@chaddyrovers @Paul Mellelieu @Lie_still_Rover you all seem to have totally missed the result of the poll, presumably as it doesnt fit your agenda of wanting to believe that everyone is baying for the managers blood. Less than 4% have already decided that Mowbray is not the man to take us forward. Many like yourself are unreservedly behind the manager long term, many like myself are more than happy to give him more time to see if he is indeed the man to take us into a promotion push going forward, of course throwing away leads, having one of the worst defensive records in the league without an attitude of desperation to change that, and a very underwhelming transfer record will all have to change if that is to happen. Whether he is or isnt the man to change these things, one thing is for sure, I appreciative the work he has done so far, especially the promotion. Im sure even the 5 who want a change feel the same. And chaddy, going over the major issues and faults of the team at the moment that are affecting it progressing at the moment is not "clogging up the messageboard." Nor do I believe you have acknowledged it, indeed you are very defensive whenever anyone questions why we spend so much on sub attackers yet make do with midfielders "doing a (poor) job" failing to stem the tide in defence. Ive seen lots of criticism about this poll even on social media. All its proved is that the vast majority are patient and dont want the manager to go just yet, and that unlike some of those in defence of Mowbray, they are able to distinguish between deserved, constructive criticism and radical moves to change that. Mowbray deserves criticising recently, he has been criticised but the vast majority want him to stay.

The poll is obvious, to determine whether our fans want Mowbray to stay or go. At the moment, it proves that the vast majority at least for the time being are happy to keep him in situ. I dont think anyone in their right mind would say Mowbray has done a job poor enough to warrant sacking, like say Coyle had, underachieving. This is something I posted in the other thread that has since vanished. The job he has done up to now has been good. There is a second type of managerial casualty, when it is felt that a manager has taken a club as far as he can, and that it is at risk of stagnating if it continues. An extreme example is Wenger, the job he did at Arsenal was superb but a change was long overdue, he had continiously ignored the need to add steel (ring any bells) and it needed fresh ideas. Another would be Adkins at Southampton, there was uproar but the club had the ambition to risk bringing in Pochettino. I thought when we let Bowyer go it was wise at the point of things going stale under him, unfortunately Venkys didnt stump up a competent replacement nor the resources to push on. I know that Rodwell isnt a midfielder at Rovers under Mowbray! But that isnt debate over. I dont agree with how Mowbray has used him. It is possible to disagree with the managers decisions. He is an excellent technical footballer who whilst he did well in the 3 clean sheets, the attackers we faced (Will Keane, Chris Martin) were really poor and indeed he impressed mainly with what he did bringing the ball out. In other games, Wigan away, Brentford away, Forest at home, yesterday, the fact that he is not a centre back has stood out. For me, we are wasting a very competent midfielder but we have no choice but to play him as centre back as Mowbray has not brought defenders into the club. Overall our defensive record this season has been shockingly poor. You seem reluctant to acknowledge that. Mowbray seemed non plus about it last week, he has been negligent in bringing defenders into the club whilst splashing out on "project" signing strikers who have yet to make an impact. You are just throwing out words like trust without acknowledging his flaws. Does he know how to get us promoted? Not sure at all.

Brereton, Rodwell and Evans would have struggled to get above 3. Mulgrew 2.

How do you know he knows what he needs in terms of recruitment? Theres no OTT reaction. Out of those who have voted only 1 so far is certain they want him gone, many choosing to wait and see at the moment, many staunchly defending him. Hes getting criticised for aspects of his management that he has neglected and seemingly has no interest in trying to fix. Look at the number of signings hes made, hes spent well over 10m as Rovers manager, and bought a flimsy full back, a free midfielder used as a sticky plaster in defence, and 2 defenders not deemed worthy of even back up status, whilst spending loads on attackers. What makes you think he will get his signings right this summer and that he will overhaul our terrible defence?

You are only saying that because you fear the results. A poll gauging opinion is the whole purpose of the messageboard. You seem to think not being near relegation means he is covered by a cloak whereby he cannot be criticised, "what do you expect FFS!" Its how we are were we are as to why people are worried. Managers get sacked in 2 different circumstances, when they clearly are incompetent and are falling below expectations (Coyle) being the most obvious one. I dont think anyone could suggest Mowbray deserves sacking this way. The second would be when you feel like there is an element of stagnation and there are aspects of his management that dont seem to be fixable by him (defensive record being the key one) and you take a calculated gamble. Bowyer was an example of this but its only an option if the club has ambition (including financial backing) to progress and also if they find a suitable replacement who is an upgrade, both of which Venkys failed on last time. I am torn personally. I think he should be given the rest of the season but I worry we are in a bit of a tailspin and our defensive organisation will continue to be neglected, and his naive loyalty to certain players/characters will hold us back. Its up to Mowbray to prove between now and the summer that he can organise a team capable of pushing on next season.

