Does he?

Very, just hope Mulgrew, Lenihan and Dack all avoid injury. Wouldn't have risked Mulgrew and Dack. Hope Rothwell has a strong performance in central midfield, we could do with a natural in there who can be slightly more attacking.

I don't really understand what any of that actually means in reality. A draw against Hull, and also mere survival, are both outcomes that may be accepted should they happen, but they are also minimum targets, we shouldnt aim for them. And im also not sure why you are basing your aims and objectives on the bookies expectations for.

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/16416126.joe-rothwell-starting-to-acclimatise-to-rovers-boss-demands/ Rothwell touches on that his natural position is actually as a number 8, coming from deep. I like the look of your team @Ewood Ace because it has attacking threats from a few different places. 2 potential issues are the fact that it leaves nothing on the bench (something we can rectify in the window) and also I cant see Bennett being dropped. Maybe more likely to see that team next Wednesday at home to Reading?

Yeah, I'd take Chris Martin here. Preferably not just on loan. He's going to be out of favour with Waghorn, Marriott, Nugent etc all ahead of him, hes got a proven track record and hes not even 30 yet.

Ah, the use of the word negative as a common attempt to get people to agree with your argument when it lacks any substance or constructiveness to it. What exactly are people being negative about? The potential of signing someone we havent even recently been linked with? How is that negative. Another year wiser? Not so sure based on how he did last season. "We take what we can" even though what we are supposed to be taken hasnt signed nor have there been any strong suggestions that we will.

As I explained, the terrible manager excuse doesnt hold much weight. Gallagher played many games in a 4-4-2 with Graham. Coyle for all his faults wasnt a manager for whom attacking players would struggle under, the only problem was absolutely everything else. Hence the constant 3-2 defeats. We dont play that formation, nor should we with the number of 10s we have now, most notably our best player. His role would have to be totally different if he was to rerurn. He had a target man in Graham last time. This time he would have to be the target man with a small number 10 ie Dack off him. He doesnt have the skillset as the lone striker in our formation.

Agreed on that. I suspect that Palmer will have the greater impact on the season overall, and I look forward to seeing him more, I just dont remember anything he tried coming off on Saturday whereas for me, Rothwell looked more dangerous. I feel like Palmer maybe wasnt helped by mainly being played on the right on Saturday, hes a number 10 so if he is to be played wide, playing him on the left will allow him to come inside and link with Dack, especially with Bell on the overlap. Being on the right makes him more likely to go on the outside being right footed which is not his game.

I agree that he is right, my point was regarding the phrase "Maybe we are a bit overly critical." I dont think we are/were, in that everyone who went agreed that we played well in the second half, as Harris said. I also think in the main people think we can do well.

Personally not at all averse to flair players, had many a debate with chaddy about how Bennett for example being defensively capable is not enough for him to get a place in our attacking 4, in my opinion. I just feel that Armstrong has to come in with his pace, Graham and Dack are obvious, so that leaves one of Rothwell and Palmer, 2 similar flair players and Palmers end product was very poor, and I felt Rothwell did more than him and deserves a start over him, of course dependant on tomorrow night.

I disagree, the consensus is that we played well and had them pinned in for 25-30 minutes in the second half. I also think very, very few if anyone thinks we will go down, the general theme I get is that people want a couple of signings to have us looking up the table. Think that all ties in to what Harris said.

Set himself another deadline so lets hope all goes to plan this time.

Obviously agree with you on the window and how ones before have been far worse. For me the Coyle one and the summer in embargo when we signed Delfounso and Koita and sold Cairney and Gestede being low points. But surely last summers window was one of success in that it set us up to finish 2nd. We signed our best player Dack, signed Smallwood, yes the rest of the signings were at best mixed but we kept our best players and let loads of rubbish leave, having an overdue clearout. You mention Mahoney but was he a loss, really? Never suggested to me hed do much based on his cameos here.

