Of course he has had plenty of time since but no blame is being put to Venkys for allowing us to slide into another embargo in the first place. He does have excuses this summer, the embargo, the lack of guarantee that we would get any money to replace Armstrong and the extent to which the taps have been turned off all would have impacted any manager. His blame lies for what has happened prior to this summer and the current state of the squad and he shouldnt be here, I get that but it doesnt mean that he deserves the brunt of the blame for a summer of nothingness caused by those in India. I've repeatedly stated that Mowbray should go and the current squad state is down to him. But this summer, much of what has happened is not his fault, or will have massively impeded his job to improve the squad. If you genuinely think that people are specifically avoiding us and Mowbray because of the "2 wins in 17 run" then fair enough, I personally dont think that is the case at all. We have been a mid table Championship club for 3 seasons, one that we follow intently from the inside, potential signings external to that wont avoid us based on a random spell of form. The worst team in England is not mid way up the second tier. The free agent market is definitely a key one especially in these covid times and an especially congested one with so many teams needing to use it and little money across the league. I think because Mowbray shouldnt be in the job, which I agree with, the difficulties of working whilst literally unable to sign players for much of the summer are just being ignored. Many free agents that may have appealed will have already gone elsewhere (Vrancic, Woods, James, Marcondes, Pearson etc) by the time that we came out of it, or were probably already deep in discussions, ie Mpanzu who chose to stay at Luton.

The main thing that will drive most people like anyone in life is going to be money. If we offered more money than another mid table club, a selective run of form last season wont swing the decision. But there is no way that a player would say, they won 2 in 17 at one point last season, I better had go elsewhere. Equally, they could look at a few thrashings that we gave out or isolated runs of 3 and 4 wins, but again form levels out and we finished 15th, which is what they will see. I dont doubt that Mowbray shouldnt be in the job, and has had loads of time, and competitive resources. But not for the first time, our summer business has been massively impacted by Venkys. By all means try and make a profit with sales v purchases, but not to the point when it isnt competitive, and also the embargo was a huge hindrance.

His wages are speculative, I very much doubt in these times that anyone has come close to equalling his wages. He will be a squad player at West Brom.

If our sole recruitment comes from asking for kids on loan, why bother hiring a head of recruitment?

Why is it one or the other? This Rothwell rumour seems to have snowballed from random guesses about a team sheet in which he was one of a number of senior players to miss out, and Mowbray specifically said that he was injured. Rothwell doesnt even play in the same position and we have lost 11 or 12 players. I very much doubt that players reject us based on a specific run of form within a season, you could equally pick a more favourable run. They will see us as a mid table Championship team, 15th, 11th, 15th, mid table Championship. I am not convinced that players would avoid us because of Mowbray. Mowbray should be sacked but he isnt the real villain, that was all my point was. Any manager would struggle under the current circumstances, the fact that we have Mowbray just rubs salt into the wounds and leads us towards the bottom of the division sadly.

Yeah, with no Armstrong and no signings, any manager would struggle to keep what was left in the league.

Don't get me wrong, Mowbray is well out of his depth, it is his fault that the squad is as it is. But a bit of me almost feels sorry for him, again the manager has become the smokescreen before the real masters of our downfall hidden away in India. That sympathy goes soon after because if the owners cared, he wouldnt he here. There just is no plan or strategy at all, and we seem to be having a similar summer to the one in which we ended up going down. Its ok looking to make a profit in the window, to cut the wage bill etc, but you can do it competitively and constructively. Not by just turning off the taps completely. We have been reported to have offered contracts to 2 freebies, very average Championship players in Mpanzu and Reach, neither have chose us. We don't have a competitive budget even if it was just a fraction of the massive wage saving we have just made losing a dozen players, only able to beg for kids from the big clubs on loan. We cant even guarantee that a penny of the sale of our key player will be reinvested, by all means keep some to cover running costs, but not all. To think that anyone has the brass neck to defend them at any point. Everything screams that we are likely to go down. Also, any supposed ITK intel seems to be well off the mark.

If he goes, he needs replacing. The answer to a 28 goal striker does not lie within, they need help.

We lose 400k a week because of them and their incompetence, negligence and disinterest. If someone seriously hurt you on purpose and offered to pay for your medical care indefinitely, but did so ineffectively so you stayed at a rubbish hospital, would you thank them?

How do they? That cannot be a justifiable excuse. If they dont trust the manager to spend their money, get rid of the manager.

Whilst the current state of the squad is undoubtedly Mowbrays doing. It cannot be escaped that everything stems from Venkys. There is absolutely no strategy in anything they do and they are and always will be the root cause of the clubs ineffeciency and lack of direction. A theory that they are turning off the taps is purely speculative but if that was the plan, it would be a bizarre one.

