To be fair, he played Nyambe, Platt, Grayson, Brereton and Buckley in the last round. It is a difficult draw, because Sheffield United will be packed with quality, McBurnie, Sharp, Morrison, Besic, Jagielka, Osborn etc. Make too many changes ourselves, and we wil get battered, then again we cant afford injuries to key players like Cunningham, Williams, Lenihan, Johnson, Travis, Dack or Graham. Grayson and Platt were out of their depth v Oldham.

Presumably because Gallagher for example has been given 3 chances in a row wide, following the lead of Brereton last season who when he did feature usually played wide, and its not proved a successful tactic, surely a natural wide man would be at least worth a go. No one can be sure that Chapman is the answer, but he isnt anywhere near the squad and its a massive curiosity. He played v Oldham, was hit and miss but played a couple of superb passes amidst the obvious ring rust. We saw what he is about in League 1, direct running.

There side will be full of players they have signed and are yet to get up to speed, Ravel Morrison, Phil Jagielka, Ben Osborn, Mo Besic and Oli McBurnie, plus Billy Sharp who loves scoring against us. As much as I agree that we need to name a much changed side, and I appreciate that the League is the main priority, I don't understand how a Rovers fan "doesnt care" whether we win or lose. Even at the Oldham game, was delighted with the 2 late goals. But anyway, some big selection dilemmas. With Tosin out, we are down to 2 centre backs, Nyambe can't play there effectively contrary to popular belief IMO, and Grayson and Platt proved v Oldham how far away they are, so if we play them 2 again I couldn't see past a thumping which does nobody any good. Problem is, with a lack of depth, can we afford to do anything but wrap Williams and Lenihan in cotton wool? Chapman HAS to start, not a 20 minute cameo, a start to show his worth. Would also start Armstrong and Rothwell, and would start Gallagher up front, if he fails to score again I would take him out on Saturday. Would also start Nyambe, Buckley (CM) and Walton.

That doesn't mean that I can't suggest that we should play more natural wide men! Especially when I don't think the current plan is working. Why did he sign Harry Chapman if he has no intention of playing wingers? And what about Stewart Downing? I don't think that our wide men have been particularly successful throughout his tenure to be honest, hence our over reliance on the Graham and Dack partnership. For me, our 2 wide men should come from 4, Armstrong (who I consider more of a wide man than a forward especially as hes far better right than left cutting in), Rothwell, Downing and Chapman. Brereton was often used wide last season, Gallagher this. For me it suggests that maybe he doesn't have the trust to play them regularly down the middle over Graham, but its the easiest place to get them game time. I don't think either is effective wide.

Working his socks off doesnt mean he should play every week, every player has been trying their best so that doesnt make him stand out. They havent, which I've repeatedly said is a massive concern, that the manager really needs to be getting far more from us as an attacking team, and that we have been crap going forward so far. I think the Gallagher out wide experiment should be written off as a failure, and he should only be considered as an alternative to Graham.

I understand to an extent, but my point being its nothing when youve got the luxury of a 35m strikeforce, including a striker who scored 18 in La Liga the other year, and is already top scorer in this league. With him and Ayew in the side, that sort of luxury means it is very difficult to have sympathy with the manager even if he has had to rely on loans and frees in addition to that, because them 2 are replacements for James and McBurnie themselves, and bloody good replacements at that. With firepower like that at the managers disposal youd expect a minimum top 6 finish.

The good ones tend to be. I've said a couple of times that hes putting in the graft, but thats not enough to warrant a place. He's never a wide man in a million years either.

The thing is, Dack and Graham have credit in the bank as proven performers, Rothwell has not been given a chance really (a solitary start and away at Fulham) despite his form at the end of last season. In general we havent been anywhere near good enough going forward, dont even think thats subjective, as improved as weve been defensively.

Fair enough, he did well to earn a foul out wide. He hasn't offered any threat of a goal however, which isnt ideal for a 5m striker, and the likes of Rothwell could only dream of the sort of patience that Gallagher is getting from the manager at the moment.

My main priority is always to win. BUT WE DIDNT WIN YESTERDAY! My criticisms are on the back of yesterdays impotent attacking display, which was horrid to watch and not effective. "Yes Attacking wise we need to be better" - Correct, much, much better. Theres no need to repeatedly bring in our defensive display, I completely agree that its good to see us so well organised. Having more effective attacking players does mean that its more difficult to stop Dack. Yesterday they man marked Dack fully in the knowledge that we had no attacking threat elsewhere. If Rothwell was running at them too, different story entirely. Gallagher has warranted 5 starts, offered no real goal threat yet hes done well, whereas in your mind Rothwell deserved to be dropped from the start of the season. Totally devoid of sense.

"The system is set up around him yet he isn't delivering at the moment." The formation yes somewhat, but there is no way that you could argue that our way of playing at the moment is in any way beneficial to getting the best out of Bradley Dack. You mention swapping him for Rothwell, but we massively improved last season when they BOTH played. You also suggest playing Gallagher up front, he played up front twice, did nothing, and has in fact offered nothing in any of the 5 games, even though we have often gone more direct.

