Why would they? And if you are a supporter of a team in them leagues, which we arent, we are casual viewers, then youd pay for the rights regardless. Why would they choose a lower deal to allow fans who support English clubs to watch it casually and infrequently without having to pay any extra?

I dont necessarily think that Mowbray is at all too attacking in terms of his set up, 2 defensive midfielders and one winger whose in the team primarily to defend could be seen as very cautious. When we look organised, as we have done 3 times, we seem to keep clean sheets. In the other 3 games, weve conceded 8 goals. We seem to be either well drilled or all over the show.

To be fair, you could say that about anyone on Sunday. That said, the one thing you know about the Graham, Dack and Armstrong axis is that it works well in tandem. I hope that Armstrong as a 10 isnt something we do again as it didnt work. We have more than enough natural number 10s to play that role.

Sadly only Lyons! (Nothing against him, never heard of him, but Chapman would have been nice)

As much as that is true in terms of individuals, im not sure that it is necessarily totally accurate. We had Jason Steele, the worst keeper that I can remember, in goal for the majority of that season. Whilst I think that David Raya makes considerably more than an average amount of mistakes, he is definitely an upgrade on Steele. Ryan Nyambe has developed considerably on the incredibly raw and nervy full back that emerged half way through that season. Derrick Williams remains at a similar level but we do have Amari'i Bell to give him a bit of competition. Charlie Mulgrew and Darragh Lenihan had significant issues with injuries, albeit they are very prone to them and we would be lucky to see them both avoid injury throughout the season. They were also often wasted in midfield with the poor stand ins mentioned below asked to fill in at centre back. We also have potentially better options that Jason Lowe, Danny Guthrie and Hope Akpan in central midfield, not that its difficult. Corry Evans has always shown quality in spells around being dogged by injury, we do also have Harrison Reed, after an impressive season at Norwich, Jacob Davenport who impressed at Burton but is only young, Elliott Bennett who wasnt considered to be a central midfielder at that time, Jack Rodwell who is very much a gamble and Richie Smallwood who there are big question marks about. Overall I think we do have better options in there however to protect the defence than we did 2 seasons ago. The problem could lie in strength in depth. Mowbrays failure to sign a centre back this summer could come back to haunt him. That last season was riddled with incompetent stand-ins, Elliott Ward, Gordon Greer, Tommie Hoban, Wes Brown etc, whenever Mulgrew and Lenihan were injured or wasted in midfield. Whilst we have managed to ship out them 4, and although Mulgrew and Lenihan are permanent centre backs, we only have one player who can naturally cover, and in Paul Downing there are big question marks over his ability at this level.

Rich Sharpe has suggested that he will be publishing a story tomorrow in the LT on his twitter feed, and that there is a chance of it going through.

Again, taking criticism about an INDIVIDUAL match and both managerial decisions and player performances that may have caused the INDIVIDUAL thrashing and using them within a bigger picture to try and make a mockery of valid points. You say its a massive leap, something that people are basically in universal agreement and understanding on. Believe you me, if we had lost 4-1 to Rochdale or Fleetwood then criticism would have been twice as strong. You say cut a bit of slack, but people are commenting about ONE GAME in the appropriate match thread. Please highlight quotes whereby people are suggesting that they think we will struggle throughout the entire season, that there are questions about Mowbrays future, or anything that demonstrates anything other than criticism over an individual performance and result. It might happen on occasion, but if it does, it will warrant criticism. Just as if we do it to someone else, we will get praise.

And where fans of every team that hammers another team convincingly will eulogise their team in praise, whereas teams that are hammered in abject fashion will be criticised by their fans.

