Just now, JacknOry said:

Who brings on Welbeck with Kane/Sterling and the like on the bench if you are chasing a result?

One thing I do agree with. Even if you brought Trippier on for his deliveries for the out of his depth Alexander-Arnold.

Felt the midfield needed an Alli or a Lingard, Delph and Loftus Cheek (especially without Henderson) dont get us forward in the same way.

We dont deserve to get beat off Colombia, no need to overreact. Dont think there was a lack of effort, just a lack of quality. We deserve to be in the next round as much as anyone.

Was a poor performances, no one saying that they should be in the team ahead of the tough Colombia game.

Dier showed how deficient he is compared to Henderson, takes too long and stunts our whole game.

Alexander-Arnold was really poor, like a fish out of water. Loftus-Cheek really poor too. Luckily we have Trippier and Alli to come back.

Rashford had to score aswell, in general play Sterling gives us more.

2 hours ago, Biz said:

I don’t recall it being a complete failure? I remember it being ineffective at times, useful at others. Similar to how we played 4231 and 442 times and it looked useless - ie Oldham away.

 

4231 was in the main used, so i dont understand the desperation to change from a formation that worked in order to get us promotion.

When we did use it we looked flat. Bury at home, Doncaster at home, did we play it v Oldham at home first half? 

It doesnt get the best out of our best players. When he did play it he sometimes put Mulgrew central of a 3 to accomodate Williams, so he couldnt step out. He played 2 number 10s either side of a striker so I dont feel it gets the best out of Dack either slightly wider.

We cant be counting on the likes of Gladwin or untested youngsters either. Weve gone up with a decision so we dont need players who might at a push do a job, we need to bring in ready made quality, not overload more kids in.

Only reason we are so short on wingers is that the players we played there last season were all on loan. They need replacing with better quality.

Just now, MarkBRFC said:

I don't think Mowbray will start the season with wingers, so I doubt there is any panic in his mind to get any wide players over the line at the moment.

Of course when we get stuffed in our first 2/3 games of the season because of his insistence at playing that horrible 3-5-2 formation, things will probably change and we'll look at getting in a couple on loan before the deadline.

Haha. I really do hope hes kicked the thought of 3 at the back in to touch after its failure last season.

Just now, TruRover said:

No doubt last season he was poor post November. But he was looking decent early season but I agree he has to massively step up his game to have an impact next season, just feel like he could Mayby surprise a few next season. But that's probaly just me being over optimistic!

Either way tho signing a new striker to challenge him and DG has to be a priority in my eyes. 

Theres no logic to state that a striker who failed to score after November will do any better against better defenders. I dont rate him in general but I specifically dont understand the buzz over a video of him working out. All playees will to some degree.

Mowbray mentions young players alot but we dont have any wingers worthy of the name so we need at least 2 first team ready wingers. Not ones that "will do."

1 hour ago, TruRover said:

Abit off topic here, and this may be abit controversial as he rightly had his critics last season, but after reading the LT on Dominic Samuel I think he has identified the area which he needs and TM needs him to improve to get in the starting 11, which is his hold up. If he can add this to his game along with the pace he already has he could be a really decent player for us. His confidence took a big knock last season but I do Feel like there's a player in there and he seems to have the right attitude, however he was pretty much non-existent in the second half of last season, and if that continues this season I imagine he will be off. Going to be a big season for him.

link to the article if anyone wants to read - http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/16318542.Rovers_striker_explains_decision_to_take_on_personal_trainer/?ref=mac 

Think a few videos of him working out have glossed over the fact that at a much inferior level, he failed to score post-November.

Didnt fancy Germany as much as usual but amazed that they didnt grind out a win today, Sweden really are poor so equally surprised by that result.

Did think that they were relying too much on experience, Loew didnt seem to know his best team, and obviously Sane's well publicised exclusion plus Brandt being underused was puzzling in that they were crying out for pace, width and energy.

Not sure Werner is a top striker either.

1 hour ago, MarkBRFC said:

There's always been a weird obsession on here with people wanting ex players back.

Unless that player was exceptional, I have never really understood it.

For me I have always thought Rovers (certainly in more modern times) should be a club moving forward bringing in mostly young hungry players (with one or two experienced heads too), developing them then hopefully sell them on for big money after enjoying them for a few years.

I think that's what Mowbray is trying to do, and I hope it works out for him/us.

Agreed, suppose its an understandable lack of knowledge of the general market making it easier to suggest players people already know but I dont understand it either.

Seen suggestions of getting Mahoney back, getting Gallagher back, last year it was Emnes and Akpan, none of whom are anywhere near good enough. That or players like Rhodes and Gestede who we cant afford.

