I havent at any point doubted that as individual players, the players we have brought in are of a decent calibre. My issue and criticism has always been with the balance of the squad. I actually think one thing that was strongly in Mowbrays favour straight away was look at the players you mention, Emnes, Joao, Gallagher, Hoban, also Hendrie, none of whom we would have particularly cared about losing I would argue, all of whom their loans expired so he didnt have to struggle to offload them. Lowe, Akpan, Mahoney, Guthrie, Brown and Greer were the obvious ones who are examples of my point though, he was able to start a clear out with most of those obviously expendable out of contract and those remaining players we had of value all under contract and able to build around. Signing players fit for purpose in certain positions is something that is just as important as the player himself. Kasey Palmer is a very talented player but he impressed especially at Huddersfield helping them to promotion playing as a number 10, hes not played there at Rovers. Jack Rodwell is obviously a talented midfielder albeit one with baggage but playing him as a centre back is not something he is suited to or used to and he is not effective there. Ben Brereton was signed at a time when we desperately needed a striker, we didnt need a wide forward. We signed primarily midfielders but we have no real centre back or right back cover (barring those filling in from elsewhere or a poor Downing) and the whole wide midfielder thing is obviously a big problem, last season there was a certain balance to our team but thats deserted us following the mass of players signed for those positions. My issue with Mowbrays recruitment is not that some havent worked out, theres Hart, Gladwin, Samuel, Bell etc but everyone makes poor signings. Its the imbalance of them.

So Dack was signed solely to get us promoted, and not as an asset, as Samuel was, albeit he turned out to be crap? You're doing that thing again where you are just blindly agreeing with Mowbray regardless of what you see with your own eyes. He may have tried to justify why he likes his wide men doing x and y, but is it working? A chronic lack of goals from open play, especially at home, suggests its not entirely working. A total reliance on the most long balls in the division to create attacks suggests it is not entirely working. The players he has played wide, goals wise, Reed has 1, (his one at WBA came from a central role) Palmer has 1, Bennett has 0, Rothwell has 0, Brereton has 0, Conway has 0 and Armstrong has 1. 3 goals from wide positions from 18 games. None of the wide men have shown anything like enough quality or consistency to nail down a spot, none of us have a clue who he will pick today, that suggests that his recruitment in those areas is perhaps slightly questionable. Same with signing Rodwell as 3rd choice centre back. I know, his new contract doesnt change the fact really that he isnt going anywhere anytime soon and thats totally irrelevant to the point I am making. I am just saying that thus far his recruitment has been imbalanced and very mixed and needs improving. Am I saying he should be sacked for it? No.

The one thing that I find perplexing is the focus on the extra windows required. Surely thats only a strong argument if past windows had highlighted a consistently strong window by window improvement in terms of recruitment? Im not convinced it has. The first window, he signed Dack which proved as a catalyst for improvement. The overall summer was mixed but the likes of Smallwood, Downing and Antonsson were all useful short term in League 1. There were a lot of players that have fallen by the wayside since, Whittingham, Samuel, Hart, Gladwin to name but 4. The second window, Armstrong was a particularly good short term signing, Payne and Bell where much less successful, the former wasnt played in his natural position. The latest summer window was possibly the worst for him in terms of he had ample resources, he signed 7 players and only really Reed has established himself, and even then he is moved from centre to out wide and back too often. Rodwell isnt a centre back, Brereton, Palmer and Rothwell arent wide players and Armstrong likewise and hasnt been good enough. Considering hes had 3 windows. We look really poor at left back, we only have 2 competent centre backs, one right back, one trusted centre forward and no one anything like securing the wide positions. Thats a chronic lack of balance in the squad. If you look at the team Mowbray would naturally revert back to, Raya, Lenihan, Mulgrew, Nyambe, Williams, Evans, Bennett and Graham would almost certainly be in it. Im not sure that the team has improved much since he joined nearly 2 years ago. In terms of building and progressing window by window, thats a concern. Obviously he has done a lot of good for the club and certainly shouldnt be sacked anytime soon or anything like that but its just a point that I felt needed raising on the constant bleating for patience as he needs x more windows. He should have done better/more in the windows hes already had and he needs to be better in terms of player recruitment.

The main thing that Kean and Coyle had in common is that they were bloody hopeless managers. If they were doing well do you really think people would have disliked them? He signed 7 players, with only Reed (a loan) so far proving to be an unqualified success. The squad has certainly more quality than when Mowbray arrived and he gets more from those who he inherited but it is also too imbalanced with many players struggling to find any consistency. Wilder signs players for their specific positions. Mowbray in the summer didnt.