For all the talk about Swansea cutting back, it is somewhat going under the radar that they have one attacking player who cost 20 million, and another who cost 15 million, both of whom carry track records well above the standard of the Championship, in Ayew and Baston.

A contract has to be entered in by both parties, the team loaning these players are agreeing to pay these penalties, of course only if they dont play. If clubs arent happy to take on players they wouldnt be normally able to afford, temporarily, knowing that they will have to pay if they dont use them, then you could argue that maybe they dont intend on using them regularly anyway. To be honest, it may well be financially unrealistic of any clubs that low in the pyramid to agree to potential penalties, but even without them, I definitely feel that we need to look at where we loan players too. It always seemed unlikely that such a rookie CB would play regularly for a League 1 club, surely we should have looked further down initially. The Adarabioyo situation is a good example. He is a player who was clearly signed with the intention of playing, but ultimately due to luck more than anything he is now out of the team and behind a partnership on the back of 3 successive clean sheets. I mentioned yesterday that regardless of any potential penalties or risk of him being recalled in January, we must continue with Lenihan and Williams. We have loaned him with the intention of him improving our defence and our position in the process. If we manage to do this but it happens to be without him, financial penalties would be a small price to play, but understandable because essentially on the loaning clubs behalf, and the players behalf, a young player at a key stage of his development will have stagnated and essentially wasted 6 months. To be honest, that is a short term view anyway, because we are otherwise lacking in depth in that position, both Lenihan and Williams have injury history, and neither has been without bad patches of form here, so I am sure he will get a chance soon enough anyway. I actually find the Cunningham loan the strangest out of the 3 loans that we have. Walton and Adarabioyo are 2 young players who need game time, but wont get it at their parent clubs. In theory, everyone benefits, we get a player we couldnt afford who will improve us, and on the expiry of the loan, if all goes well their parent clubs get a better and more experienced young player back. Cunningham is a 28 year old with a proven track record of being a very good LB at Championship level. Why is he being loaned out? That is when you question the reason for loaning players.

It is ridiculous to suggest that Dack didnt get into team of the year because "we are unfashionable little old Blackburn" he didnt win our player of the season and didnt deserve to be in team of the season. That being said, certainly agree with your sentiment about how good he is and how crucial he is, numbers like that are often under appreciated as we saw with Rhodes when we had a striker banging in 20 goals a season and people taking it for granted.

I would somewhat disagree, indeed I fully see the merit of charging potential penalties, its a way of ensuring that the team loaning a player has plans of using them on a regular basis. Of course players should play on merit but like a club selling a player, the club willing to loan out a player owns an asset, and the club loaning them is getting the benefit ideally of a player with quality that it could not permanently afford to buy outright.. You mention Chelsea, but they want to ensure that their young players get game time and develop. Abraham, Mount and Zouma all went elsewhere and massively benefited other clubs. Look back under Coyle, we stockpiled our squad with players like Byrne, Samuelsen, Hendrie etc, loanees that just padded out the squad because we lacked money at that time.

You have unfortunately reverted back to justifying the managers selections, regardless of whether they are successful or unsuccessful, a mere week after telling us all that you were discussing who should replace Mowbray after the cup win. This is making your arguments inconsistent and utterly incomprehensible, for example your nonsense about Rothwell not starting the season due to poor form in pre-season. For one, he did impact on pre-season, but other attacking players notably Gallagher didnt yet you just blatantly ignore this. Similarly, nonsense about Rothwell not starting due to poor form, he has played one game, he was dropped from the start of the season. Rothwell should have started the season in the side, in home games especially when the onus is on us to attack and create. He ended the season very well, and not only that, seemed to develop a good understanding with Dack which proved both entertaining to watch and effective. Good players bounce off each other. Dack ultimately of course carries responsibility for his own performance, but as a team we have not played in a way that will suit him. Its far easier to man mark someone when they are the sole threat that a team is carrying. Throw in a Rothwell an/or a Chapman and it becomes far more easier to do that. Stick Gallagher wide solely to win flick ons and work hard, but offering zilch going forward and carrying no goal threat, and then its easier to focus on Dack. No one is doubting the fact that the improvement in defence is very positive to see. People aren't criticising that aspect of the side, indeed people are praising it. But offensively we've scored 3 goals in 5 games, none of which were from open play, one being an own goal and one a penalty. No other Championship side has failed to score from open play, and to be honest in the main we havent looked like scoring very often. People criticising our attack are doing so because it is objectively not working at the moment. There also is added focus on our attack, because off the back of spending what Mowbray has spent on our attack, there really is no excuse for us failing to offer a goal threat. I was very underwhelmed with the Gallagher signing, I didn't rate him much when he was here last time, he's certainly not going to fire a team into the top six. Mowbray also played him wide when he was appointed when Gallagher was here last time, partially out of necessity because of our squad at that time, and the goals and his (somewhat) effectiveness dried up. He went straight into the team v Charlton and in the 2 first games as a number 9, offered very little, never looking like scoring. Mowbray, presumably to ensure that he still gets into the team, has since shoehorned him in wide and again hes offered no threat at all. On the back of the Brereton fiasco, questions need to be asked.