Eleven Sports presumably bid more than Sky or BT for the rights so its not a case of deserving it, if they bid more then it is what it is. I bet the ratings have gone down so we will see if its sustainable long term, personally I hope not but I imagine that football rights diversifying over several channels (Amazon Prime have also secured some rights) and even into streaming will continue over the next few years. Gone are the days of one network covering all of the games, to the cost of the consumer. I am very disappointed with it as I did watch both leagues but on very much a casual basis. For example, between the evening PL game and the EFL highlights being on. I would never pay for a seperate subscription or go out of my way to watch it online via streaming as you touch on, hence why I suspect that ratings will have dropped. Find Sky and BT to both be pretty good in terms of coverage in the main, although I prefer pundits such as Jamie Redknapp and Michael Owen to be kept off. BT is made worthwhile with both Premier League games and European games.

I'd argue that the best place to move on isnt the thread of the game we got hammered in.

Theres a noticeable swarm of people, and this isnt specifically aimed at Parson at all so apologies if it seems it, who seem to only be willing to accept praise and if we lose, or do something that could potentially be critiqued, its put down as "one of those things, we cant win them all, have some perspective, dont be negative etc." In the main, supporters will praise and criticise when due in equal measure. Id argue its part of our culture to go to the game and go to the pub or whatever afterwards and say what youd do differently etc to your mates. Nothing wrong with putting yourself in the managers shoes, weve all got different opinions and it doesnt mean we think we can do a better job than Mowbray or think overall we are doing badly. Yesterday I felt that Smallwood had ran out of credit and should have been dropped, and I felt that Palmer and Armstrong should have been in the opposite roles to which they ended up in. And I stand by those criticisms. Does that mean I think I would make a better manager than Mowbray? Obviously not. Does that mean I fear for our season after that solitary game, or that Mowbray should go? Again, certainly not. As you say, we are specifically in a thread for a game we lost 4-1 in. The majority of criticism has been about decisions made during this game, and its only those who seem desperate to highlight these criticisms who are in fact the ones ironically guilty of lacking perspective. For all the criticism in here, there is an equal amount of praise in the Brentford thread, mainly for the characteristics that were absent yesterday.

You are as guilty as anyone of taking tbe game out of context. In the main people are solely judging on yesterdays game. No over the top conclusions that we will go down, or Mowbray should go or any crap like that. In this individual game thread people will comment on tactical choices, subs and selections ect that people feel he did wrong. Mowbray will make mistakes, he is human and football is a game of opinions. "The poor guy cant win" is nonsense. Last week he seemingly got his tactics absolutely spot on and look at the praise he got then in the Brentford thread.

Agreed. Theres a bit of a myth that old fashioned wingers dont exist anymore but I've provided lists of wingers throughout the Championship. I felt we should have made getting at least one in as an option in the summer a big priority. I do understand why players who are naturally strikers/centrally based midfielders are played wide, but ideally wed have a winger on one side to offset the fact that on the other side, our wide man will naturally drift in. Players like Palmer and Rothwell can be useful wide in that they will come in and link with Dack etc. Players like Armstrong wide, assuming your striker is someone like Graham who can hold the ball up, can use being wide to make clever runs in behind the striker and exploit the space thats left. But if you have one of these, its best in my opinion to have someone on the other side who keeps the width most of the time. Wingers, and they dont have to be defensively irresponsible. Infact naturally central players will often prove even less useful defensively as they will naturally come inside at times and leave their full back exposed. And @chaddyrovers the post wasnt just aimed at you. Just giving a few facts and a bit of meat on the bones against the flawed notion that he is a "show pony" without an end product.

There seems to be a bit of a myth forming whereby Palmer is a "show pony" with no end product and basically the opposite of Rothwell. Yes, Palmer has missed a couple of good chances but he has 3 goals in 6 games, he is contributing directly to a goal every other game. Rothwell for all his industry hasnt directly contributed to one, although he did play the pass that played in Bennett to cross for Palmer to score the winner v Brentford. Even today, Rothwell was a real bright spark when he came on but his final decision was lacking, no different to Palmer in that regard. Palmer has the added advantage of having historical evidence of competence in the division. In 16 starts and 8 sub appearances for Huddersfield, before getting a serious injury, he contributed with 4 goals and 3 assists, as well as a goal in a solitary FA Cup game. He got another 2 goals and an assist in 2 starts and 13 sub appearances for Derby, and a further assist in the cup. Not ground breaking or enough to suggest any level of consistency, but hes not just a show pony. For both, we have to appreciate that they are central players "doing a job out wide." For me, thats down to an imbalanced recruitment, albeit I think both players can play a big part. Stuart, you mention that 3 of our front 6 need to be "worker bees" and Mowbray said again today that is what he will continue to play, I personally think there are times when we only need 2.