I think the contract is a year too much personally but he deserves it considering the job hes done. Lets hope he can iron out the recent blot on his copybook so to speak. Plenty of credit from last season.

Weve put in 2 horrendous performances and got 2 horrendous results in a week. Of course people will be mad. My point was that the word patience is hurled around in general (not with Mowbray) but you need to see signs at least that progress is being made, however slowly. Patience is just a buzz word used to ridicule those who question the manager. Im sure he is a nice guy, Ive no real interest in meeting him, Ive not met him, it has no bearing on my opinion of him as a football manager. I like him because overall hes done a good job, not because hes a nice bloke. Every manager tries to explain themselves but it doesnt mean that they are right. Hes explained why he signed Rodwell as a centre back, I dont agree with it even though it had a small hint of logic to it, and it hasnt worked. Im not going to credit him for doing something counter-productive simply because he explained his supposed logic in a press conference prior. He has done a lot of good, my point was that people may question a manager if at any point aspects of a long term plan dont seem to be fitting. Many of his summer signings havent really done much, nor do they appear to have a specific role within Mowbrays plan at the moment. They are talented players but not necessarily best suited to playing the roles theyve been signed for. That doesnt give me much confidence that 2 more windows worth of his signings would leave us well equipped for promotion. Just pleading for patience isnt a counter-argument to that point. Can you please stop banging on about people talking about sacking him. Removing potentially Mercerman (who himself has more hinted and implied than said it) no one that I have seen has suggested it so stop using it as a shield to make people look stupid. Mowbray does have enough credit in the bank, people arent arguing against that. Recent performances/results, especially the last 2, will always cause a lot ot criticism.

Graham went off at 3-2.

Im not one to ever judge on what he says, its all about what he does for me. He does seem like a nice guy but that is also almost an irrelevance to me and shouldnt make a difference to our judgements. Rodwell playing at centre back is a perfect case in point. His reasoning may seem somewhat sensible but on the pitch it doesnt seem to work, you can tell hes not a centre back, his defending for Wigans 2nd is a case in point. Same with strikers wide, midfielders up front, playing Smallwood and Evans, playing occasional back 3s, it may sound logical when he explains it but if it doesnt work then such things need to be tweaked and abandoned and he deserves to be questioned rather than praised for his "honesty." My only fear is that we hear all the talk about progressing the squad, needing x number of windows. Hes had 3 so far, and the last one particular he was backed with resources belittling the fact that we were in League 1 last season. I dont agree that merely staying up would be an adequate achievement either considering the resources at our disposal. And patience is often a word used in preference to actual reasoned judgement. Patience is only worthwhile if there are obvious signs of progression. You look at the summer signings, undoubtedly we brought some talent to the club. In my opinion it doesnt seem to have been done with much balance or forward planning, the only unqualified success is only here on loan. He signed 7 players and we are still short in a number of areas, whilst having plenty of players (Palmer, Rothwell, Armstrong, Brereton, Rodwell) none of whom have really enhanced consistently any of the positions that we needed. All that being said, Mowbray does have enough credit in the bank obviously to continue and I havent seen anyone suggest otherwise. The manner of our promotion was impressive and we are hardly in a poor position at the moment. But he needs to give the team some consistency, attacking threat, defensive stability and identity back.

I pointed out everything that I think is wrong, and everything that needs addressing, playing the ball through the lines, pressing high, braver team selections, less loyalty to those not good enough, signing players for the actual position they play in. (unlike most of the summer signings) Mowbray has never named a side anything like that so Ive got no idea why you think he will on Saturday.

Whether you try to empathise and understand or not. They were the incorrect decisions, they led to a woeful result and a woeful performance. Your problem is if he makes a correct decision, you judge him on that. If he makes a wrong decision, you listen to what he says in an interview and judge him on his intentions, always taking them as logical even if the result on the pitch shows otherwise. Thats always your argument when you have nothing constructive to say. I know it wont make a difference what I say but its a messageboard and if I think a decision he has made or continues to make is wrong I will say it. The reason you cause so much controversy is because you cannot tolerate any criticism of Mowbray even when he is wrong. Would you have made that sub? Would you have signed Rodwell as a centre back? Would you continue to play Smallwood and Evans? Would you continue to use Brereton and Rothwell so sparingly? Would you continue to play long ball football?

A back 3 never works for us, not least because we have 2 competent centre backs and our only competent full back is never a wing back in a million years.

It resulted in MB meltdown under Mowbray.

I appreciate that, but my point is that goals are the most important part in any attacking players game, and the goals alone justify his place, and show that he is having a big impact. If he has an average overall game but gets a goal, hes had a good game. Goals are not the icing on a performance cake, they are critical and the main source of judgement.