I am not as against loanees as long as they are good enough and make us better. It is all well and good saying we should develop our own and I get that, indeed it doesnt have to be one or the other, but if the loanees are better players than what we have, which in many cases they will be, then they make us better so get them in. My issue with them at the moment is more the quantity (5 last season was too many and it seems that we are going down the same route, and indeed at the moment how lacking we are in experience, if ever there was a time for more kids, its not now. I also dont have a problem with being more prudent and I don't expect us to start splashing out loads of money all the time, especially as a Championship club where losses are regular. What I do have a problem with is the lack of joined up thinking, the lack of competence and the lack of care. Venkys regularly just seem to turn off the taps and drift even further away, leaving the manager at that time totally confused. 2 unnecessary embargoes so far. They aren't even trying to run the club efficiently and effectively, they cant be arsed themselves nor are they willing to delegate power, they leave incompetent managers in charge, no competent CEO, assets losing value, no guarantee of even a small % of any player sale to reinvest, no scope even to fill a reasonable level of a considerable wage reduction to bring in a couple of experienced players. Yet we still have people praising Venkys and defending them. Beggars belief.

Fair enough, appreciate differences in opinion although I do find your comments about broadening the scope of my understanding as to what an effective wide player is to be a little patronising. Nyambe for me is still better defensively than he is going forward. I felt that last season, he did start contributing from an attacking sense which he hadnt before but his crossing is obviously still really poor. I felt that he showed intelligence to appreciate that his strengths are his power and pace rather than his crossing, so he isolated full backs more and got in behind, a perfect example was his assist for Armstrong I think v Barnsley at home. To clarify, I don't think that Magloire had a shocker or a bad game necessarily but if he was in our starting 11 for a Championship game I would be nervous. Although I would with Garrett and he didn't necessarily do anything wrong. Magloire over ran the ball a couple of times surrendering possession and also made quite a few dodgy passes that he sliced. He did a few bits of decent defending too, again its a hard one to judge especially defensively as he was in a back 3 against Rodrigo who is far better than any Championship player but equally not typical of what he would face. Would you be happy if we regularly changed between the 2 formations? I personally think that, especially considering how different 3 at the back is, we should stick predominantly to one formation.. If that is 3 at the back, so be it, you can obviously make more subtle changes whilst keeping that same formation especially with the players that you use but Mowbray loves to tinker and it invariably leads to a lack of cohesion. I know that England did it to an extent at the Euros and it worked against Germany in particular but I feel that international tournaments are a little different to the regularity of 2 games a week most weeks in the Championship with less intelligent players and less depth to a squad, consistency can be king. I am not convinced that there is enough end product between the trio that you mentioned to expect them to be able to see off the lower teams within a 4-3-3 top be honest, Dolan is obviously very raw, Rothwell's end product is regularly questioned and the 3 got 13 goals between them last season. Without Armstrong and Elliott, we need attacking reinforcements.

Why are you sticking so petulantly to this theory that Harry Pickering has been written off, can you please highlight posts in which this is the case? You specifically quoted me on this yesterday to which I elaborated my comments. Last night was the first time that I and indeed the vast majority if not all of the Rovers fans watching will have seen Pickering, and ultimately, the whole purpose of this forum is to discuss Rovers to extreme detail, after every game, every transfer, every sale etc. I was keen to qualify my impressions by firstly pointing out that it was a friendly and that he was also against a very good and very quick winger of a calibre that he will not face in the Championship. I felt that it was constructive to share that my first impression was that he is not very fast at all, a potential red flag of any defender, and his positioning and body shape didnt prevent Raphinha from exploiting his pace advantage on a number of occasions, again I revert back to my comments on the standard of opposition. He also from an attacking sense struggled to get involved and on a few occasions, chose to play it safe and slow things down. I was just portraying what I saw. If I had said that Pickering is shit, that Pickering isn't up to it, that Pickering is a waste of money, that I don't rate Pickering etc, then fair enough, thats assertive and final, and of course a massive overreaction. And indeed, I have not seen any other people saying anything which makes your frustrations warranted. Also, on Brereton, the jury is very much still out and he still needs to do much more, although happy to see a considerable improvement last season.

At the end of our Championship season, he used Ward in the middle of a back 3. I think when we went down to League 1 when we did play deeper that was only because that Lenihan was injured and our only 3 centre backs were Ward, Mulgrew and Downing, all slow players. So if he did play a back 3 I suspect that Ayala could play in the middle, but it is such a complex formation that it requires continuity and it seemed that it was done last night more out of necessity due to the players remaining.