He should have buried that chance or at least done better but he did very well to fashion it in the first place and was off balance. But it wasnt his age or physical condition that caused him to miss. He kept going until the end and continues to belittle his age, he is capable of playing games in quick succession as I proved he has done already the other day and he looks to be as sharp and fit as he ever has been, as he says himself. We do need a credible alternative to him but thats more due to the lack of quality of Brereton and Nuttall, whilst Samuel was unable to add a credible alternative in League 1 and is not the answer either. My biggest frustration with Dack was his positioning yesterday and that was down to the manager. He is currently in poor form but the numbers he provides are underapreciated in terms of goals and assists. We play direct percentage based football that doesnt suit flair players but he continues to thrive and you look at the numbers of those around him, Armstrong had a superb month in an otherwise poor season, and the rest (Brereton, Rothwell etc) havent contributed at all. You underestimate Dacks contributions and also the ease of signing "game changers." The Dack and Graham combination is the aspect of the team that I have the most confidence in and is in least need of changing.

It was unacceptable levels of players seemingly not knowing what roles they were in and players out of position. There was no excuse to get into that situation, Boros formation was well known and he named an incredibly top heavy team. That being said, if he wanted to be reactive and match them, it took one brave sub in the first half to make such a drastic tactical change at least somewhat feasible. Bell for Brereton would have had a domino effect in terms of putting players back into their correct positions.

Graham is being done a disservice again I feel. He kept going until the end and even in the last 10 minutes he made our best 2 chances. (one he did well to set for himself but blazed over off balance and a lovely header for Dack) We do need some a competent alternative (Nuttall and Brereton are not that) but his fitness is constantly prematurely written off. And Dack is the last person who should be sold. Hes in poor form (albeit last 3 games hes been hindered by an injury, starting on the bench and being played far too deep) but he has 11 goals and 5 assists in a very limited team. Hes probably not a Premier League but theres not a chance we could get a replacement of equal quality. I suspect with him it is a case of not being fully appreciated until hes gone.

Mowbrays tactics ensured that he was playing far deeper than he needs to be to be effective.

Not a fan of home and away teams as it does nothing to promote consistency. Especially defensively. But why have you gone for a more conservative choice of winger at home? And what has Brereton done to warrant further starts every other game?

I would even go as far as saying that even if Reed became available, we shouldnt buy him before we have done a major overhaul of our defence. There are 2 elements to it, im unconvinced that Mowbray has the organisational capacity to sort the defence, but also much of it is individual errors because Mowbray has neglected the defence in his recruitment and indeed the only 3 I would keep around, Nyambe, Mulgrew and Lenihan all pre-date Mowbrays appointment. It cannot be a job for 1 or 2 signings to be brought in as cover, as sticking plasters. We need a revamp but can you see Mowbray for example doing a Wilder and splashing 4m on an Egan? I cant. Weve essentially got 5 defenders (Williams and Bell too, sadly) and beyond that we move midfielders into our defence which quite simply cannot be done with regularity or it will do what it is doing now, costing us goals.

Theres no way that Bell should be played as a winger. If hes not good enough defensively, which he isnt, you cant just shoehorn him in further forward. His final ball is nowhere near good enough to be a winger, being a winger is different in that as a full back attacking you have space to run into, and he showed in a game last year (cant remember v whom) that he isnt suitable as a winger.

The tactical change was neither a wise one nor one that should have been reactive. Middlesboroughs 3 at the back formation was hardly a secret, playing an extra (useless) striker as a wide man at the expense of Travis made a bigger disconnect between attack and midfield and meant we were over run. But even if he did want to make that change, he couldnt do it without making personnel changes. The change he did make was horrendous and had a massive domino effect. It meant Bennett had to go to left wing back, where he cannot play as proved v Newcastle, Reed had to then moved to an unfamiliar wing back position, which in turn left our best player in a midfield 2 often deep inside his own half where we dont want him. If he did want to admit a selection mistake, surely bring on Bell for Brereron and adjust accordingly, Bennett RWB, Reed CM with Evans and Dack in front. Saying that, the problem was them dominating the midfield so it would have not changed that, indeed all his change did was moved Reed away and made it worse. But it definitely wasnt effective.

Part of the problem now is there is no viable alternative to Mulgrew and Lenihan. No other centre backs. Rodwell, Williams, Nyambe, not centre backs. Even if we sign a centre back or 2 which we need to, we need competition.

