You do wonder if giving him an extended deal was premature. Doesn't seem close to being up to the rigours of regular football.

Sounds like a mismatch for Saturday. Johnson is going to be involved, Van Hecke "not ready" although has been in full training for 2 or 3 days, Rankin Costello not mentioned but shown on the video, Lenihan a big doubt, Nyambe definitely out, Rothwell and Gallagher big doubts should be ok. I personally think we need to weigh it up and potentially take a small risk. If we go with Magloire, it will be a mix of a player not up to it and also some sort of mismatch, either Buckley at wing back or Magloire himself out of position. I think we need to weigh it up and decide who is fittest from Lenihan, (perhaps with a pain killing injection) Van Hecke or Rankin Costello. Not ideal but even if it backfired, we have loads more bodies back in 2 weeks, Lenihan, Van Hecke, Nyambe, Rankin Costello and Wharton.

Magloire at centre back wouldnt be too far off accepting defeat before kick off. Johnson is back available according to Mowbray. I think Johnson in for Nyambe with Travis moving to right back should be under serious consideration, not ideal but needs must.

Do people think there is a chance of postponement, looking at the forecast especially on the day and the history of postponements at Bloomfield Road?

With Edun, he certainly has regularly trained and played as a full back. Obviously, it is not ideal him playing on his wrong side, but he is a natural full back, it is better than playing a centre back so far off the required standard there instead. It would be between Edun and Travis, and I would prefer the latter in midfield. On Maja, we seemingly now have had it confirmed by Waggott that he was the player. Whether the loan would have been no strings attached, with a non committal option in it or an obligation will forever remain unknown, and ultimately is irrelevant to my point that the idea that we will have signings all lined up in an organised manner on a suddenly created budget seems fanciful to me.

Definitely another more viable alternative than what I expect (Magloire in a back 3, Buckley right wing back) but I fear that we would miss him too much in midfield. Who would your midfield 2 be? Edun, Davenport, Clarkson and if fit Johnson seem the choices.

Assuming that Rothwell doesn't make it: Kaminski Edun Carter Ayala Pickering Travis Johnson Dolan Buckley Brereton Gallagher Subs: Pears, Davenport, Khadra, Butterworth, Clarkson, Phillips, Cirino

I think Brereton is a good example, there was no evidence really in those first 2 years that we had a good player on our hands, definitely not one who would score 9 in 10 games. Ultimately, when anyone doubted him at that one point, me included as I did, they were justified to have an opinion, and they were wrong if they predicted anything other than what we see today. If the policy is refraining from holding an individual opinion and discussing those, simply believing solely in the manager, then this messageboard ceases to exist. I predict that he won't make it at this level, think that he is a total liability at the moment and would prefer never to see him again in a Rovers shirt for both of those reasons. That being said, if he does play, I will support him as I do all of the players whether I rate them or not, and certainly don't wish him any bad luck or ill will if he does go further down to continue his career. Although to be honest, Mowbray clearly doesn't rate him that highly otherwise he wouldn't have signed a loanee centre back on top of 4 centre backs already over Magloire, and he wouldn't re-jig the whole team and system in a failed attempt to protect him.

It is not a lack of support to predict that a player will never be up to standard to play at this level on an internet messageboard.

In kids football/friendlies. HIs ability at senior level is a total unknown.

To be fair, Pike has never kicked a ball in senior football, so can't really be seen as a convincing deputy himself. The loan was only for a month too.

He is just getting his fitness back in a non competitive environment. We need some experience and physicality in there. Might be a good day out but it will be a long match to endure if Magloire plays. We have a natural full back who we paid money for, not ideal on the opposite side but better than playing a centre back who is probably conference level. Would also put Gallagher central, and would bring in Johnson or if not fit enough, Davenport to add some bite next to Travis. If Rothwell is fit, drop Buckley, if not then obviously Rothwell misses out.

Because they are the ones who control the money and give the budget. The issues with the contracts are financial from everything in the public domain.

