The problems we have are a result of failing to recruit properly last summer, along with the team not being fit enough and not knowing how to see games through. I'm of the belief that merely signing a few more players in January isn't going to be a magic wand that sorts all our problems out. The stuff we're witnessing at the moment goes way above and beyond personnel. It is fitness, mentality, game management - all not what they should be. The manager needs to inject it quickly or vacate his position for someone who will do.

A lot of people saying this is going to be a season of consolidation and that we should be happy with a mid table finish. That's fine but to do that we are likely to require another 25 to 30 points. Usually pushing 50 to secure survival and another 10 to reach mid table status. Until we are at 50 there can be no consolidation, no pats on the back. We can't just turn around after each painful defeat and argue that as we are on course to achieve safety there's nothing to worry or complain about.

Exactly. This isn't a product of being in a higher league or up against better sides. The problem has been lingering for the last 18 months and the main difference now is it is costing us more than it did last season. Mowbray either will not or cannot stop it. It could be personnel, it could be fitness, it could be tactics and organisation. Either way the responsibility lies at the managers feet.

Not sure I would agree with some of those verdicts. Rotherham I thought we were poor in the first half and barely had a chance and were lucky to be 0-0 at half time. Another one of those games we had an awful first half with no goals and very few chances. We upped the tempo in the second half and had a few decent chances and they were on the rack but then went down the other end and scored with their only chance, which then cost us 2 points as we needed 2 to win. Preston and Wigan were abysmal and embarrassing. Wigan's only win in about 13 games and we barely laid a glove on them. Sheffield Wednesday were at the height of their crisis when we played them. Telling that they are the only side we've beaten by more than a single goal margin. Birmingham - threw away 2 points - again - having barely been troubled. Incompetence. Leeds took it to new levels - regardless of the opposition to take the lead in the 90th minute and end up losing is a travesty and brings our failings into the spotlight. It would have been a smash and grab job had we got the win but you need a few of them over a season. Once again the goals came through a couple of set-pieces dispatched well by Mulgrew rather than through open play - another issue we have - very rare we score unless through Dack, Graham or Mulgrew.

I wish I shared your confidence. Next two are tough games which we'll do well to get anything out of. On paper we have a kinder run in January and February beginning with a trip to struggling Millwall, but given the way we are playing would you fancy us going down to the Den and getting a win against a Millwall side fighting for their lives? Our record this season against the bottom half sides is very poor. Failed to beat Preston, Wigan, Rotherham, Ipswich, Millwall, Reading, Bristol City and scraped wins against Bolton, Brentford and Hull. That will have to change. We SHOULD have enough to survive in comparison to the likes of Ipswich, Bolton and Rotherham but strange things happen. A lead of 10 points+ over them going into the 2nd half of the season SHOULD be a good gap. But we're on a slippery slope and I honestly wouldn't fancy us to beat anyone at the moment. We have a knack for snatching a draw or defeat from the jaws of victory and have done all season. The only thing keeping us going is the camaraderie in the squad and the presence of Mulgrew/Dack/Graham who between them can deliver the goods infront of goal.

We can talk about personnel or panic/fear in the team. Ultimately it is the manager's responsibility. It has been a trait of Mowbray's tenure that we cannot kill teams off and struggle to defend properly for 90 minutes. I don't think Mowbray knows how to sort it. I doubt bringing in a replacement CB will suddenly fix our problems. It is a team effort and there is clearly something wrong with the team when defending a lead or under pressure. Anyone who watched us last season will be able to recall multiple games we ended up winning where we struggled to see the game out and at times only did so due to poor quality opposition. No such luck at this level I'm afraid.

We're too reliant on Mowbray. I'm not saying he should be sacked but if that decision were to be made it would no doubt then significantly impact upon other areas of the club - recruitment, staff, communications with owners etc. Plus we'd have all the talk and worry about who would lead the search and who on earth they would bring in which would be used as a reason not to make a change even if one were needed. As I went into the other day, we need a head coach structure in place (which Mowbray was originally appointed as) so that if needed a change can be quickly made without the need to rip up the entire operation and start again. Won't be happening though which is another reason we'll never follow Leeds/Norwich. Nowt to do with crowds or money its having a plan and structure from the owners down that can work and a good head coach who will work within that.