Its ridicilious that he has been given one start out of 5, in the most difficult game, and thats justified the suggestion that he doesnt deserve to be playing. Sam Gallagher has had 5 starts, done nothing in any of them yet still warrants automatic inclusion.

Well at least apply some bloody consistency. Gallagher didnt do anything in pre season, nor in the first 5 games, yet you blindly accept his automatic inclusion. Rothwell scored a screamer in pre-season, on the back of a superb end to last season, yet only one start is warranted? You make absolutely no sense. I am criticising the team selection. It is a fact that they both played and we went direct, but Mowbray chose to select them over pacier, more skilful alternatives. I wanted Graham up top, Rothwell over Gallagher. I feel that would have been far more effective. We didnt have to play that way, Mowbray chose to play that way by choosing those individuals in the first place. We didnt win! If we had won today, totally different story, but we didnt. I was full of praise after the Hull and Boro games, and in neither of them were we great going forward, but enough to win. I've repeatedly said, I am very happy with the defensive side of things in recent games, I am in full agreement with you. I just find it baffling that you are unwilling to accept that going forward, whether it be team selection or tactics, its not been anywhere near good enough, 3 goals in 5 games, and very few shots on target. Defensively, much improved, attacking, very poor.

Absolutely. I think its rare for a goalkeeper totally untested in senior football to go to a league club and play. Raya for example had to go to Southport to get game time. When I heard that Magloire was going to a League 1 club, I did think this may happen, similar to Platt at Stanley last season.

Obviously a financial penalty is not something a team loaning a player will expect to pay, its basically something that ensures that the team loaning the player doesnt just want him to pad the squad out. You may be right, it may be unrealistic, but we need to be taking far more care loaning our players out. It did seem incredibly unrealistic to loan Magloire to League 1 and expect him to play regular football.

He was repeatedly played with the kids in pre season, scored a belter at Bury, whereas Gallagher did nothing in pre season but ultimately pre season means diddly squat anyway, we lost every game before we won the title. We didnt win today, which is the thread we are in. Wins are the most important, but any home game we dont win is a disappointment, that has to be the attitude if we are serious about top 6. Today definitely was winnable, Cardiff have lost their first 2 away games and came for the point. Your point about having to play direct because we played Gallagher and Graham is absolutely ridiculous, the main issue was playing them both in the first place! I have repeatedly said that Gallagher is simply not a wide player, and yet again playing him there yielded nothing. Would rather Rothwell, Armstrong or Chapman played wide over him. I havent overlooked Downings form, I would have played him left, Rothwell right. And Dack whilst of course acknowledging that he is responsible for impacting games was always going to struggle considering the way we played. Again, get Rothwell on with him, buzzing around him, playing one twos, rather than the crap we had on show today going forward. It has been a good week, I just dont understand why you and others are acknowledging and praising the defensive improvement, which I have done and understand, but are dismissing the worries about our lack of attacking threat. If you think 3 goals, an own goal, a penalty and a header that may have been disallowed, are good enough from 5 games, accompanied with very little threat, then you are easily satisfied.

Seems to have been a bit of a repeated failing that we send players on loan to clubs who ultimately dont give them game time. Also noticed that Fisher was only a sub for Northampton. Definitely something that needs looking at, whether we are overestimating the standard that our players are capable of playing at, or need to start putting in small penalties for lack of game time as is becoming common practice, not sure but something needs to change.

Interesting conundrum is the Sheffield United team selection. I think Mowbray said post match that Downing will have the night off, and that Brereton and Adarabioyo are unlikely to be fit. For me, Chapman, Armstrong and Rothwell all have to start, theres no point giving the former 20 minutes at the end, let him start a game. The 4th place in the attacking positions I would give to Gallagher, to try and get him a goal. Dack obviously did get one in the cup, and theres an argument to get him firing but I would have him on the bench. Further back, its difficult to justify playing Williams or Lenihan, but if we put them both in cotton wool, weve seen that Grayson and Platt will lead to us getting our arses handed to us which does no one any good, they were out of their depth v Oldham.

Absolutely, I am very happy that the ref did get it wrong, because standing in front of the goalkeeper is definitely interfering with play. Dont worry, you are allowed to admit a dodgy decision went in our favour, they wont over turn it! Rothwell has started one game, what on earth are you on about that hes not been good enough. All the talk was about building a team with him in it during pre season, he barely played last season up until near the end of the season when he was superb. Start of the season, hes back on the bench. Gallagher has played all 5 games, 3 of which hes played in a position he clearly isnt capable of playing, as much as he does graft thats not enough. So why did Mowbray try and play Warnock at his own game and go direct himself when he has smaller, pacier players in Rothwell and Armstrong? Mowbray was primarily responsible for our display being boring and ineffective in an attacking sense, its been a common theme all season. Like I said, I am happy to give the manager credit for our improved defensive performances recently, but lets not hide the fact that going forward we have left a hell of a lot to be desired.

Agreed with the gist of this, just think its only fair to consider both the positive at the moment (a much improved defence) and also a massive worry. (our lack of ideas going forward) Theres no point pretending that both dont exist.