roversfan99

My point in a discussion to another poster was that loan players, even recent successful examples have been signed and trusted to fill positions with no previous senior experience to back up the risk. It wasnt even a criticism, yet again you have barged in with a defensive attitude. If your mentality is to blindly not critique/judge and just assume that Mowbray is signing the right players, or indeed that any person is, that is fine, but other people will. Regarding this example, we signed a player and doubts were raised about someone with no senior experience as a centre back and with only a shaky spell at right back on his CV to come in and fix a woeful defence from the previous season. Regardless of the success that he has been, those doubts were very valid and very constructive and understandable.

Neutral venues surely reduce the already waning remaining integrity of the competition.

Burnleys profit in 2019 was £4.3m to be fair so they are hardly churning out millions after millions of profit. They havent as far as I know, although I may be wrong, and of course their match takings, costs of testing etc and I presume a chunk of their TV money will be taken so you would suspect they will certainly post a loss, maybe a decent sized one. So I personally can understand it to an extent. They have offered refunds so you cant really argue. Again I mention the moral dilemma of getting refunds, I am not sure if it is frowned upon but it shouldnt be, but I dont think it can be described as a disgrace.

Its a bit of a minefield in terms of what to think. I would also feel somewhat like I should help my club. But there are so many logical reasons why you should feel entitled and guilt free to take your money back which to a football club is a mere drop in the ocean. Would you feel conflicted if the club didnt offer a refund but then went out and bought a player, or would you just think thats done to help the club progress?

I said 3 of the most successful, 4 including Adarabioyo, which they were, but specifically I was talking about players with minimal or no first team experience prior to this season that had been signed on loan with a risk attached because these sides couldnt know whether they would come in and slot in having had no previous experience or proof that they can do what is expected. Adarabioyo came with lots of doubts because he had never played any real football at centre back. He had a solitary season at Championship level in which he attracted a lot of criticism for poor performances and mistakes made playing out of position. He had a just excuse for that in that he is a centre back but Mowbray didnt have anything to look back at or indeed scout to say that he would be a competent Championship centre back. If he goes out on loan elsewhere next season that club would be able to look at his spell here. You dont have to command people to "trust the manager and his scouting staff" every time. The same manager and scouting staff also saw fit to spend 12 million on 2 wastes of space, like any manager he makes mistakes in terms of transfers and people are free to judge and critique rather than just blindly trust. If you are happy to just "trust the manager" as a general rule and cant accept constructive debate then maybe discussions about transfers and players is not for you I struggle to be excited about a transfer window that isnt for 2 months presumably when clubs are skint amidst a pandemic ahead of a probably behind closed doors season but each to their own!

Refunds are a really strange issue really. I suspect that supporters will feel an element of guilt about potentially taking a refund from THEIR club, and considering their relative wealth to footballers who have as of yet only deferred their wage, we have had our fair share of suffering paying hundreds and thousands to support our club up and down the country in the time when these wealthy owners have been here treating us with disdain, big wastes of money being brought, and our refund being such a small drop in the ocean compared to that, it is a wonder why we would feel that guilt.

I think there is a big difference between Man United still to replace Lukaku with millions burning a hole in their pocket throwing it at a Prem team desperate to take a key asset from them, and Rovers trying to beg, steal and borrow, especially post financial issues caused by a pandemic to find a left back, targetting one who has been seriously injured and previously considered unneeded by his parent Championship club. I am not convinced that Cardiff will be happy to loan him out dependant on the opinion of their manager brought in after Cunningham had joined us, I think thats the main issue. You are right that we need to ensure any loans coming can hit the ground running although to be honest that is easier said than done. Adarabioyo very much was a risk, he had not shown himself (or been given the chance) to prove he was a competent Championship centre back and it was a risk to put our eggs in that one basket. He had spent a season at West Brom in which the vast majority of his game time came out of position at full back where he struggled. We had no evidence that he would come in and slot in so competently. The loan market is a bit of a minefield unfortunately, and with money at a premium for teams after the pandemic I suspect reliance on and thus competition for them will ramp up. You look at 3 of the most successful loans last year aside from Tosin, Ben White had previously spent a couple of underwhelming loan spells lower down the pyramid and was brought in to replace Jansson, and Conor Gallagher and Rhian Brewster both had no real senior experience. The relevant teams were fortunate as to how well they did.