The change in shape certainly caused additional confusion and didn't help. You could put every individual goal down to individual errors/brilliance from the other team specifically, but in regards to the general game, it was a strange move and it hindered us. Out of interest, would you have agreed and put Edun on at right back, or did you think that Mowbray was correct to put on Magloire and put Buckley as a right wing back? What would you have done? I would agree with @Bigdoggsteel that I wouldn't want to see Magloire play in a Rovers shirt again, he is so far out of his depth despite loan spells away, he will never be good enough, and for his personal sake, let him go and try and manufacture a career in the lower leagues/non-league. I also think that Buckley should never play as a right wing back (or right back) again, he cannot cover that position. Whether it had a loan option/obligation is purely speculation. We still have a loan spot but even if we use it, it would be a huge change of policy if it was anything other than another raw kid with no/minimal first team experience that we could afford.

No responsibility to Venkys for not stumping up the money at the moment to get the deal done? Rightly or wrongly, I suspect that he will want to be up there with our highest earners. Easy to solely blame those 2 for everything and they certainly both take a lot of blame for various things but this is clearly far more complex. A year ago many would have not seen him with 2 years left (and a potential option for a third) sitting on 2 or 3 league goals at the club as a worry. From the sound of it, Mowbray is not involved in contract negotiations anyway.

Yeah, I am well aware that playing a left footed left back at right back is not ideal, but it causes far less disruption than bringing on a player so out of his depth to a level that I have never seen before, and then not only that, but changing the shape bizarrely which again put Buckley at right wing back where he couldn't be any less comfortable. Natural full back on for natural full back, I accept it isn't ideal as he is left footed, but there is no way that Magloire on, a back 3 and Buckley at right wing back is a more sensible idea. Mowbray recently said in the LT when Maja was still "an unknown striker who had not signed on the final day" that he would have been the 5th loan, when asked why he didn't fill all 5 spaces. I suspect that again, the reason why we didn't move for someone like Molumby was money. Clarkson is wet behind the ears, a total novice, and Mowbray spoke numerous times of wanting more experience but that parent clubs tended to want a decent contribution of their wages, whereas with untried kids, he could "sell them a dream" on how they can gain experience with most of the wage being covered by the parent club. We have started well in general for sure but I can't possibly fathom how anyone ciuld have watched last nights game and felt that we did well. The performance was really poor, really scruffy, really unstructured, the defence was all over the place and the lack of depth reared its ugly head. There is clearly a good spirit but that doesn't mean that we did well last night.

As pointed out elsewhere, I very much doubt that we will have the funds for numerous January signings, considering that "the journey is on hold," that money is at a premium and that such proactivity has never been seen in the past. The squad is going to be stretched beyond its limits on Saturday, making it very difficult to remain competitive.

Some would say that City are too.

None of the subs really stood out as obvious alternatives. Butterworth over Poveda would have been fair simply based on how poor Poveda is but Butterworth gets better with each game that he doesnt play in. Edun is a left back ideally. I didnt agree with his tactical change to accomodate Magloire and would have brought Edun on at that time so I wouldnt disagree that Mowbray made mistakes tonight.

Sadly he had little alternative. The likes of Holtby, Evans and Downing were correctly allowed to bet let go but we were only given the money to be able to afford a handful of kids on loan. Mowbray said he wanted experience but couldnt afford it so when we get an injury or two we look really shaky.

How can you possibly know that Venus is responsible for any good tactics and Mowbray solely for any bad ones?

With no Lenihan, Nyambe and potentially Rothwell, it is really hard to see us getting a positive result. Would go Edun at right back and Carter at centre back probably. And bring Johnson into midfield for added protection.

Even if he is on that amount, which with your track record is unlikely, it doesnt indicate how much we are paying of that. Mowbray wanted experience, he said as such but the loanees were brought in because we couldnt afford experience. Either way, even if he was just signed as a cheap desperate signing to add to the numbers with the manager not having the funds for anything other than heavily sponsored loans as seems to be the case, speculation of his wage aside, the most important thing is rhat he looks rubbish.

Because even if you think that the first 11 is good enough, which I dont, the squad is paper thin. Beneath lie a lot of players not up to it.

Lenihan has gone for a scan according to the LT, unlikely for Saturday. Presumably Nyambe will follow the concussion protocol and I cant see us getting a result on Saturday if Magloire plays.