Apologies, I didnt mean to sound as if I was complaining that you was criticising his performance. I believe that people should in general be able to criticise todays performance, individuals and collectively, just as everyone was in universal agreement that last week we were as good as we were bad today. I just wanted to point out that he has already scored 3 goals so there is definitely some end product. I did think he was poor today but I feel like basically everyone in the team was. His miss was very poor just as it was at Ipswich, no denying that. Its important to remember that he is a number 10 and I feel like Mowbray carries some of the brunt today for his and Armstrongs performances for the roles he gave them both. For me, in Dacks absence, Palmer should be played centrally. Can't comment on Bells performances for Fleetwood but in his first couple of games here he was refreshingly attacking and he does seem to have reigned that side of his game in since. Nyambe isnt very attacking in general and his crossing is far worse than Bell's, I do wonder if Mowbray specifically instructs them to sit further back.

Kasey Palmer has liked a couple of tweets criticising him. Not sure thats necessarily a good trait, saw Chapman like someone make a light hearted comment about him picking up an injury as well the other day. Doesnt bother me but potentially shows a bit of immaturity, suppose they are young lads but still. @Bigdoggsteel he has but hes also already scored 3 goals for us to be fair to him. And hes not playing in his natural position. Feel like he has got the raw deal slightly from a generally inept performance today.

There are valid points amidst all the shouting and ranting, such as a lack of defensive depth that you mentioned that most would agree with. That said, I think the reason for the ridicule is the way you convey your anger and frustration, in disjointed paragraphs full of hyperbole and sarcasm. Surely you could be moreconstructive than to use phrases such as "shower of turd."

Think my opinion is in between yours and many of those who are arguing against you. I personally think that, something that I think @Tom summed up very well, is IF he is drinking on a regular basis, then it is a problem. We all arent professional athletes and hypothetically, if, and its a big if, he is out drinking too much and not looking after himself, it is totally differentv to us having a few drinks on a regular basis. Yes he is entitled to a private life (although plastering it on social media suggests the privacy aspect isnt of paramount importance!) but he does need to obviously look after himself far more than us with regular jobs. @chaddyrovers said that Mowbray will know where he is always which is a massive assumption to make. That said, there is a lot of assumption involved on your side too, and I think that you are very much stretching your point out by suggesting where Dack was could have impacted upon todays result, or that assuming that he hasnt been drinking, that spending time with friends will impact upon his injury is clutching at straws. Not sure the whole isolation of a generation of people by suggesting they are universally lazy and "dont know their arses from their elbows" is ever going to be conducive to healthy debate about the matter either.

Would agree in general, whether that will prove to be value for money will be seen over time, but theres no rush to shoehorn him in the starting 11. That said, Grahams performances lately have not really warranted being dropped, nor did Brereton did anything special when he came on to prop him ahead of Graham in the pecking order, not that he really had the time or the supply to do so. I would expect Brereton to become first choice at some point, a matter of if and not when, but his price tag shouldn't gain him a place automatically. If Brereton starts against Villa then I would imagine that Graham may be knocking on the managers door on the Monday morning.

You'd drop Graham for Brereton? Why? Views on Bennett today?