I think that, possibly with exceptions I cant think of, 3 at the back is a formation that only tends to work if its one you play religiously week after week because it is quite complex in terms of specific roles. I dont think you should randomly change to it at half time randomly for a start. Perhaps symbolic of Mowbray worrying more about the opposition than allowing his own team the freedom to really develop its own identity, something which it had in the main last season. Our wing backs were Nyambe and Bell, 2 fairly defensive full backs both having shocking games. How would that ever lend itself to making us more attacking? He will get criticism if he does things that contributes to poor performances and results, and praise if it improves us. I dont think you can use that as a defence. Against Swansea he put Dack as a striker and Brereton wide so strange example too. Also, Mowbray has said Graham wasnt injured, it was tactical. I would have kept him on, and probably brought on Palmer and Rothwell for Armstrong and Smallwood, and put Reed next to Evans. But I would have started a different team anyway.

His recent lean spell has been in the spell when he has been moving from 10 to 9 and vice versa, no continuity, and he has always looked lost as a 9. It has also been amidst a slump in the level of performances in general where our lack of attacking plan has been particularly highlighted. We have not been very creative in open play all season to be honest but we have done enough and scored a few from set pieces to grind out results. I think he deserves criticism for his form but I cant fathom how you can justify dropping your best player and primary goalscorer in the spite of any alternatives who suggest they could get the goals that dropping Dack would remove. Nothing to suggest not. People said the same about Rhodes, and he continued to get the "lucky goals" and continued to get people perplexed as to why he was so lucky to always be in the right position at the right time. I have always thought that goalscoring has somehow become underestimated in judging a player. What sort of argument is that if he had hit the post a few times people would have suggested he hasnt made the step up. We need to develop some sort of plan in terms of sustaining attacks, not just for the benefit of Dack, but also the likes of Palmer, Rothwell and Armstrong etc. You don't like the long ball stat and theres also the stat of us scoring 5 in 9 home games from open play, and weve not scored in 12 of our first halfs this season. These stats are all damning of what I forsee to be an absence of a consistent, effective, tactical strategy in terms of mounting attacks. Graham has done brilliantly this season just making anything from a constant stream of long balls, often aimless punts, and Mowbray can stand on the touchline getting frustrated but hes responsible for setting us up and the players are carrying out his game plan. If yesterday was a one off then youd say fair enough but it isnt. Under Mowbray, weve been at our best when weve played at a high tempo, the stat about us starting games suggest hes being overcautious as to the step up in quality, but its coming at a cost of us by making our attack toothless. We dont look like a team that ever works on how it sustains and creates attacks in training. We also often bypass the midfield obviously, I don't think his over-reliance and loyalty towards the likes of Bennett, Evans and in particular Smallwood does anything for us in terms of helping us to work through the lines. We never get Dack on the ball in between the lines. I do still think that our transfer recruitment was really poor in the summer, we are really short in terms of centre backs, we have no cover at right back, no quality at all at left back, we are a striker light and have no width, and a series of his signings all that dont seem fit for purpose in their respective areas that Mowbray hasnt got anything out of really so far. So we are working in spite of a very inefficient summer spending a considerable amount of money.

It is a stat perfectly highlighting our total lack of attacking plan going forward and that comes down to the manager. So even if he is frustrated watching the players are doing his gameplan, and its him that needs to sort it. You dont like the stat because it highlights Mowbrays problems at the moment in black and white. Because you never are willing to criticise him when he makes stupid decisions. I never asked why is he playing him there. I said just because he has said why he thinks its a good idea doesnt mean it is a good idea, yesterday blatantly proved it is not and he should have signed an actual centre back. Whatever the supposed reasoning behind the change, it didnt work. When Martinez took Wigan down?

Everyone has been pathetic in the last games. And will continue to be with our thoughtless long ball tactics. I would drop any other player yes, the reason I wouldnt drop Dack is because hes our best player, our top and practically only goalscorer and Mowbray needs to come up with a better way of getting the best from him. The fact that creating chances from open play is an unrealistic ambition is pretty saddening!

It wasnt because it was essentially a back 5. Either way it was never going to improve us as an attacking team. I think its pretty meaningful that he has a forward that cost 7 million on the bench, as well as 2 attacking midfielders he signed, and when lets assume Graham got injured (not seen anything to suggest that) he resorted to a defender in a bizarre changed that panned out exactly as to be expected. Yes he had to try something but to be honest its worrying that hes having to be so desperately reactive in the absence of a way of cresting attacks from the start. But the sub he did make made absolutely no sense and it proved a complete failure. The most problematic aspect was that we didnt appear to have any sort of plan regardless of what formation and set of personnel were on the pitch. And? So did I. Ive yet to see a logical explanation fot a sub that clearly didnt work. Im not even sure Graham was injured but he had 3 of his own attacking players on the bench. The sub was a total failure, lets not dress it up. Absolutely right. It was both a baffling and conservative change in equal measures. It seemed strange at the time and it didnt work.