We dont usually have a massive kitty, and surely that will have been swallowed up by reduction in income both past and ongoing, cost of testing etc. I just personally think it would be a bit questionable if following the steps taken to complete the top couple of divisions, if the summer saw the usual spending spree splashing big money on players across the world ahead of another behind closed doors season, it wouldnt sit right. Whatever my own personal feelings are on it, I suspect and would guess that we wont be splashing out on new signings, surely we have to cut our cloth accordingly. Naive to expect the window to pass as normal really. Not sure it is wise to be sniffing around gooch.

I would be very surprised to see us spend a fee this summer. In fact I think it would be distasteful if the transfer window saw anything like normal spending. I dont see how it is possible even for the big teams this year.

If we are taking without argument and debate that the season is going to be finished for the Premier League, Championship and perhaps League 1, then fair enough, in the absence of any possibility of a truly fair conclusion, playing the games behind closed doors and actually finishing the season seems the fairest way to conclude things, if logistics allow. Whilst morals and safety issue come into that debate, if you put them to one side and just ask what is the fairest possible way, at least that involves playing a full fixture list out. Certainly dont disagree there. Its the issue of points per game fuelled finalised league tables v null and void that seems to cause controversy now. I appreciate that cancelling a season as null and void is not ideal by any stretch of the imagination but it goes without saying that a season is far from over with a quarter still to go. The season was halted suddenly and ultimately in these leagues cannot be feasibly concluded but you cant just start changing divisions based on where a team was when that sudden halt came into play. There are 2 differently affected scenarios. Where 2 non completed leagues meet, and where a concluded league meets an unconcluded league. The latter scenario also would show blatant inconsistency and disregard to any integrity. You cant extrapolate divisions based on three quarters of a season, with differing difficulties of fixtures left remaining. A season is either completed or it isnt.

100%. Youve either completed a season or you havent.

It might be the fairest way to allow League 1 clubs to decide if they can conclude the league or not perhaps. But points per game should not be an option. Finish in full or not at all. Also no way will prevent the risk of legal action, this is something you cannot seem to grasped. No matter what the conclusion is, there will be teams that miss out on promotion, that are relegated etc that wouldnt have been had another method been used. Im sute that Peterboroughs idiotic chairman has insinuated that it wont be the end of the matter if they use points per game for example. My suggestion ensures that the season is either finished IN FULL or not at all, no half measures. Its the points per game thing that really I am opposed too. It is a ridicilious half measure that shouldnt be considered. As I have said, I suspect that you are either purposely not grasping my simple proposal (finish divisions until the point where it becomes impossible logistically, the leagues that are finished incur titles, promotions and relegations as normal, up until the point where divisions cannot be completed as to which the season is written off) for wind up purposes or you cannot understand said simple proposal. If its the former more fool me, if its the latter more fool us both, either way more fool every poor bugger who has had to read it ?

Haha beyond that I think!

In my opinion, you have made 2 huge errors in understanding my points, either accidentally or purposely which are clouding your judgement. Number 1, you have misunderstood my suggestion. It is a simple rule, if leagues are completed, then promotions and relegations go ahead. Moving down the leagues, once you get to the point that a division CANNOT be completed, then at that point as a complete rule going downwards, there are no promotions/relegations. You cannot relegate and promote teams on incomplete seasons. I have repeatedly said that my suggestion, accepting that as a minimum the top 2 divisions are going to be completed, Premier League and promotion chasing Championship clubs will NOT be affected as you seem to have misunderstood. Promotions and relegations between those divisions CAN be allowed because both divisions will have completed the full set of fixtures, including play offs, therefore it is then as fair as it is going to be to promote and relegate 3 clubs between these as normal. It is unfair to promote and relegate teams based on an unfinished season, that is my point, and extrapolating results is not a fair way of doing so, it is not the best remaining way to do so, it would make a mockery of the integrity of the football league. This would be typically prevalent where the lowest complete league meets the highest incomplete league, and you throw inconsistency into the mix, replacing teams that have played 46 teams from one league with games who have played 30 odd games. Number 2, you have failed to grasp that there is NO 100% fair way in the current situation, and there will be winners and losers to all suggestions, so you cant sympathise and empathise with individual clubs and pander to them, you have to look at the overall picture. For every Coventry, there is a Peterborough, for every Wycombe, there is an Accrington Stanley, for every Charlton there is a Sunderland. Theres also a touch of personal bias mentioning Rovers but see point number 1 as to how we wont be affected anyway) All you can do is come up with the fairest way. Assuming that some divisions will be completed, how I have outlined in Point 1 is not perfect, no way is, but IMO the most consistent, fair and common sense approach to a very difficult situation. If they need to vote to determine if League 1 can be completed, then fine, and if it can, it still all falls under my proposal above.