2 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

I've not watched a lot of the world cup but they have been plenty of decisions that have been in 50/50 and plenty of stuff not given in the right decision. 

Ronaldo should have been sent off last night. England should have been given a penalty or 2 against Tunisia. Against Panama these calls were made

Not like you chaddy. Been brilliant to watch and far more interesting than getting bogged down in the transfer silly season!

Not sure how you can make such a judgement on its overall effectiveness if you havent seen barely any of the tournament? In the main, it has been less farcical and much smoother than I expected, however I am still against it. Sadly its here to stay.

That said, im on your side of the VAR argument but I disagree with the overall principle, not necessarily the effectiveness of the current set up as I do think that things can be ironed out, never perfectly.

1 minute ago, Baz said:

For me VAR nothing to do with the Ronaldo incident. If the ref watches the incident and thinks it's deliberate, then it's red, if he doesn't then it's no card. IMO he wasn't sure, so went for a half-way house of yellow which it clearly wasnt. Again the handball incident isn't VARs fault, the ref should have looked once, then made the correct decision. Personally I have no issue reviewing that type of decision, especially in the last few mins of a game.

Still have no idea how Spain topped that group, they where poor in every game.

I though they were excellent against Portugal, and it was only an incredible Ronaldo performance that stopped them. 

1 hour ago, Amo said:

He blotted his copybook going to Brum and shilling for Kean. A true club legend wouldn't have done that.

Dont you also have a strong dislike for Alan Shearer, a proper, undoubted legend? (Irrelevant to Dunn)

12 hours ago, Vinjay17 said:

It was a Premier League club and some fans seemed to think playing for England was the height of achievement. "Dunny for England" was playing for Rovers not good enough for some? Rovers were a Premier League club (and pretty damn established even taking the 2 year absence into account) you wouldn't have heard Liverpool fans chanting "Fowler for England" despite his limited number of appearances. People chanted it with Sutton of course but I guess any fanbase would have done the same after that whole England B/Hoddle fallout. Sutton regretted it but how could you justify picking Les Ferdinand ahead of him in 97-98 season? Maybe in 96-97 while Ferdinand was banging in goals at Newcastle but in 1998 it was the other way round. Didn't people question Hoddle picking Ferdinand because he happened to be at Spurs? Darren Anderton as well who initially in WC 98 was selected ahead of Beckham.

Also it's more than fair to question Dunn accepting a callup from Eriksson. If he's the great local icon he claims to be then he should have refused or at the very least criticised Eriksson's behaviour towards the club (and Jack in particular) in 1997 and leading Jansen to believe he would be in 02 squad. I guess exaggerating his "hatred" of Burnley (played for their youth didn't he because he hates them so much?) was more important than speaking up for Jack though. He even had to spin that into a story about turning them down for Rovers in the end as if that was a tough decision ?. People can say what they like about me impacted by years of mental/psychological abuse which never gets taken into account. That's not an exaggeration because I was right about the Walker family influencing the trustees + their neglect in general.

 In 1997 had I been an aspiring youth player (that's a VERY hypothetical scenario lol because my footballing "ability" is beyond non existent) there's no way in hell I would have represented United (something else I had to "justify" more and more after Jack died when nobody had any issue with my contempt for them before that) at any level even under 12s. Don't call me a liar. Admittedly I've seen some City/Liverpool fans say they would let their kids play for United youth and would have done the same themselves. I can't understand that logic at all. Hypothetically or otherwise if United express an interest in a young player other clubs would as well. Even if United made the first approach all you would have to do is send letters to every other top club (and even some average clubs) in the country saying "United want me can you take a look instead"? I even saw one story about a kid crying (think it was a City fan who's parents were also City fans) because United scouts had spotted them and they forced their kid to go and attend one of their youth sessions. Why didn't they just call up City or anyone else and tell them? Maybe it's a bit extreme to call that child abuse but never denied my contempt for United approaches psychotic levels at times. 

In all likelihood I wouldn't have represented Burnley either because even then their boring name alone would have sent me to sleep and been detrimental to any enthusiasm. No wonder they haven't had more takeover interest though FUP lessens any appeal too. No doubt FUP and their paranoia over relegation caused the family to pressure the trustees more and more. Ultimately to the point their "extensive research" led them to sell to people who didn't even know what relegation was. I guess because of my pro takeover stance it's somehow hypocritical of me to have expected them to at least do some actual research and conduct an intensive questioning process. If not for me at least for the vast majority.

Said I wasn't going to "justify" myself again and then I write responses like this. Anyone who says I can't help myself and rant too much you're probably right. 

Can you please say, as requested previously, in one or two lines, why you have such a strong dislike of David Dunn.

