[Archived] Deadline day 2017 (no unrelated chat)

[Stuart]

Just now, Cherry Blue said:

I've seen it again. Another team mate (Brown) accidently falls onto back of Charlie's leg, towards ankle area. Trainer come on and he is rubbing top of his foot.

Really unlucky.

7 years bad luck!

[TBTF]

15 minutes ago, AAK said:

Suspected broken foot for Mulgrew.

is this tongue in cheek or a serious comment?

[RV Blue]

Big pressure on Downing to not be sh1t now, Tony is completely responsible if he is.

Wharton needs to shape himself fast, this is his opportunity to show what he can do.

[the original david brent]

31 minutes ago, arbitro said:

Totally agree. We are exceptionally weak and vulnerable in the centre back department. Mowbrays inability to address this properly could really come back and bite us on the arse.

All the more baffling given that Mowbray was a centre half! 

[JacknOry]

wow some seriously longs posts having been away from the boards for a while. Just to be clear, im on the anti anti anti anti anti venkys team.

[Dreams of 1995]

15 hours ago, Biz said:

Keeping it as brief as possible, here is a few issues I have that would probably point out the difference in opinions;

1. The bold parts are opinions formed on the face of a month, and whilst I know some football fans who think they know the score on players, I am not one of those to jump to conclusion. I couldn't write off any of those players at this point, I will leave the analogies and countless examples of other players we and other teams have had who may not have started at the top of their game, to someone else. These parts also completely ignore the u23 setup we currently have comparable to other teams at this level, regardless of what transfer market . com says. Not to mention facilities, actual wage budget, top earners etc etc.

2. The italic parts are generally just examples of things that I, and many of us are completely aware of. When I am surmising that the transfer window has been overall; a surprise in my eyes comparatively to what I was expecting - I already know we have a vacuous structure when I have that view, aka I already know the show is run the way it is. Thats not saying "lets move on" is it? I know you didn't coin that, but the point remains.

As for the "we can't blame.." stuff - who said that? Blame who you want, I know who I blame for the demise overall but is that relevant to loaning a centre half  from MK dons? Finally; You mention the previous post about criticising both sides, but again - the "toxic response to protests" ... from who? Surely if you had an open mind, or an unbiased view, (aka a reasoned head?) it wouldn't be written as such? Followed up by soundly 1 side of the story - aka those accused of being "thugs" (by who exactly?). Followed by justification for their reaction to the comments? What was their reaction?

Problems will continue to exist within our fanbase when the club is in the position it is. Bickering, infighting and difference opinion will rise to the surface more when times are hard. One thing that might help us on BRFCS though, (and the wider world for that matter) is stopping the use of labels. I'm not blind to that.

 

I'd like nothing more than those players to prove me wrong but I can't see that happening unfortunately. Gladwin has had nothing but bad ratings since his original big chance. He's way out of his depth. We have the facilities we have not because of Venkys but because they inherited them - give it 5 more years under them and our facilities will suddenly become vastly outdated and we'll lose that too. The top earners doesn't mean a thing if one of them is a striker that can't even get into the starting 11. If anything it is more evidence towards bad management and bad ownership that situations like that are still allowed to happen.

I think it is relevant to loaning a centre half from MK Dons, yes. We wouldn't be in a position whereby we are relying on an unwanted centre back from a team we trounced and should finish above if we weren't in the position we have been put in by them. You keep alluding back to the vacuous structure but you can't just consider something a success because it didn't do as badly as you expected. Thinking about things completely objective, ignoring the owners and executive, can you honestly and truly say you are happy with the incomings this transfer window? Yes it's too early to judge most but, on the face of it, can you say our recruitment process has been effective? I'd say not, and the lad from MK Dons is the best example I can give. He will get his chance now our iron-solid centre back has broke his foot. A partnership of Downing, Ward or Williams sounds exactly like something I'd not want a week after a transfer window has shut.

It was a toxic response. It was a witch hunt, launched by a well known columnist. You only need to look back through his column to see the accusations I've mentioned, either from him or by those commenting on it. Equally the protesters said some stupid things back: questioning the 'loyalty' of other fans or hurling insults back. In fact, didn't someone at one stage compare it to the miners strikers in which they didn't want to be called 'scabs' for crossing the proverbial 'picket line'? Pathetic but just a great example of how truly divided our fan base is.