Graham looks tired after 1 minute but he continues to be effective. I think he could have played longer personally, and deserved to stay on over basically everyone else in an attacking sense. Golden rule from free kicks so close is that the keeper shouldnt be beaten at his side. If it goes over the wall and back down then fair enough. He was also beaten at his near post midweek, and has not cut out basic themes from his game, such as when he rushes out, he clears the ball back into play rather than into the stands, and he often parries shots straight back into the danger zone, as he did v Reading. He also often looks for the quick ball on the counter when he gets it, something which at times he is very good at, but he needs to learn WHEN to do it, at times he needs to keep it and slow things down. All of these are hallmarks of a keeper with excellent reflexes, who is young and raw, but has so many flaws that continue to cost us. I would hope that him and the goalkeeping coach can look at ironing these things out as they are basic. Palmer is a number 10 though, so surely amidst your criticism, you will acknowledge that he deserves a pop in his best position, his natural position, where he played so well for Huddersfield in their promotions season, before writing him off? In general, do you agree that the fact that all of Graham, Brereton, Armstrong, Dack, Palmer and Rothwell want to play centrally is a concern, in terms of who to play wide? And that Bennett was again below par from a wide position, offering nothing at all going forward.

Feel like hes slightly re-creating history, by suggesting that the primary reason for the lack of discipline was us desperately chasing the game with lots of attackers. That blatantly isnt true. For both the first 2 goals, when we wasnt chasing the game, the defence and general shape was equally disjointed, and the team was jittery throughout really. Even when chasing it, we had a back 4 full of experience, and 2 holding midfielders, as well as Rothwell who has been putting in a shift.

After half time we were awful. Ive already but some much over the top reaction on social media by some Rovers fans - you are missing the point. You've just admitted we were awful! People are just saying the same, judging an individual performance and result. They aren't saying we are doing really badly in general, that we need to sack the manager, anything like that. People are angry and disappointed after a very, very poor performance and a thrashing. Just like after the Brentford game, people were 100% complimentary. Youre bringing in the bigger picture when in judging an individual match, it is almost irrelevant. We need to play to Brereton Strengths and Graham doesn't seem able to play 90 mins regular and he looked shattered second half. His legs are going quick - We didnt play to either of their strengths, but Graham looked fine to me, we had just conceded but he didnt look like he had to come off so soon. I feel like you are focusing on Palmer too much. He wasnt great but he was out of position, and there were so many other bad performances, particularly Smallwood, Bennett, Armstrong, Lenihan and for his mistakes, Raya. Rothwell continued in his showing for the ball yet lacking end product performance. I guess Armstrong play off Graham so he can run off Graham flick ons and headers - this didnt work at all. It worked more last season when Graham came deep and Armstrong ran diagonally in from the sides. When Armstrong was so good from wide last season, and considering Palmer is a natural number 10 just like Dack, it made no sense to switch their positions.

I thought Rothwell was similar to Palmer, wanting the ball, looking to beat people, but end product sorely lacking. I understand Palmer being played wide when Dack is fit but when he isn't, Palmer is a natural number 10, a position which gives you far less defensive responsibility, and far more influence going forward. Considering Armstrongs success from wide last year, I found both positions very strange. I do worry about the balance of our attacking players, for all the talent we have. Very few if any would choose to play wide over centrally. Graham, Brereton and Armstrong would want to play as 9's ideally, Dack and Palmer as 10s and Rothwell in central midfield. To be fair, AdamRochinas posts are very unique in that they arent constructive criticism, just wild sentences of anger. The Dack stuff is a seperate issue, but is obviously dependant on factors we dont know about. I dont really agree with the first line. Just as if we were in a poor run/start/position, and got a good win (see Bradford away last year) people would be entitled to compliment the performance and result without having to overly concentrate on the fact that we are still below overall expectations. We are in the match thread of a game when we were comprehensively beaten, and sorely lacking. Its not going over the top to state that, and state what in particular caused that. If the thread was judge our first 6 games, I'd say we are doing ok, no more, no less, but we are in the Bristol City away thread.

Another thing about Palmers performance that I would say, it made no sense to play him wide. He's a natural number 10, and in Dack's absence he should have played there. Felt that Mowbray got it wrong playing Armstrong off the striker, we saw what he can do wide last season.