My point was that you said that most teams dont play with natural wingers. I have just researched for you and given you a list proving that the vast majority of teams in the league have at least one natural winger. We would benefit hugely from having the option of at least 1 natural, out and out winger. Again on your Ripley and Wilcox point, Chapman and many of the wingers listed are more reliant on pace and getting to the byline, rather than crossing from deep, which suits us because we dont play 2 up front so we need to be more inventive in getting the supply right for our striker. Crosses from deep will usually suit 2 big centre backs as we saw. The discussion was initially about how you said wingers need to be aware of their defensive duties, something I am not convinced Chapman for example he has shown he wont try to do, and obviously would learn further with games. It was a line used last year in my opinion to cover Mowbray at a time when he was over cautious early in the season. I also stated that whilst Bennett is very good defensively, hes not offering anything going forward, something we differ on our standards of. I didnt dismiss McKay, I agreed that I would have had him here.

Im not that hopeful but I agree that it would be a big boost. But you implied on the other thread that wingers are a thing of the past ?

I agree that Bennett has a role but yesterday it was too defensive considering the game. Point being you have to offer SOMETHING attacking. Thats my point. You said they have to offer something both attacking and defensive. At the moment, from wide, Bennett only offers defensive capabilities. Its a myth that wingers dont exist. To prove it, beyond reproach, here are a list of proper wingers that played in the Championship yesterday, many of whom play on their strong side as very direct wingers: Albert Adomah, Andre Green, Callum McManaman, Jed Wallace, Craig Noone, Will Buckley, Callum O'Dowda, Niclas Eliasson, Lewis Wing, Jacques Maghoma, Harvey Barnes, Matty Phillips, Gil Dias, Mo Barrow, Jon Taylor, Gwoin Edwards, Grant Ward, Jarrod Bowen, Adam Reach, James McLean, Tom Ince, Sergi Canos, Barry McKay, Bersant Celina, Tom Barkhuizen, Callum Robinson, Harry Wilson, Florian Jozefzoon, Ezgjan Alioski. Please stop peddling the myth that wingers are extinct from the game. Playing players like Palmer wide will actually potentialy give less protection to the full back than actual wingers. Chapman for example never left his full back isolated leading to a goal as far as im aware, I felt Mowbray was too cautious with him.

If any of us had said the quotes he said, or shown the frustration he showed, you would be calling us negative, tell us to have the faith, or at a push, saying we may as well forfeit the season.

I'm very much of the mindset that I wouldnt praise Venkys for wanting to spend, or planning to, or trying to but unable to before the deadline etc. I will happily do so if and when a deal goes through. If that is genuinely the case, then there is no reason why we cant spend it now, on loans with an obligation to buy, basically permanent deals, in which case the window is still open. I dont think its undue paranoia to pick up on the phrasing of Mowbray's interview yesterday, as if hes in some sort of doubt as to whether the money will still be available when he wants to spend it next, and also in terms of whether the deals we do look to conclude in the rest of the month are more stop-gap loans rather than ones that lead to permanent deals. We will see. He also said that Armstrong was well down our list and we signed him a couple of days later so hes clearly not opposed to telling a white lie to bluff us! I take on board that the market is a bit stupid but it is for everyone, you cant hide behind that and not sign players at all, and with the improvements in scouting I've heard on, surely we can find some players or it was pointless improving that side of the club. In terms of teams being more unwilling to sell, as you touch on @briansol many Prem clubs will have been of the mindset of theyd rather have more than enough than less than enough at window end, knowing that teams lower down the chain can then sign their unwanted surplus in the extended loan window. Look at players like Gallagher (who I dont want) as a perfect example, Southampton signed Ings last minute, they already have Gabbiadini, Long and Austin, and will have been relaxed knowing that the only teams that would want Gallagher would have been in the football league, therefore a deal wasnt urgent prior to Thursday, and that only once they know they dont need him to fill the squad will they allow him to leave. Teams in the football league are in the same position as us, therefore they CAN sign replacements if their players leave. So that cant be used as an excuse. That said, 3 of the most common names on here are Brereton, Chapman and Maddison, and if im not mistaken all 3 have all not played a minute so far this season. Chapman has been in the squads along with Taverneir and Wing who Pulis clearly rates higher than Chapman, as he has started 2 of 3 I believe. Boro had a couple of deals fall through before the window and I think Pulis has said he is still in the market, they have even been linked with Bolasie to replace Traore, therefore he may become available. Maddison, his chairman has said they will consider loan to buys, and Brereton is 4th choice at his club and has been left behind a bit due to the money theyve spent. I'm not saying definitely sign one of those 3, more showing that players availability wont have massively decrease, logically speaking. One thing I will say, is that im not opposed to 1 or 2 loans, like Palmer, who clearly dont have a chance of being made permanent, but are of a calibre that will greatly improve our options. We just dont want a squad full of stop gaps, as Mowbray has previously touched on. I'd be disappointed if we didnt get one or two loans with obligation to buys for players that will greatly improve us, considering weve been told that the money is there, and knowing that the window is basically still open.