What you dont seem to appreciate is that I am talking specifically where 2 leagues meet where one is completed and one isnt. The reason that I used the word flexibility is because you keep reverting back to rules set in stone in the early 90s that simply cannot be prioritised within such a unique situation. In League 2, it was a unanimous decision because it is logistically and financially impossible as agreed by all clubs to complete the season. Its not as straightforward above that. I hardly think having an attitude of "decide amongst yourself" is showing great leadership. I was opposed to the restart at all on safety grounds and moral grounds but am looking past that now and accepting that some leagues are going to be completed. Its nothing to be excited about but its possibly the fairest way. But what I am clinging onto is that they should only complete the seasons to which the season can actually be completed. Clinging onto rules rigidly that simply do not account for such unprecedented events to try and justify a bizarre necessity to relegate and promote, even based on totally unfair formulaes makes absolutely zero sense and makes an absolute mockery of the supposed integrity and fairness of football in this country. I do think that allowing clubs to vote opens up a can of worms in terms of self interest but that is not my main expectation. I just cannot fathom why they are using this points per game shite. Whatever the leagues that can be completed, ie the Prem, Championship and if possible League 1, complete and award titles, promotions and relegations between those divisions. Beneath that, the divisions unfortunately CANNOT be completed so no promotions and relegations, including between the top division unable to be completed and the bottom division that is able to be completed.

Following the money is not necessarily a negative trait. A footballers career is short, some footballers see their career solely as a job and we are all motivated by money to some degree. Gestede made a move we all would have made in his situation, he on the back of success at Championship level joined at that time a club doing better and moved up a step. His lack of recent football is a red flag and turning 29 soon you do question how long his primary asset of pace will last. That being said, my main analysis comes from having seen him play quite a few times at Wolves and mainly at Huddersfield. He has talent but has never shown it on a consistent basis ans is a very frustrating player. I do think the wide positions are particularly weak at Rovers and should have been made priority this summer once the loanees had been replaced, had this been a normal summer. As it is, I suspect that this may prove very difficult considering the current situation. I dont think there will be anything in this rumour anyway if I had to guess.

I think any rumour like this has to be taken with a huge pinch of salt, even before considering the current situation, its seemingly an agent trying to drum up interest. In terms of the player himself, he ticks a few boxes, a fast winger is something we desperately lack and hes free. But hes spent the peak years of his career playing very little football and hes incredibly frustrating and inconsistent. The type to score or assist and then do nothing at all for 7 or 8 games. One id swerve I think.

The agreement didnt account for such an extraordinary and unprecedented situation though. You can't just stick to that as if its a strict rule, if ever there was time for some flexibility... All I am saying is that now it is clear that some leagues will be finished, surely some common sense comes in. The integrity of the season is long gone, no method of conclusion is fair. But consistency is maybe all we can ask for. If you cant see the unfairness and the inconsistency of relegating 3 teams based on finishing a season behind closed doors, all games played at least, and then replacing them with 3 teams calculated on a formula who hadnt finished their season, then more fool you. If you also cant see how teams in the main will vote for what suits their clubs current League situation then you are more naive than you think, its the obvious flaw of all of these votes. It was clear that League 2 clubs couldnt afford to finish and they did well to just universally agree but in the top 3 leagues there is potential scope to finish. Who was the first team in the Championship to ask for the season to be scrapped? A Hull team dropping like a stone. Whereas Charlton are desperate to finish. Your mindset is, there is an agreement, it has to be honoured and balls to the extent of the pandemic and the uniqueness of the situation, and balls to being flexible, the FA's decision will be the correct one. Some consistency, common sense, flexibility and an acceptance that "sporting integrity" cannot be fully maintained regardless but as much as possible should be kept is what I ask. Not blindly accept that a rigid agreement made before a one off world wide pandemic justifies these bollocks formulaes that are being used.

Absolutely. For me out of all of it, its the inconsistency that drives me crazy. As you touch on there is going to be unfairness regardless of the situation but promotion on PPG to relegate teams who have had all 46 games is the unfairest method of all. You cant be using formulaes to complete seasons for me. It is either safe to finish it or it isnt. You then have a clean break between completed divisions and divisions that have had to write the season off. So much can change in the final games as you mention, I know the Championship would probably finish regardless now but an example would have been that Charlton dropped into the bottom 3 I think for the first time on the last weekend of played football.

