yet to convince that he can be as effective without being the big fish in a small pond having not yet ever replicated his Villa form, Mount needs to do more in the final third for me, Sterling has been anonymous at club level for about 18 months, Rashford is only just back from injury and didn't seem to want to be part of the squad as is the case with Greenwood, Sancho is rotting under Solskjaer (as much as I love him ruining United, it is negatively effecting many England players too) and Saka and Smith Rowe are really coming to the surface now at Arenal. Happy with 4231 but I do wonder if a slightly more flexible 433 would allow us better control over games and perhaps to get Bellingham in. Connor Gallagher could also come into the equation as a central midfielder with the likes of Mount, with Rice sitting. Foden, Kane and one other as the front 3. A team of Pickford / James Stones Maguire Shaw / Rice Bellingham Mount / Foden Kane Sterling for example, with many of those positions up for grabs. Ramsdale in net, Alexander Arnold and Chilwell at full back, White at centre back, Phillips, Henderson and Gallagher can come into the centre of midfield and a whole host of players could alternate with Sterling.

The state of some of the replies to this.

Because I was commenting (and not alone in doing so) on what I perceived to be an overly cautious line up against poor opposition, and reverting back to a formation that I am less keen on compared to one that gets 4 attacking players in it, especially as England have such an array of talent in that area at the moment. I do think that we would have battered a very naive, high pressing and poor quality Albanian side regardless of formation but still, I have acknowledged that I was incorrect so I am unsure why you are so desperate to go over it. As a neutral obviously but that is a totally different question. When watching Rovers (and England) my concern is the result. That doesn't mean that I cannot comment if it is boring but my main focus is the result, how we get there is not the issue.

I would totaly disagree that Gallagher is a good outlet, in fact I would say he is as poor as I can remember a striker being at that side of the game in a Rovers shirt. His first touch, hold up play and his ability to back into defenders and bring others into play is so poor it is untrue, and has never shown signs of improving, and that brings further pressure on us. He often over runs the ball or mis controls the ball too which hands possession back to our opponents and can lead to a seige on our penalty box when we are holding onto a lead, and often causes us to throw unnecessary points away. The 2 perfect examples would be the Luton and Coventry games in which we threw 2 nil leads away in both, not overlooking the fact that he was key in us getting that 2 nil lead in the latter. I am not saying that he is useless, I think when we are pressing high early in games his physicality and his running power can be very useful, he never will be prolific but he does chip in with a reasonable number of goals and he is useful at the front post from defensive corners but as an outlet, I think that he is piss poor.

Football being boring or not is totally subjective, tonight England got the result and had the performance. All I did was make a throwaway comment about what I (wrongly) perceived and predicted to be an overly cautious lineup within the international break which is always boring anyway, watching England thrash crap teams. Those 2 managers deserved to be sacked because of poor results, not "boring" football. And I have never said or implied that Southgate needs to be sacked because of boring football so your comparison is not a valid one anyway. Unsure why you seem keen to quote and question every post I make at the moment by the way. Hungary are crap too. England are comfortably better than both.

I never said or implied otherwise in the post you quoted, nor have I ever. I think me and you could beat Albania but it has been very good.

Southgate boring everyone further in the international break with 2 holding midfielders in front of a back 5 against Albania.

I very much doubt that those players "would be nothing" without Lampard.

That would be good news for us. Get him a bit of rest and in the country well ahead of the Bristol City game.

Dyche's tactics and lack of plan B i can only presume are a huge bug bear for Burnley fans who have seen their side promoted and become Premier League mainstays under him.

I'd be amazed if we made 4 signings in January. Seems like misguided optimism.

Chaddy, we don't need to repeatedly go over it, you and @islander200 quote me every time I put something even remotely related to transfer spend and reiterate your opinions on FFP. Can you both please stop constantly telling me what you believe and assume and just accept that I do not share your assumption that the lack of spend this season is solely down to FFP, there are I believe flaws about your assumptions which I have previously pointed out, but I am fed up of going round in circles about it. My view is simply that Venkys have turned off the taps as they have done previously more than once, and probably further instigated this time by the pandemic. Nobody knows for sure either way, so the point to which I will agree with or as you put it "accept" both of your opinions (not facts) on the matter will be when someone at the club, either Mowbray, Waggott or the owners come out and say implicitly that we haven't spent this season solely down to being on the brink of FFP regulations even after selling Armstrong and the training ground transfer. So please stop trying, you are both wasting your own time. I would agree with you though that we cannot put a halt to recruitment simply out of the uncertainty or even if it has been pre-arranged that this will be Mowbray's last season. (Which is a huge assumption but if true, would be bizarre as he should be sacked now if that is the case) I would further suggest that the signings of Pickering and Edun and the contract extensions to the likes of Wharton, Buckley, Dolan, Dack, Rankin Costello etc all beyond the end of this season prove that this is almost certainly not the reason to which recruitment has been put on hold. A new manager would need a semblance of a squad to build around, not just a total clean slate.