Norwoods a very good signing for Sheffield United, and one we should have gone for in my opinion. @Stuart is right in there being no excuses, in that theres no point waiting until the end of the month and risk a case of de ja vu.

Agreed, my point was in regards to the over-caution of picking players in the most attacking 4 positions, specifically wide, that are defensively strong and leaving you with no attacking threat as a result. In my opinion, from the admittedly limited spells that hes played up front and wide, Armstrong was and is far more effective wide. His ability to penetrate from deep and run past the striker with his speed is what made him so effective. That brings us back to the importance of having a target man that is capable with his back to goal, like Graham, who works perfectly in tandem with him as Armstrong runs in the space Graham leaves. And why Gallagher would not be the correct type of striker to bring in as he would be too similar to Armstrong. I agree that Palmer and Rothwell are more likely to find a home in our team wide, especially with Dack. I just dont believe for one second that Palmer and Rothwell, neither of whom are defensively minded players, are noticeably more defensively responsible than Chapman, who would at least be less guilty of roaming into central positions.

Mowbray said yesterday after the game that Rothwell has been having to understand what it requires off the ball, so im not sure thats true at the moment with him. I'm also not convinced that Chapman is a lot more defensively unwilling compared to Armstrong, so I did feel that at times it was unnecessary caution. I dont recall any goals conceded that Chapman cost us due to defensive negligence, so I felt it was an unfair tag that he got. He was a victim of his own success as a sub perhaps. You can iron out defensive problems as you go. A wide man has to offer at least something of an attacking threat, or you may as well stick a full back there.

I agree with chaddys team but it highlights the issue of perhaps the imbalance of our squad following the window, neither are natural wingers.

There is labelling on both sides. Some seem to like being in their ivory tower labelling the folk in the Darwen End as a bunch of pathetic teenagers only interesting in baiting the away supporters from behind the safety of a line of police and stewards. A stereotyped often used to justify the move of home fans from the Darwen End without consultation. As someone who used to be in the Darwen End and did none of that, just like the majority of others, I found that labelling just as bad as the needless use of the word spectators seems to have irked a couple on here.

Mulgrew is a centre back, yes he takes set pieces but is better at trying to score himself from them. Rest of your Bennett comments, in terms of filling in different roles dependant on the opponent, I agree with. But hes a defensive player at the moment that needs to do more attacking, obviously you have much lower standards of what you expect from him going forward which is fair enough. Presumably Palmer came off because firstly hes not fully match fit yet, and nothing he tried really came off for all of his obvious talent and he started leaving his position. Dack went off to be replaced by Conway in a defensive move that didnt work. Also, regarding our difference in opinion in terms of our first half performance, with you thinking we were good after 10 minutes and I thought we were awful all half, Mowbray said the following: "Fair play to Millwall. They have a way of playing and they make life really difficult for you," Mowbray reflected after the game. "The game didn't have much fluency to it and the first 45 minutes was a real none-event for us to be completely honest. "They hit the post twice and we could have found ourselves behind. We couldn't get out of our half in the first half." I fully agree with Mowbray who also seems unimpressed with us in the first half, and Graham mentioned he had words at half time. Glad you didnt do the team talk as youd have been telling them well played!

Leutwiler Travis Lenihan Downing Williams Davenport/Smallwood Whittingham Conway Palmer Rothwell Armstrong Subs: Raya, Nyambe, Bell, Smallwood/Evans, Samuel, Nuttall, Tomlinson Give Mulgrew, Dack, Bennett and Graham the night off. Give Armstrong an hour for fitness, and Palmer and Rothwell also could do with the minutes. For me, Palmer, Rothwell and Whittingham are the 3 there, Davenport if fit too, who could make themselves a starter for the weekend with a good performance.