I was watching both games and both of them became a total farce at the end, one decision was right, one was wrong, im in no doubt that it will increase the number of correct decisions (although there will still be that controversy) but you just have to weigh up and for me, its not worth it when you see examples tonight.

Taking that joy away at times that you get from scoring a goal by making everyone wait a few minutes hypothetically.

Think that Trippier, Henderson and Lingard were outstanding again.

Henderson got so much stick pre tournament and it continues at times but hes critical to this formation. Hes disciplined yet his passing range is progressive and varied, the pass in the fourth goal was absolutely brilliant. Hes so superior to Eric Dier and im pleased that Southgate agrees.

Trippiers delivery is brilliant, we look so much of a threat from set pieces, and so much is down to Trippier. Don't feel Young is half as effective and for me Rose should be playing.

Lingards ability to get forward and threaten is so useful, technically good and athletic, hes far better centrally than wide as he plays sometimes for United. Not 100% convinced by Loftus-Cheek, he has all the tools but I feel he doesnt impose himself as much as he should and we miss Dele Alli.

Sterling looks so less confident in an England shirt sadly, would have loved him to get a goal, maybe the media treatment has got to him.

Kane, goes without saying really.

First half was very good albeit v the worst team in the tournament.

Second half, we were pretty poor really, many reasons, temperature, the fact it was so easy, I do get that but both games weve come out the blocks and then to an extent run out of ideas. The goal was really sloppy to concede and not the first problem we had defending set plays so obviously that needs addressing ahead of the upcoming games. 

No, I've seen bits on here but I don't particularly care what he has to say if im honest, dont want to spend an hour listening to it.

However, if theres something that directly relates to the discussion we was having about walk-on prices and the increase, then just say, rather than pointing it out then saying "listen to the interview" as it is patronising and needless. Either that or leave it out completely. Its the equivalent of saying "I've heard weve been linked with x and y" and not saying from where.

Just now, chaddyrovers said:

Listen to the interview

No I dont care enough. If you are going to be an idiot about it then the conversation can go no further.

Just now, Ladyboys of Bank Top said:

If you know you will only make 5 to 10 home games for whatever reason then the 1875 is good value. 

I get to an extent what you are saying but fair weather fans are unlikely to see it like that, in my opinion. And I don't mean that in a disrespectful way.

I think would I be right in saying, on the big assumption that Brazil top their group and Germany finish runner up in theres, that if we was to win our group and then in the last 16, we'd face the winner of that game in the quarters, whereas if we was to be runner up in our group, we'd again likely, big ifs included, play Mexico or Switzerland.

Can see Thursday being a reserve team game if that does work out like that. Group H is a much of a muchness really, best team in there is Colombia and look how they did.

Its coming home...

Just now, Ladyboys of Bank Top said:

What is a barrier to people attending? 

People who are walk ons are obviously less committed in terms of attending games on a regular basis. This means that they are less likely to become 1875 members, and factors such as paying a needless premium on top of the ticket price may put people off. If it was someone who went every week they would go regardless, people who are walk on every now and again, less so.

Just now, chaddyrovers said:

Waggott explained on Thursday night why there is a extra charge on the day sales

Why?

4 minutes ago, Ladyboys of Bank Top said:

The 1875 mrmbership saves 3 quid on a match ticket so worth getting if you don't have a ST but are going to do a few home games. 

I will have a season ticket but some people will wake up and think yeah I might go Rovers today actually and its an additional barrier to encouraging that sort of thing that doesnt need to be there and will as a result potentially restrict attendances.

Hope Belgium take their foot off the gas, then we thrash Panama and only need a draw on Thursday...

Should be an exciting game on Thursday, 2 of the most exciting attacks.

Just now, chaddyrovers said:

This season match day prices been announced

https://www.rovers.co.uk/news/2018/june/rovers-confirm-match-ticket-prices-for-2018-19/

Shame that theyve increased the walk on price to a £3 premium. Counter productive to getting more walk ons to boost attendances.

1875 going up is stupid too considering lack of small allocations next season. Bit of a swindle.

Yeah, they are so good going forward, far more clinical than us id suggest.

There are definitely weaknesses there though to be got at.

Been an entertaining first half with Tunisia playing a part in that.

23 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

agreed and we need more of striker with strength and pace who can score goals also

fair enough. Norwich is good suggestion. maybe Ipswich aswell. 

my opinion based on them needing a striker. plus they were after him on deadline day last January

Ah ok, the phrase if the numbers are right sounded like you had got it from elsewhere.

How do you know this rumour is true. Cant see that.

Can you clear up why you dislike David Dunn. Simple question, please dont answer in riddles like you usually do.