Nail on the head. This has been going on now for 18 months. We cannot see games out. Yesterday took it to a whole new level. I'll be honest, when we went 2-1 up my only celebration was that i believed it would at least ensure we got a point although i fully expected them to make it 2-2 even with only a few minutes left. We simply cannot cope with protecting leads under pressure when teams throw everything they have at us. I'm sick and tired of the 'heroic' line from club PR. Pats on the back because little Rovers went to mighty Leeds and almost got a result but just couldn't in the end. Yesterday should never happen. I can forgive the equalizer as frustrating and predictable as it was but to concede twice in the final 3 minutes is outrageous. This is a serious issue that needs urgently addressing and I see little to no evidence that this is being dealt with. Simply cannot throw wins away like we have against Birmingham and Leeds recently,

I remain of the view that the best prospects of long term success are by installing a qualified, capable technical director or director of football who can oversee and orchestrate the football operation with a head coach operating alongside/beneath him. The D of F or whatever you want to call it would liaise with the owners and report to them and be given a budget and he would take overall responsibility working in tandem with his choice of manager. I look at Leeds and Norwich steaming clear in this league and both are doing so with good head coaches who have come into this sort of system working under a footballing director with recruitment a joint effort. Bielsa has come along and fitted smoothly into the structure at Leeds which was set up before his arrival. The way we operate is extremely old school with the manager having too much responsibility across too many areas. In this day and age the manager should be able to focus on training and matchdays with academy/recruitment going on elsewhere. It is ludicrous that the manager has to fly to India to get his instructions/budget. There are odd exceptions these days like Warnock at Cardiff or Dyche at Burnley which were more traditional ways of doing things but I think in our circumstances with absentee foreign clueless owners we need a structure in place that ensures continuity and so managers can come and go without being utterly reliant upon them for the entire football operation. It seems Mowbray played a part in our CEO arriving which is also bonkers and quite alarming. I'm not for one minute slating Mowbray or saying he should be removed from his role but we're now in a position where we are heavily reliant on him for virtually every aspect of the operation - speaking to the owners, this 'trust' thing we have in place, recruitment, training, scouting. If we unfortunately reach a stage where Mowbray reaches the end of the line at the club then it will all have to be started again from scratch, which will probably take several years to achieve. We need to be able to change manager if required without losing all direction and having to start again from scratch. That's how Leeds have managed to get where they are - not through spending daft money or even being particularly well run - but having a structure above the manager that continues and into which the manager can fit.

Leeds haven't swept many teams aside recently. At home they've an impressive record but wins usually by the odd goal. We know how Mowbray will approach it. Could go either way. A repeat of Derby or West Brom away or Swansea/Bristol City. Depends if we go behind early or can hold firm. Will be a long afternoon either way.

Managers are ultimately judged from above by how they perform with the resources they are given. It is a fact that last summer Mowbray used more money on new players than most managers in this league did. If we believe the figure of £7 million for BB that we committed to then that represents a net spend of pushing £10 million on fees. Irrespective of where we've come from, what the 'plan' is or how much on wages those people cost, that sort of expenditure at this level massively raises expectations. If it were me signing the cheques I'd probably expect to be finishing above half of the division purely on cash paid out. If we'd have spent a few hundred grand and sold a few, like Preston or Millwall, then expectations would be lower. If we'd been under restrictions like Birmingham or Sheff Wed then expectations would be lower. Mowbray has seemingly had a perfect summer transfer window - allegedly he's in complete control of the operation and decides on who we sign, he's had a relative warchest to spend by most club's standards, and he's not had to sell anyone. Most managers will give their right arm for that sort of position not having to contend with a director of football or selling before buying. So far we've done OK but i have a number of concerns about our recruitment, performances and run of form with fixtures coming up.

