Personal memories of a midweek match of Bristol City v Nottingham Forest, hardly one to show the grandkids! I just find it bizarre. You spend all that money, perhaps take 2 days off work to travel away in the cold to watch your team who get a late equaliser and winner (a rarity for any team) and rather than really enjoying it, you are watching it through a small screen.

Does anyone get filming matches on their phones? Drives me mad!

Game plan worked according to the stats and if you ignore our side of them.

I do to an extent get extra protection towards "our own" but to be honest I think we should try to judge player performance fairly and neutrally. Both were equally poor. Buckley himself has not been overly influential this season, yet to score from attacking midfield and needs to do more in the final third, plus he was not great in the 2 losses and a draw picked up in the last 3 games. That being said, he is obviously better than Clarkson who seems an illogical loanee who is not only not good enough but not the type of player that a team actively encouraging a lack of possession does not suit. A signing out of pure desperation due to an uncompetitive budget by the owners.

The Hull game at home? He had an impact although I personally felt that Khadra was far more influential, and that Butterworth tired about 20 minutes after coming on. I just feel that in this case, Butterworth and Clarkson's performances are getting totally different responses based on previously held reputations when both were as bad and as lightweight as each other. Clarkson is one of the loanees, he is from Liverpool so there is an assumed favour towards them, whereas Butterworth is our own player, people have been calling for him to play as more as a common criticism to use against the manager, so when both perform poorly, one gets the brunt of the abuse and the other gets excuses and further defence.

I definitely think there is an element of confirmation bias towards Butterworth in that not only is he not a loan like Clarkson, but his lack of inclusion lately has been an easy stick to use against the manager. There have been desperate calls for him to start, when he does he is considered to be thrown under the bus. He looked lost last night, too slow on the ball and his lack of stamina is a major concern, he was as poor as Clarkson IMO. Both have barely played but one is prime target for criticism and one has been "thrown under the bus." We wasn't good, he was poor.

He is not getting sacked, anyone clinging onto forlorn hopes that he might are only torturing themselves again. Venkys probably wont even know what score it was last night.

Venkys would never know if anyone boycotted or protested as they dont give a shit about the club at all. Mowbray is just a manager doing a poor job, I have no doubts that he does care and he is trying his best yet ultimately the owners allow him to continue to underperform.

Absolutely dismal tonight, reminded me of that infamous Spurs away game under Kean such was our lack of attempt to score a goal tonight. The first and I think only shot on target was a weak speculative long ranger from Rothwell with 5 minutes to go. The 3 at the back bollocks has to stop. Kaminski for an experienced player has no concept of game management, constantly rushing the ball out quickly when the game didnt call for it, there was once when he launched a rubbish kick towards Butterworth who could barely run, then a minute later he threw a quick ball out to Edun which again brough on pressure, his distribution is really poor too. Van Hecke is crap, his header attempt in the second half summed him up, he constantly pulls opponents shirts and they could have scored early in the second half due to a mis kick from him. Ayala was good, the ball seems to be drawn towards him in the air, Lenihan had a mixed night again playing a role that doesnt suot him. Nyambe was decent although lacks end product, but is a good one on one defender. Pickering looked off the pace and I have no idea what to make of Edun, defensively he is really poor and leaves so many gaps behind him, but he is decent on the ball and very positive so maybe he would be better further forward. Clarkson again looked totally lost, what we get relying on kids on loan due to budget restraints, plus he isnt helped being played so far forward. We need Travis back fit, Johnson like Pickering looked off the pace and Rothwell was no more than ok. There have been plenty of calls for Butterworth, but he gave his chances of another start anytime soon a hammer blow. He looks somewhat overawed by the speed of professional football and he was poor, plus his stamina is a real concern, hard to justify starting a player who tires so quickly. Brereton was anonymous too and his hectic schedule in South America seems to have worn him out. I said prior to the game that we would lack goal threat although I didnt expect it to be that bad. Mowbray out, definitely. His tactics are beyond strange although lets not kid ourselves, contrary to popular belief this is a crap squad of players and is soon to lose the half decent ones to be replaced by cheaper replacements. Most importantly, Venkys out.

Strange team, 3 at the back not ideal, nor is a total lack of goal threat aside from Brereton.

With nothing really in the way of new information not already in the public domain and it being very much no longer being somewhere whereby breaking news can be found, plus with numerous mistypes and errors in each article, I suspect that take up will be minimal.

Which one would be preferable? Both had 3 at the back, so it is whether youd prefer Dolan and Gallagher in attack and Buckley in midfield, or Brereton and Poveda in attack and Davenport in midfield.

Great news. The first of many senior players leaving on a free to be replaced by players on cheaper wages, most likely on loan. Operation relegation commences, but why wont the attendances go up?!

This post in supposedly stating a "fact" that all of our senior players being set to leave on free transfers because of delusions of self worth regarding demanding Premier League wages is as much "speculation once again that ranks as unadultered rubbish" as you eloquently put it as anything that anyone else has put.