It is impossible to say really based solely off a friendly and in direct opposition to a 20 million pound winger and its not as if he had a shocker. I just thought that it was worth flagging up that he looks slow and it may be a concern against quick wingers in competitive matches, the key will be if he has the intelligence to compensate for his lack of pace. I also read that his strengths lie going forward although he tended to turn back and at one stage he took too long to get the ball out of his feet and a good counter attack fell apart. He did put a decent ball to the back post at one point that was nodded behind. Obviously a friendly is very much not something to take many conclusions from, it is just interesting to get a first impression of our sole new (sort of) signing and what type of player he is. And id like to think that for a player that cost over half a million and will be our only new addition to last seasons team that will have cost money, that the standards are above merely being better than 2 incompetent players. I think that 3/5 at the back tends to need to be played week in week out like Sheffield United did for players to get that continuity. Does it suit our squad though, thats the question? None of our centre backs seem comfortable in bringing the ball out from the back. I personally think that Nyambe is more suited to being a full back which relies less on his attacking output which is very limited and more on his one on one defending where he is strong. Pickering with his lack of pace may also suit being a full back although im obviously less sure on him having never seen him competitively.

The likelihood of us being that solid every week with kids is very unlikely, and we also have some players to come back in, plus obviously we need more. Its ok doing yourselves proud in a friendly at half pace but when you lose a couple of league games in a row against at times technically average but physical players bullying you, you need experience and proven quality. There is a balance that you need of experience and youth.

Where did I write Pickering off? I passed comment on him having been particularly interested to see how he performed as a new face in a friendly, judging as a one off performance based on what are my first impressions. I even acknowledged Raphinha's obvious quality, but I thought that Pickering looked slower than I had expected/hoped and he also was very conservative when he got the ball further up. But I have not written him off and you concluding that is an exaggeration on your behalf. And I thought that Magloire once or twice did a couple of good bits and pieces defensivsly but technically looked well off it, touches playing himself into trouble etc. Hardly a disaster of a performance or a particularly poor one, just not one that gave me any confidence, although it was a friendly against some very good players. I do think that we need a new CB but even without one he will struggle to get into the first team in my opinion.

I obviously didnt expect any vocal dissent but I was surprised to hear "Tony Mowbrays blue and white army" and even "Mowbrays got them playing the way that the Rovers should."

That only works on the assumption that the player brought in is not very good or not ready. If a loan player is better than what we already have then its a different story and a deal should be pursued. Carter played a few league games for our first team and was well off, signing a Harwood Bellis is a considerable upgrade and is a good signing, maybe with Carter then getting game time elsewhere, as even without a signing there, with Wharton, Lenihan and Ayala, he might struggle for game time elsewhere. Its all about the quality of the loanees. If its a loanee like Reed, get him in, if its a Jack Byrne, may aswell prioritise Davenport and Buckley. If its an Elliott, again get him in, if its a Samuelsen, we may aswell play Dolan. Its not as if Mowbray doesnt play young players, in fact we dont have enough experience, which would be my main worry regarding loanees.

Mowbray said that Rothwell will train tomorrow but missed today and indeed has been hindered in pre-season with a bad back. Seems that one is wrong. No mention of Reach either.

"We had a sponsor picture before the game and because it was a betting company they needed players over 25 and we only had two in the dressing room!" Then goes on to say that we are signing youngsters on loan from "super clubs."

A very backs to the wall performance full of determination by an incredibly young side, really impressive and really good to be back in Ewood. That being said, if the squad is anything like that v Swansea, we are in trouble really. Was looking forward to seeing Pickering and came away underwhelmed. He is rather slow and the admittedly very good Raphinha found it so easy to get past him, and he was very slow and indecisive going forward too. I thought that the wing back formation would suit him but he doesn't seem to be dynamic enough. Nyambe was better although he doesn't really have the end product to be a wing back. I seem to be in a minority but I thought that Magloire looked out of place, very poor technically. Thought Carter and Lenihan were better. First chance to look at Kaminski and he is such a steady presence and made a few very good saves, although like last season, his kicking is poor. Going forward we offered little threat, Buckley was inventive although I am not sure that the position today suited him, some lovely touches though. The formation is an interesting one, not sure if it was done out of necessity due to unavailability or it is something that will be used going forward, I can see pros and cons to it. Davenport full of energy as was Garrett who settled in well although we didnt have the players really to keep the ball. We need strengthening there. The kids that came on did themselves proud in their cameos. Have the prices in the concourses gone massively up, a pint of Amstel for a fiver?!

What an utterly depressing first team squad we have left.

He was last season and on the back of also losing Holtby, Downing, Evans and Trybull, we look so depleted there.