I've probably watched 95% of our matches during the Sam Gallagher era. What exactly has his contribution been? He scored 3 goals in 1,721 Championship minutes for us last season. I'm happy to bet any amount of money that you want that any forward (and by that I don't mean winger, although even they will probably manage it) we have that plays over 1,700 minutes will score at least 4 goals.

Bottom half starter? Squad player? He's 28 and he scores a goal 1 in every 5 appearances for a side that has actually not struggled to score goals during much of his time at this club. We've seen two players go from nothing to being prolific goal machines in that time and yet he can barely get on the end of a chance. He's not good. I don't expect his replacement to be worse than him and that isn't me being optimistic about our future signings.

Will it? I've genuinely seen nothing from Sam Gallagher to make me think that he is anything close to an average Championship player. I honestly believe that the only thing going for him is that he looks good. I don't mean because he's relatively tall and looks strong, but he actually just looks like he should be a good footballer. Signing someone who looks like Gallagher feels better than signing someone who looks like Paul Dickov. I know which player I'd rather have. We won't be weaker for losing Gallagher and any money that we get for him is a blessing.

The initial fees, yes, but some future clauses that relate to first-team appearances and that will be triggered (likely) after a certain age may be a different thing. Not to mention any sell-on clauses that will impact the 'pure' profit nature of an academy signing.

It might not be literal peanuts to a club carefully watching FFP.

Totally agree. And if any other Championship club signed him we'd be hearing the 'why aren't we investing in experience' argument.

I understand the 'recruitment being motivated by finances' line, although I slightly disagree with it. It seems that Szmodics wants out - who could blame him - and that he has a gentleman's agreement in place to leave. That has been the story of my life as a Rovers supporter. Nothing new here. As for Gallagher? He's a bit rubbish and he has a year left on his contract. Get rid. Almost any warm body will match his performances and output. The most compelling argument for keeping him has been that he's useful for defensive corners. Think about that. Supporting this club is depressing at the moment, but these outgoings aren't really the issue. I'm happy to see some players coming in and I hope that they prove to be a great success. I wasn't excited when Szmodics signed and now we're all sad to see him leave.

This isn't 1992, there's no reason to be concerned about an ACL injury that a player had 5 years ago.

This is in addition to Mafoumbi? We should definitely be raiding Ligue 1/2 more often than we do. Clubs like Nantes have incredibly prolific youth setups.

That isn't splitting hairs. City can buy the best players in the world. Southgate can select from the best players in England. It's a massive difference. But you're fixating on only one of the points I made. Probably best to just leave it there.

No, it isn't at all the same. First of all, Manchester City can buy players. They can identify weaknesses in their first 11 and squad and go out and make improvements. England have a glaring shortage at left back, but can't do too much about it for the time being. City would simply go out and sign a left back and solve that problem in a single summer. Secondly, it would be like judging Guardiola purely on the Champions League. League competition typically allows class and consistency to shine through - both of which England have shown under Southgate. The problem is delivering in one-off matches against good-quality opposition. It is virtually impossible to compare international football to club football in terms of how you would assess success. Southgate gets a chance to win something once every 2 years. Guardiola has two big competitions a season to win and if he wins either of them the season is a success (not to mention being able to throw in a handful of other competitions that can sweeten the deal). Apples. Oranges.

It's not at all the same.

The reality is, 8-10m is probably fair for a soon to be 29 year old who's been plying his trade below the Championship for most of his career. He's had one very impressive season, but that's really it. We would have snapped anyone's hands off had they offered 8m a season ago and there's a good chance that 12 months from now he's coming off the back of a 10-15 goal season in the Championship where his value will drop. I'm against selling him because we won't see any of the money and it will just weaken our team, but it's actually somewhat fair value for a player of his skill level, experience, and age. Any club signing him will know that he will have virtually no re-sell value (assuming they hold onto him until he is 31/32).

I think there are more delicate ways of approaching both of those questions that might result in a conversation. Regarding his qualifications, I think speaking about inexperience is a legitimate line of questioning. When it comes to his refusal to play, I think we are more likely to ask something along the lines of how have his views on unhappy players changed now that he's in an admin role and how might he deal with players who are as frustrated or unhappy as he was during periods of his career. So, there are differences between softball interviews and coming across like an angry fan trying to shout down a club official.

You won't have to listen. I'm sure there's a fence somewhere that you can work on.

Good question.

It's a good question. I think we will likely have him on after the window has closed. That will give us the advantage of being able to properly judge the summer's transactions and also give him enough time in the role for us to feel like he can't just avoid questions by saying that he is still getting up to speed.

There's a difference between a softball interview and being so challenging with a guest that they either leave or don't consent to an episode being published. We could get him on and ask him very aggressively about his qualifications or his refusal to play when he was manufacturing a move and it would result in us not having an interview. I would suggest that you hold off any criticism until you hear the actual interview - if you ever even listen to it.

You can do that, but then you can't use actual results and success as assessment criteria.

Woke? 🙄

I like the shirts a lot, I just wish our sponsor looked better on them. That's not a knock on the sponsorship deal, it's just unfortunate that it isn't a logo suited to being on the front of a shirt (not that many are). I also find the logo to be a big oversized on the shirt itself.

I should have maybe included the fact that we won't plan on having questions that come across as being directly antagonistic. Happy to ask questions that ask for accountability and clarity, but there's no way we will get an interview out, or have future guests, if we treat this as an inquisition.

I don't think we will be asking the second part of that question.

We'll be having Rudy on our podcast, so if anyone wants to post questions they'd like asked we'll be happy to put them to him. No gotcha questions. Nothing rude. We're going to try to get a clearer understanding of what his role is. What the infrastructure of the club now looks like.

I think 'disgraceful' is an incredibly strong way to describe it. He's been a long way off his best, but he still contributes to the side in terms of the work he puts in defensively. I found it interesting that there were glowing remarks surrounding Morata's effort for Spain against France. It was a performance that almost perfectly resembled what Kane does for England. Often isolated up front, but does wonderful work tracking back, contributing defensively, and dropping into midfield. That effort comes at a cost and often means he's not in the areas of the pitch that you want him to be, but it's still useful effort. He's also not been helped by quality service in most matches. Even in the Switzerland match, where some examples were highlighted of him not gambling on a couple of balls Saka put across the face of goal, you can actually argue that he had dropped into excellent space around the penalty area but Saka failed to get his head up and instead blindly hit a ball into a 'good' area.