The groups exist, Biz. The last time a well known Rovers fan got behind a protest was the 1875 protest. It was one of the better supported ones and garnered media attention - that protest was what sparked the 3 weeks of columnist space that greatly disparaged the reasoning behind the protest, event the intelligence of those protesting (feeble-minded wasn't it?) and the inevitable protesters left insulting and questioning the loyalty of those that chose to stay in the ground. We can't just deny these divisions exist or these situations occurred in order to 'not label' people. The quicker all supporters start working in unison to either get rid of our owners or work with to improve the running of the club the sooner we can all get out of this terrible situation we are in. Sadly, I can't see that happening because years ago the hostility between different sets of supporters began and now the line is firmly drawn the sand. 

[JBiz]

53 minutes ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

1. I'd like nothing more than those players to prove me wrong but I can't see that happening unfortunately. Gladwin has had nothing but bad ratings since his original big chance. He's way out of his depth. We have the facilities we have not because of Venkys but because they inherited them - give it 5 more years under them and our facilities will suddenly become vastly outdated and we'll lose that too. The top earners doesn't mean a thing if one of them is a striker that can't even get into the starting 11. If anything it is more evidence towards bad management and bad ownership that situations like that are still allowed to happen.

2. I think it is relevant to loaning a centre half from MK Dons, yes. We wouldn't be in a position whereby we are relying on an unwanted centre back from a team we trounced and should finish above if we weren't in the position we have been put in by them. You keep alluding back to the vacuous structure but you can't just consider something a success because it didn't do as badly as you expected. Thinking about things completely objective, ignoring the owners and executive, can you honestly and truly say you are happy with the incomings this transfer window? Yes it's too early to judge most but, on the face of it, can you say our recruitment process has been effective? I'd say not, and the lad from MK Dons is the best example I can give. He will get his chance now our iron-solid centre back has broke his foot. A partnership of Downing, Ward or Williams sounds exactly like something I'd not want a week after a transfer window has shut.

3. It was a toxic response. It was a witch hunt, launched by a well known columnist. You only need to look back through his column to see the accusations I've mentioned, either from him or by those commenting on it. Equally the protesters said some stupid things back: questioning the 'loyalty' of other fans or hurling insults back. In fact, didn't someone at one stage compare it to the miners strikers in which they didn't want to be called 'scabs' for crossing the proverbial 'picket line'? Pathetic but just a great example of how truly divided our fan base is.

The groups exist, Biz. The last time a well known Rovers fan got behind a protest was the 1875 protest. It was one of the better supported ones and garnered media attention - that protest was what sparked the 3 weeks of columnist space that greatly disparaged the reasoning behind the protest, event the intelligence of those protesting (feeble-minded wasn't it?) and the inevitable protesters left insulting and questioning the loyalty of those that chose to stay in the ground. We can't just deny these divisions exist or these situations occurred in order to 'not label' people. The quicker all supporters start working in unison to either get rid of our owners or work with to improve the running of the club the sooner we can all get out of this terrible situation we are in. Sadly, I can't see that happening because years ago the hostility between different sets of supporters began and now the line is firmly drawn the sand. 

1. I don't care what your assumption on Ben Gladwin is, I don't write individuals off so soon. Top earners don't mean a thing? So whilst Tony signing players he wants IS related to poor ownership, those owners allowing a high wage is NOT related or important? (Because he's not in the side..?) 

Talk about picking and choosing what relates to them, to suit a argument.

2. I told you what I thought in isolation of this summer. You can't change my mind by repeatedly disagreeing with me Dreams. Key part, and I wish you'd stopped this part at this; "it's too early to judge" the players but at the same time I'm happy about numbers, experience and the squad. Nothing you can say or do changes that.

3. A witch hunt? I call writing an opinion piece....an opinion piece. I didn't agree with it, so what? Also, if you are utilising something like this, why not link it to me, so I can actually read what you are meandering on about! It's good to see that you've actually shown a bit of both sides this time but still - I'm not sure the relevance of the protests to this thread or our window business?

The want for fans to change the owners or force them to change the way they run the club is irrelevant to transfer debate, that's exactly the point I've tried to make but it's completely wasted on you. 