I meant let go. The idea that we arent signing permanent players beyond the managers contract because it is set in stone that he will leave then and there is a fear of burdening any new manager is a series of wild assumptions married together that also fly in the face of the numerous examples of things that have happened in the last year that do go beyond the end of this season. Venkys have turned the taps off, theyve done it before and there is no need for elaborate assumed theories to try and explain it all. I very much doubt that any decision has been made to be honest.

Of course, but as a Rovers fan, I would want what is best for Rovers.

Say he signs a new deal tomorrow, out of interest, would you want Chile to qualify even if it meant missing numerous games for us next season? The Chile novelty against the potential loss of points for us?

It is all a giant assumption that he is definitely being sacked at the end of the season, if they have come to the conclusion that he is to be sacked, it makes absolutely zero sense to drag it out. If thats your assumption, is there any scope for that decision to either change or be brought forward? Recruitment shouldnt be focused on the contract of a manager anyway. Pickering and Edun have both signed on long term contracts presumably well past the date to which Mowbray will be at the club, as with the renewals of the likes of Dolan, Wharton, Rankin Costello, Dack and Buckley. Mowbray has bigged up Ash Phillips and includes him in first team training even though he has admitted in training that the potential benefit and potential of him will not be seen by himself but by future managers. The managers contract should have no bearing whatsoever on recruitment and based on my examples, that isnt the reason.

It was what Mowbray said repeatedly in the summer. Dont want to go into the FFP debate again, an assumption you have made that I disagree with, best to leave that there. Regarding the last paragraph, again its a huge assumption. It is certainly not a logical way to run a football club, to have a year without basically any scope for permanent signings because youve pre decided that the managers time is up yet wont let him go yet, its risky and illogical without factoring in what happens in that time if Mowbray either took us down, took us up or even got a play off place. I dont think a club should ever put recruitment on hold for a year based on such reasoning and I doubt that Venkys have thought up such an elaborate strategy.

I think that it is easy to look at Ronaldo and his lack of pressing but as touched on it is far from just him who doesnt put a shift in and that comes down to the manager. Fernandes, Pogba and the wide men dont graft either and they all will contribute far less regularly going forward than Ronaldo. I remember under Mourinho when he got criticised for making Rashford do the hard graft going backwards but ultimately it led to far more success than Solskjaer will achieve. They have plenty of quality so they will win games mainly against poorer opposition through individuality but they wont compete with the teams they ought to be competing with under Solskjaer because the players dont seem to be disciplined and organised especially out of possession.

Not a normal way to run a club to just hold off the usually continuous process of signing players when possible to improve the team because you have already decided that a managers time is up, but you arent going to let him go just yet. If and when we dont spend, that wont be the reason. The reason that we didnt spend in the summer and the owners didnt reinvest the Armstrong money is because of how tough they have had it financially in India, so I suspect that regardless of the circumstances, things such as league position, managerial situation etc, it hasnt changed in 6 months.

Theyve undoubtedly not spent money perfectly (unsure how much of a say that Solskjaer has over that?) but the side is not well drilled at all, they arent well disciplined, its unclear how he wants them to play, the wide men dont track back etc.

Will no doubt be another window of frugality and excuses.

If United didnt have Ronaldo and his constant late goals then they really would be in the shit to be fair.

Would he really reject the United job on the off chance that he gets the City job (far from certain) when Pep has had enough? I think they would overlook them if it meant considerably better results. Either way, such petty reasons should not be sculpting the planning of a football club. We have a similar situation here, Dyche is a far better manager than Mowbray and he is Burnley manager now, would most Rovers fans welcome him? I reckon so and I certainly would.

Again he wouldn't be someone that I would personally choose but Brendan Rodgers would be a gigantic improvement on the inept Solskjaer and if it came to it, I'm sure that he would move as soon as possible.