Using mathematical formulaes to decide promotions is unfair, full stop. Its a half arsed, inconsistent method whereby teams are being relegated after 46 games and promoted after 30 odd games to replace them. Its a load of bollocks. You either can finish the season and you do, or you cant and you dont. Ultimately, as with a lot of situations, whether it be the FA, the Tory Government, Venkys or indeed Mowbray, your instinct to support and defend comes before your ability to come to any constructive feedback. Thus in this case, you have chosen one of your usual deflection tactics, sometimes you refer back to supposed explanations that you have "given in the past" and in this case you reference thought processes from someone else that you name, but in both cases you refuse to state the argument. In this case you have admitted that you dont even know why Parry thinks promotion and relegation is compulsory as you "wasnt in the meeting" but agree with it anyway. As you know, I felt that resuming the season was in terms of safety and also morals, the wrong thing to do. With players back training and testing underway I feel that such a debate is now fairly moot. But one thing I do strongly believe HAS to happen is a bit of consistency and no silly half measures or points per game ratios. Getting teams to vote on it is inherently flawed because ultimately teams will vote based on their own interests. Surely it should be, the leagues that finish do so as normal up until the last league in which no relegations happen as there are a lack of teams who have completed promotion seasons to replace them.

If it was unfeasible to finish the season, it would be absolutely crazy to use a mathematical formula, at that point it would have to be null and void. If they can only play the top 2 or 3 leagues, there is absolutely no justifiable way that there can be relegation from the lowest playable league and promotion based on formulaes from the unfinished league below. If that happens then the system is an absolute joke. Ive been told that it does need to be like that but not why as of yet.

Very true that professional footballers want to win every match, crowd or otherwise and indeed even training matches. But having a crowd will help add a percentage of motivation. You would think that plus in terms of away games, we have more left than home games so another slight advantage in what is a situation that has an unavoidable unfairness about it.

I felt it was particularly prevalent today as to how sanitised behind closed doors football was because of what was at stake, ie the title. I personally would say it is naive to suggest that an empty stadium does not lessen the impact of a game, especially an important one. It feels like a precession and going through the motions. There are various reasons for this. The main one is something that is in the back of my mind and surely every player and fan alike. When that title is lifted, it will be in front of an empty stadium. One for the history books but not one able to be cherished and celebrated in unison. In regards solely to this game, of course there were no real celebrations at the end in terms of players and fans. It was noticeable how limp the end of the game was, Dortmund needed a result, I appreciate there are tactical and personnel limitations but there was no feel of a critical game, youd have one of the most atmospheric grounds baying for a goal, maybe theyd have chucked Hummels up top for 5 minutes and gone direct but nothing like that. It felt like going through the motions. The commentators said there have been 3 home wins in 22 games, showing how home advantage is now obsolete. I dont want it to seem like I am only willing to consider things that strengthen my point. The standard of the game again was very watchable and indeed outside factors being removed I think increase the time the ball may be on the pitch, although that assumption would need statistics to prove. A few more minor points to add. 5 subs is something I am not fond of and a symptom of rushing loads of games in at once. The commentator said there were more bookings for staff members for dissent now they could be heard. And I think VAR helps to limit attempts of cheating as much as I dislike it overall. I personally dont think there is any doubt as to the fact that no supporters is to the detriment of football, it is to what extent and to be honest its slightly more affected than I expected or realised beforehand. Watchable but also without its edge.

Dont know if anyone watched the Dortmund and Bayern game earlier. Not the most open game but played at a very high technical standard as youd expect and it would be interesting to see how much time the ball spends on the pitch with no fans compared to with fans, I suspect it is longer. I think as a huge game it really highlighted exactly how the "new" normal match really is so much inferior compared to a game in front of fans. Although the actual football was very watchable it did have the feel of an unimportant training game rather than a potential title decider. Kimmich scored a lovely chip just before half time (aided by poor goalkeeping) and Dortmund had to play the last half hour without Haaland so did naturally lack a cutting edge against a top class, experienced Bayern side. That being said there wasnt really a flicker of a late rally and it was a different game without 80k Dortmund fans aiding their cause. It did not feel like a decisive day in a title battle at all.

I think they havent come close to repairing the damage they did (and to my knowledge never took responsibility or apologised for) but it is easy and perhaps preferable, given they are out of sight and out of mind, to just focus on moving forwards with them not in the picture I suppose. I dont get people who have fully forgiven them or are willing and always on hand to praise and defend them to be fair, but each to their own. My personal preference is for them to stay in the background silently and then I can carry on as if they dont exist, save for selling up and removing their stench entirely but I appreciate that is not going to happen. But we are digressing.