Another typical Rovers game and performance. Can't fault the effort or application but lacking in quality, fitness and defensive strength. Another game where we've conceded late on and lost points through it. Last 15-20 minutes the difference in fitness levels between the teams was embarrassing. We were wandering around with 3-4 players absolutely knackered and Norwich put their foot on the gas, ran at us and got their inevitable goal. I say inevitable because it was clear to me they were going to score at some stage or other, as most teams do against us without putting us under much pressure, and it was also clear to me that for all our effort we weren't going to score. We didn't create anywhere near enough considering the amount of possession we enjoyed. There's lots of chat about 'chances' we created but for me we didn't create anywhere near enough to deserve to win a home game. We had lots of possession and had a few occasions where we got into good positions to make things happen and cocked it up. I don't remember any chances where we've got a shot away or tested their keeper. The performance for me was decent. Or at least it was in the 2nd half, whereas the first was another typical non-event which happens most weeks at home. How many times is that now we've gone in at HT without having scored or even had any decent chances? There's an inevitability about everything we do. Inevitable that the first half will be a dull affair with no goals, inevitable we'll up the tempo in the second, inevitable that we won't ever put the opposition to bed and inevitable we'll concede usually in the last 10-15 minutes. To be honest I find it quite boring. The way we play, the lack of a 90 minute performance, the ease with which the opposition break us down, then the self-pity afterwards as we've battled bravely once again but once again not got the result we wanted or probably deserved on the balance of play.

Birmingham is 15 quid anywhere in the ground, sell out expected. I've seen no evidence whatsoever that Rovers have any desire to see 20000+ fans in Ewood. Sadly it is too easy to cart on with 11000 home fans and hand over the Darwen End to big away followings. If you want more fans to turn up you dont: Close home stands and force people to move Put prices up across the board Introduce a ludicrous surcharge on matchday Move numerous kick offs to inconvenient times sometimes for no good reason. Until there's recognition that the above will have had an impact of some sort on numbers there's no point doing much else.

I wondered whether they might have done something like that. My suspicions were aroused earlier this week when Rovers announced the game had become all ticket with no sales on the day. That suggests to me that Leeds expected to sell out and were concerned about their fans trying to get into the away end, rather than Rovers' allocation being close to a sell out. I'd of course love to be wrong and would love it if Rovers took an impressive 2000+ following there, particularly at those prices. In theory this should be a popular one, on Boxing Day, not far to travel, attractive fixture, but at those prices I'd be very, very surprised. We've been to Leeds about 6-7 times since relegation in 2012 and I don't think we've ever got remotely close to selling 2000+ tickets, usually less than 1000 due to scandalous pricing. I'm sticking to my theory that Leeds want it on live streaming and Rovers have agreed in exchange for some sort of payment. The 'few hundred tickets remaining' line will be to appease those going and probably satisfy the authorities.

During the summer there was talk as the deadline approached of there being nothing to worry about if we didn't get everyone we wanted because we had the loan market, then as that deadline approached it was all about we've only go get through 4 months and then the January window would provide the opportunity to strengthen, now, as expected as the January window approaches expectations are being downplayed. It's a difficult time to do business, we won't panic buy, the summer is more suitable etc. That's fine if you use the summer to address your weaknesses and January is just icing on the cake or minor adjustments.

I'll eat my hat if Rovers have got anywhere near to 2500 tickets sold. What I suspect is happening here is that Leeds have sold out or close to it so Leeds now want to stream it online. The only way that can be done is if Rovers agree to it. I bet Leeds or IFollow are paying Rovers to agree to this and to 'justify' it Rovers are claiming only a few hundred of the allocation remain available. If they said 1000 were left to sell people would be asking questions as to why they have agreed to broadcast it online.

It sounds like Bolton are backing down under some intense pressure and reducing their prices for their upcoming game v WBA. They tried charging £32 for a Monday night game and West Brom fans kicked off and sounds like Bolton might be offering buy one get one free on tickets to season ticket holders of both clubs. I noticed the other day that Birmingham are doing £15 anywhere in the ground for one of their upcoming games. There's a lot from Rovers about 'backing the lads' and showing 'total committment' but other than a slight reduction on advance tickets for Norwich I'm not seeing much imagination or effort at Rovers end. Dress it up however you like and put popular Mowbray in front of the cameras every day to appeal for more people but when all is said and done it is mid-table 2nd division football, neck end of £30 most weeks for adults and that is never going to see an escalation in numbers unless either prices change or we shoot up the table. I've already raised issues I have with the going through the motions matchday 'entertainment' in comparison to things I've seen at other clubs where attempts are made to keep people in and around the ground on matchdays.