I put this in a post that was for no reason removed, but who are you aiming this at? Why can't you accept that some people have less of an interest and a desperation to attend Rovers than you or I? And why do you view it as some sort of obligation, as if it is visiting a sick grandparent, for every single person with any affiliation or interest in Rovers to attend with such regularity? Why should they if they feel if it is too much money, if they have lost interest and want to do other things, if they have grown disillusioned with disinterested owners overseeing (loosely) 11 years with no chance of progression, with our best players leaving, with a manager going nowhere, why does everyone have that obligation to spend a considerable amount of money (hundreds of pounds) and give up so much free time to attend baring in mind all of the above? The Oxford game proved that when tickets are a tenner, it is a sunny evening and there is a promotion party, that many people who aren't that interested or who in the main spend their time in other ways turn up as a one off, why do people carry such resent towards those people for not attending every other week? If you want to feel resentful, feel resentful towards Waggott for not having season tickets announced by then, for then increasing the prices that summer killing any chance of building upon that momentum, and ultimately to the owners for overseeing a reign of terror that has seen many choose what they consider to be more constructive ways to spend their Saturdays and their hard earned money.

Total speculation, with various expenses exempt from FFP rules and questions over whether the FFP rules will be modified due to covid, it is far from being as simple as using the losses from the last 3 published sets of accounts, especially when they run up until June 2020 and Armstrong left after that anyway. Ultimately, I suppose no one could possibly be sure unless the club come out and say so. Seems to have become a solely fan based defence of the owners, Mowbray and Waggott have repeatedly mentioned how hard the pandemic has hit India and how the journey has been paused, they have never once mentioned FFP this summer to my knowledge to defend the pitiful lack of reinvestment, something that I am sure would be offered as a reason/excuse if that was the case.

The free agent market once the window closes games into the season tends to be full of people who are free for a reason. Injury prone is a common one plus signing them so late as we did with Downing last season means that it takes too long to get that player fit. Brady is so injury prone, Bournemouth can take that risk (and with Brooks' unexpected absence could do with an extra body) but many teams wouldn't take that chance. A striker had to be signed in the summer, but sadly Venkys couldnt give enough of a shit to allow even a small fraction of the Armstrong money to be reinvested.

It is a very welcome pricing strategy albeit a one off so fair play for that. The season tickets are the main issue pricing wise, they are too much and once you get that wrong, its impossible to recover. But if people are not attending out of principle, whether it be against the owners, manager, Waggott, whatever it is, it would be naive to expect them to come back. Its easy to ask them to put those feelings aside when you dont share such strong views. Hopefully the cheap tickets will entice a bumper crowd but nothing can be gained from looking down upon those who still wont attend, whether it is out of protest or lack of interest.

If he masterminded a promotion, there would be no way that he could be justifiably sacked. Sadly, that is a hypothetical scenario though of which there is more chance of pigs flying!

Conversely, you can not be so sure that "we did recruit properly" when none of the players signed have made a significant impact. I haven't wrote off anyone yet but if we are talking about jumping to conclusions, saying that we did recruit properly so soon is equally naive and premature. What you don't seem to understand is that I can possibly understand FFP as well as you do and think that there is no evidence to suggest that FFP was the reason that we didnt spend more (repeated mentions of the pandemic in India, the journey pausing etc in the press, nothing about FFP) and if we couldnt spend any more, that would have made us over 10m over guidelines prior to the Armstrong sale which again there is no evidence on. All of this is beside the point I was making. He shouldnt be in a job at all so he cant complain but the summer was not one to equip a manager to progress, pretty simple, losing lots of senior bodies and selling your primary asset, signing a cheap left back and 4 kids on loan.

I agree that it is all down to poor ownership, 100%. I dont get the obsession over the specific run of 17 games. A season lasts 46 games, focusing on specfic runs only highlights bias, you could equally point to winning runs. The end result was a finish 4 places down on the previous season which in itself warranted a sacking so I would again agree that sympathy should be in short supply and wasn't my intention. But much of the rest of your post is irrelevant, including how he spent previous budgets. The 3 forwards he bought for around 15m, he has already practically broken even on by selling one, and assuming that Brereton is also sold at some stage for a decent fee, he will make a considerable profit on the 3. Previous contracts and signings do not justify the pitiful budget for this summer and the fact that it was simply not a competitive or constructive one giving any manager a foundation for success. The purpose of the post you quoted was for me to dismiss the idea that the summer window was a success. For me, the main reason was the lack of budget even to loan in or sign freebies with some experience. I don't doubt that Mowbray shouldn't be at the club but that is irrelevant to what I was saying. The problem is that because we all/most of us want Mowbray out, sometimes he is brought into conversations randomly or blamed for things he perhaps isnt to blame for.

I just can't possibly understand how anyone could say with such confidence that replacing was it 12 players including our 28 goal striker, our main creator and a number of experienced midfielders, that the permanent signing of a sub left back, 2 wingers on loan yet to influence things much, one lightweight midfielder on loan and a centre back who has played one game in which he looked shaky and we conceded 2 is "recruiting properly." I think Mowbray had his hands tied by those above him with a pitiful budget, but still, we did not recruit properly.

3 at the back in the bin please. Contributed to us surrendering control of the game in the second half yesterday, rarely if ever works for us, lets stick to the back 4 of Nyambe, Lenihan, Ayala and Pickering wherever possible. If Pickering doesn't play, just play Edun.

The type of contract that players are on shouldn't come remotely into consideration when Mowbray is making a sub. I presume that you don't share the same theory around the likes of Rothwell, Nyambe and Lenihan who seemingly will like the loanees leave at the end of the season.

Yes.