Absolutely shocking yet again, dont let a fairly spirited but ultimately fairly toothless second half with 10 men take away from how poor we were first half. Mowbray got things horribly wrong. Brereton is simply not a wide man, he is being let out to dry playing there, that being said he doesnt really resemble a footballer. Mowbrays reactive change to 3 at the back was absolutely horrendous. Bennett can not play left wing back, Reed right wing back, the front 3 not having a clue what they are doing and Dack in a central 2 sitting in front of the defence. Defensively again we were torn apart at will. Rodwell is not a centre back, Bennett isnt a right back, the defence again had a vulnerable, flimsy nature to it that continues to show signs of neglect under Mowbray. Mulgrew was the man to typify it today, he played like hed been out last night on the piss. Thought Boro were very good, dominated prior to the red card, played less long ball than us, Mikel ran the show and Assombolonga was excellent too, and they should have scored 4 or 5 in the second half but otherwise a terrific away performance. If only we were capable of such away performances. Clutching at straws looking for positives. Raya made a couple of good saves, kicking as bad as always bar a lovely chest and volley near the end. Bell was much more positive although his crossing is very ... inconsistent. Mowbrays created a massive mess for himself, 4 losses on the bounce, 9 in 16 I think it is, so many goals conceded and so many strange tactical decisions creates further doubts as to whether he can take us further.

A good shot on him? Thats the first goal hes scored for us and I dont recall him coming close before that. So not sure how youve concluded that. And whilst he did right to hit it across the keeper, it was very much a goalkeeping error. Im guessing that you perceive that he is better going forward judging by your analysis of him. Again, what is this based on? He gets so far up the pitch and shits himself and turns back. I dont recall any assists although im happy to be corrected, whereas Williams has 10 in admittedly many more appearances for us, and his attacking ability is very much limited.

Ultimately, even if it was as unjust as chaddy is implying, and the game was one that we dominated, there are 2 aspects of the result that Mowbray can be questioned on: The chances we missed - Our 2 best attackers/finishers were subs and our 7m striker blew a big chance from an alien wide role. His team selection can be criticised. The goals we let in - 2 more goals conceded of a cheap nature. Our defence had 2 midfielders in it, and is very flimsy and has been neglected with such a small proportion of Mowbrays resources dedicated to it. Hes signed 4 defenders that I can recall, Caddis and Downing were 2 League 1 squad players, a free and a nominal fee, both already left, Bell was again a nominal fee and a really poor defender and Rodwell was a midfielder brought in on a free. The latter 2 were responsible mainly for the goals. He has spent fees on Brereton, Armstrong, Dack, Chapman, Gladwin, Samuel and Rothwell, probably around 11/12m worth there roughly. His recruitment and his organisational skills can be criticised.

One was Kingsley at Hull, who then came to Ewood and made me think our 2 left backs were Roberto Carlos and Ashley Cole.

Norwich and Ipswich exiting the league via different ends would remove 2 monstrous away days at least.

You really do beggar belief ?

You never ever criticise him. Wednesday was a case in point, staunchly defending a team selection you clearly didnt agree with. A team selection that went on to lose to 22nd in the league table.

Youve maintained this "he cant play 3 games in a week" throughout the season chaddy.

Even if you can empathise with Mowbrays thinking you have to be able to criticise him when he makes incorrect decisions. Thats not OTT or negative, thats being fair.

Bell as has been pointed out to you has been shite defensively and was also responsible directly for Readings first. I thought Wlliams was ok v Bristol City, its lesser of 2 evils but Bell is a coward of a defender and we can expect crosses galore if he is at full back as he rarely prevents them. Conway is past it. He was poor and offered no threat midweek and again as others have said he offers us nothing in the future and should be released in the summer. Good servant but has been poor for a couple of years now. A tombola system is reserved for the man who put our best 2 players, our only natural right back and Reed all on the bench midweek and played a 7m striker wide, a winger at right back and a midfielder at centre back due to poor recruitment. There is no point you suggesting a team anyway as even if Mowbray picks a totally different one youll defend it to the hilt!

Irrelevant. Thats at a time of the season that is unprecedented in terms of quantity of fixtures, but even if we had 11 games in 11 days and he played 3 in that time, he has still proven that he can play 3 games in quick succession. The number of games he doesnt play is irrelevant to the number of games he did play. And why no mention of my other 2 examples? I've never once claimed he can play 4 games in 11 days, or that he might tire during one of 3 games in a week and a sub may be needed for half an hour, but he quite clearly can play 3 games in just over a week.