 

[Dreams of 1995]

5 minutes ago, Biz said:

1. I don't care what your assumption on Ben Gladwin is, I don't write individuals off so soon. Top earners don't mean a thing? So whilst Tony signing players he wants IS related to poor ownership, those owners allowing a high wage is NOT related or important? (Because he's not in the side..?) 

Talk about picking and choosing what relates to them, to suit a argument.

2. I told you what I thought in isolation of this summer. You can't change my mind by repeatedly disagreeing with me Dreams. Key part, and I wish you'd stopped this part at this; "it's too early to judge" the players but at the same time I'm happy about numbers, experience and the squad. Nothing you can say or do changes that.

3. A witch hunt? I call writing an opinion piece....an opinion piece. I didn't agree with it, so what? Also, if you are utilising something like this, why not link it to me, so I can actually read what you are meandering on about! It's good to see that you've actually shown a bit of both sides this time but still - I'm not sure the relevance of the protests to this thread or our window business?

The want for fans to change the owners or force them to change the way they run the club is irrelevant to transfer debate, that's exactly the point I've tried to make but it's completely wasted on you. 

 

1. Perhaps you misunderstood me but I'm saying it's a negative because we are still, all these years on, paying over the top wages for players who aren't good enough for the first 11. It is entirely related to the owners and another example to add to their ever growing list of poor management decisions. 

2. Fair enough. We will agree to disagree on the player quality. Maybe we can pick it up 3 months in. I hope I'm proven wrong.

3. The column was written by Blue Eyed Boy. Honestly, I was going to link it but couldn't be bothered to go through his pieces. I assumed you'd remember it as it was a pretty big thing at the time. Recent, too. I made the point to prove the divisions in our fan base do exist, that the 'labels' you allude to have been given out already and that pretending there isn't that division is ridiculous.

It's not irrelevant either. Transfer policy is directly related to ownership policy so it comes as no surprise the two are talked about together. 

[JBiz]

21 minutes ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

1. Perhaps you misunderstood me but I'm saying it's a negative because we are still, all these years on, paying over the top wages for players who aren't good enough for the first 11. It is entirely related to the owners and another example to add to their ever growing list of poor management decisions. 

2. Fair enough. We will agree to disagree on the player quality. Maybe we can pick it up 3 months in. I hope I'm proven wrong.

3. The column was written by Blue Eyed Boy. Honestly, I was going to link it but couldn't be bothered to go through his pieces. I assumed you'd remember it as it was a pretty big thing at the time. Recent, too. I made the point to prove the divisions in our fan base do exist, that the 'labels' you allude to have been given out already and that pretending there isn't that division is ridiculous.

It's not irrelevant either. Transfer policy is directly related to ownership policy so it comes as no surprise the two are talked about together. 

It's like going round in circles - everything is intrinsically linked to owners... BUT I don't see why it's relevant to discuss them within this window as a root/cause of issue.

Nothing you say changes that. Agree to disagree and move on.

[Dreams of 1995]

Just now, Biz said:

It's like going round in circles - everything is intrinsically linked to owners... BUT I don't see why it's relevant to discuss them within this window as a root/cause of issue.

Nothing you say changes that. Agree to disagree and move on.

Was thinking the exact same. It's been nice to discuss it but it's obvious we have different ideas.

[JBiz]

55 minutes ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

Was thinking the exact same. It's been nice to discuss it but it's obvious we have different ideas.

Honestly, Stuart made a good point about being able to have a discussion without it leading to some personal crap! 

[Blue blood]

Though recent injuries have put a cloud on our transfer window, overall I still think it was decent to good window; if not the best one under Venkys hapless ownership.

My reasoning being:

1) We didn't lose any of our big players (other than the host of loans and they were off anyway.) But we did keep hold of all the key players contracted to our club; Graham , Mulgrew and Lenihan. We've also kept all our second tier of good players - Bennett, Conway and the like. Given how we've lost our crown jewels (so to speak!) each other window, keeping them was a bonus. Heck, we even kept last year's player of the year, although how much of a benefit that is debatable...

2) We also seem to have brought a couple of good players in Samuel and Chapman and Smallwood. I'm used to solely downgrading so having a few good players come in without additional outgoings is an additional bonus, and look like they will actually contribute.

3) The players we did sell were rubbish. We may debate if Raya is good enough, but Steele certainly wasn't. Likewise for Feeney. The idea of getting them off the wage bill is a huge bonus with no detriment to the team.