If hes so angry about the long balls then whys he not done anything about it all season?! My "favourite stat" is that we have played the most long balls in the season. Mowbray is never "on the field" but its his job to sign the players, pick the players, coach the players, set out the game plan for the players. Thats not a valid argument otherwise managers would never be responsible. I know he intends to use Rodwell as a centre back. Im criticising that fact as a totally bizarre outlook, how about signing an actual centre back! Rodwell gave away another penalty with some embarassing defending from a goalkeepers kick out. If Graham was injured then why not bring on another attacking player. We were losing the game. Mowbray can say what he likes, im not interested in his interviews, I judge him on how the team does. Ive seen no remote signs of any passing style being worked on, on any identity throughout most of the season, bar us being a long ball team.

I disagree. We were one down and had 3 attacking players on the pitch. To remove one for a left back to play in a back 3 baffled me and others around me and it didnt work. If Graham was injured, we had 3 attacking players on the bench that Mowbray signed himself in the summer. One of whom cost 7. I personally think the fact that none were brought on at that time is pretty galling in terms of how our summer recruitment went.

Not seen one person say Mowbray needs to go. This always happens when people criticise him, others chirp up and claim that they are being unreasonable and calling for his head. If anyone is saying that, then IMO they are wrong to do so, but I havent seen anyone say it, and the fact that you "havent got the time" to show me suggests that you havent. No one wants him to fail. Everyone is frustrated at the crap that has been served up in the last few days, that over 7,000 tickets have been sold to see, that I have spent £50 on tickets and travel etc to watch embarrassing performances. Im still scratching my head as to why he made the sub. It was a stupid sub and I'd love you to explain it if you know as I havent a clue.

Goals were always the main thing last season and hes carried on this season, but we werent as reliant on long balls last season, we had more goals from other sources last season, we had far more consistency and far more of an identity once we got going, and thats why he was allowed to thrive. I dont think we are in the position where we can just remove our one chief goal threat and best player out of the side because we dont have the alternatives. Mowbrays conundrum should be how do I revert back to getting the best from him, getting an identity in general in the team, becoming less reliant on long balls and getting our flair players involved far more.

He played some of them games out of position, but he has been poor even yesterday as a 10, he is out of form but im not subscribing to it being a sudden egotistical thing on the back of a Soccer AM appearance or whatever. Everytime we play 3 at the back it doesnt work. Also, Bennett isnt a wing back and Nyambe isnt a centre back. And Bell isnt a footballer.We only have 3 centre backs and one of them is Downing. It will just be a scattergun approach, making a few personnel changes, but it is the way we play that needs looking at. Its hoofball, its aimless, its boring, regardless of who plays, regardless of what formation, and thats the worry.

So are Amarii Bell, Richie Smallwood, Derrick Williams, Ryan Nyambe all thinking theyve made it after their recent form? I think that you are potentially making a massive assumption in regards to his recent Where do our tactics come into play, most long balls in the league, the ball often thoughtleslly sailing over his head, do they not contribute to his form? Where does him being moved from a 10 to a striker and back again come into play as to his poor form? Is there no recognition that he has an excellent goal record this season again, which is the most important thing and has always been the key aspect in his hame, and no one else steps up to the plate when he doesnt score? I'm not saying his form in recent games like many others has been really poor and he has to take the blame for that. I just think peoples reasoning behind it is a case of adding 2 and 2 and getting 5.

His version of not scoring has led to him proving to be our primary goalscorer this season in the absence of anyone else bothering to contribute. I dont think we can afford to drop him, just as we couldnt afford to drop Rhodes when his form dipped or he had a bit of a dry spell, because no one else is scoring in his absence. Sheffield Wednesday are rubbish, anything less than a win is a poor result. Raya Nyambe Lenihan Mulgrew Williams Reed Evans Palmer Dack Rothwell Graham Subs: Leutwiler, Bennett, Conway, Armstrong, Brereton, Downing, Rodwell Couldnt pick a left back, both terrible, Nyambe plays in spite of his terrible recent performances due to a lack of alternatives, Downing to play even though hes not very good if Lenihan isnt fit as none of the alternatives are centre backs and he is.