4) We've brought in enough that numbers aren't precarious. It's still a small squad but I was encouraged that we got some cover in 3 of the key positions looking a bit thin on the final day. I'm not too sure of the quality, but at least there is some cover in these key positions.

 

Ultimately we're still stuffed until Venkys bog off and give us new ownership and there is still a lot, lot wrong with our club. However, I feel we dodged a few self-destructive bullets in this window which ended much better than any of us could have hoped. Both on and especially off the field we still have problems but we're in  better position than I thought we'd be come the start of September.

 

[chaddyrovers]

Mowbray on Deadline day business

https://audioboom.com/posts/6277890-rovers-head-coach-tony-mowbray-tells-us-about-his-deadline-day-business

 

[Grez]

I may be in the minority here, but I think Gladwin has the potential to be a great signing if he gets the game time.

i saw him come on in the second half at Coventry and thought him and Chapman changed the game.  

Personally, I would play him instead of Antonsson behind Samuel.  I think he is a big direct player.

 

[JBiz]

10 hours ago, Grez said:

I may be in the minority here, but I think Gladwin has the potential to be a great signing if he gets the game time.

i saw him come on in the second half at Coventry and thought him and Chapman changed the game.  

Personally, I would play him instead of Antonsson behind Samuel.  I think he is a big direct player.

 

Agree, He certainly isn't worth writing off yet anyway. 

[Mike E]

3 hours ago, Biz said:

Agree, He certainly isn't worth writing off yet anyway. 

Agreed to. He strikes me as a Jason Roberts type. Half-decent touch when he's on his game but useful as a battering ram.

[philipl]

Rovers had superb international stars here very recently. Of course whinge when 11 Fred Nobodies signs for us.

It looks like this lot could be good enough as a squad to get us back into the Championship. So let's enjoy the promotion challenge.

[Bigdoggsteel]

A nice selection of Antonssons goals here. Early days, but jesus he looks like a great finisher. Yes, I know it is youtube.

I would recommend playing it with the volume down as the music is ridiculous 

 

 

[Bigdoggsteel]

These 4 are currently without a club. Karl Henry would be a great signing, although I would consider any of the 4 to be decent signing for us on a free

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Henry 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Davies_(footballer)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamil_Zayatte 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Spearing 

[RevidgeBlue]

I thought Spearing was shocking and didn't look like he wanted to be here when he was here last time. Definitely wouldnt want him back. Don't know enough about the others to comment but as a rule of thumb if a player is still out of contract by this stage there's usually a pretty good reason.

Edit: Karl Henry has always seemed well regarded wherever he's been but do we really need a guy who turns 35 in a couple of months? I'd rather see TM try the players he signed in summer first than sign even more players who can't get a game!.

[Bigdoggsteel]

24 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

I thought Spearing was shocking and didn't look like he wanted to be here when he was here last time. Definitely wouldnt want him back. Don't know enough about the others to comment but as a rule of thumb if a player is still out of contract by this stage there's usually a pretty good reason.

Edit: Karl Henry has always seemed well regarded wherever he's been but do we really need a guy who turns 35 in a couple of months? I'd rather see TM try the players he signed in summer first than sign even more players who can't get a game!.

Yes, we are lacking leadership I think.

See Guthrie is still out of contract too. 

Emnes is gone to the Turkish league. 

[RV Blue]

1 hour ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

See Guthrie is still out of contract too. 

Guthrie would walk into our 11 right now, strange decision to let him go, although there must be some reason why he's not got a club yet (must be injured?).

[Bigdoggsteel]

19 minutes ago, RV Blue said:

Guthrie would walk into our 11 right now, strange decision to let him go, although there must be some reason why he's not got a club yet (must be injured?).

Would he?  I would have him well down the pecking order 

[RV Blue]

2 hours ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Would he?  I would have him well down the pecking order 

Best midfielder we had in the Championship imo (bar Cairney), only problem was that he only played 15/20 games a season, although he seemed to keep himself fit at the back end of last season.

[Bigdoggsteel]

26 minutes ago, RV Blue said:

Best midfielder we had in the Championship imo (bar Cairney), only problem was that he only played 15/20 games a season, although he seemed to keep himself fit at the back end of last season.

Hi praise indeed! Or maybe a sign of how bad things have gone since we were relegated..