Elliott Bennett joined us from Norwich around the same time as Elliott Ward did, although Bennett had been on loan at Bristol City up to then. Lambert was bolstering the squad with his tried and tested ex-players who were cheap and he felt he could rely upon.

Sums FFP up really as Sheffield Wednesday's owner has invested fortunes in them since he took over a few years ago. For the first couple of years they reaped the rewards of that by getting into the play-offs twice, but then they are now suffering as a result. No complaints from me really as we were screwed over by FFP penalties so the more rivals that get the same treatment the better. They knew the rules before they started throwing silly money at Rhodes etc. but it shows the problem here that a seemingly legitimate wealthy owner who wants to spend more cannot do so due to these rules and it now seems is trying to sell them as he's fed up with it all. The alternative could be that they end up with a dodgy owner or one with no money who won't invest or will asset strip them but that would be fine for the Football League as long as he doesn't break FFP rules..... See the EFL are still scaremongering with this supposed points deduction going Birmingham's way. Lets suppose we get to March and Birmingham are 3 points off a play-off position, are the League really going to go down that route and try and dock them points and open the door to all the legal issues stemming from that? No chance.

Of course every consideration of our finances has to be prefaced with the assumption that Venkys are able and willing to cover losses. I reckon all but 2-3 Championship clubs are in the same boat. Forest, Derby and Sheffield Wed having 20-30,000 crowds doesn't stop them being dependent on their benefactors. Infact Sheffield Wed are in bother with FFP and struggling in the league despite being blessed with significant support and a big city behind them. All because their benefactor came along and spent too much too quickly. Aston Villa's owners have thrown fortunes in since the summer just to meet overheads. Without that investment they'd be knackered. Their 30000 gates wouldn't count for anything, except perhaps making their club more attractive to new owners. One or two exceptions like Bolton who are limping through a painful existence of struggling to pay the bills each month (rumoured to have taken out a loan to pay November and December wages). Apply the same principle to most Premier League clubs who are utterly dependent on Sky cash and without which they'd be in serious trouble. All ok as long as they survive in the Premier League or have an owner to cover losses if they get relegated but not if they don't. Selling the training ground would create a lot of trouble and if nothing else would be a lengthy and complicated process. In the scheme of things given the annual overheads and losses the money they would raise by selling it would be a drop in the ocean. I can only see such a thing happening if they were stripping the club bare and raising whatever cash they could by selling assets - like we saw at Bolton when they sold their training ground and car parks to raise quick cash. It wouldn't surprise me however to see more references to combining the academy and training grounds into one site, both for efficiency and to save some cash. It does make sense for everyone to be on one site rather than split across two, however I doubt either site at Brockhall is big enough to cope with both the senior squad and academy given the demands of having Category A status. To combine it would either need a reduction from Category A down to a smaller scale academy operation or a relocation to a new purpose built site elsewhere.

We've a decent record there over the last few years and we've also a decent record away at the better sides in the division this season. They are winning games but aren't hammering teams, a lot of their wins have been by a single goal. Noticed yesterday that Rovers fans can no longer buy tickets on the day, it is ticket only in advance. I presume that's got nothing to do with us selling most of our allocation.

I'm not sure how relevant the attendance issue is. Clearly the city clubs who can fall back on 18000+ a week will be more attractive to buyers, but I don't think lesser gates precludes us from attracting new owners in future. I look at the bottom half of the Championship at the moment and most of the clubs down there are getting lower or very similar attendances - Wigan, Bolton, Reading, Ipswich, Brentford, Millwall, QPR, Rotherham, Hull, Preston - all of them are in a similar ball park to us which is almost half of the Championship. Add in Swansea and Middlesbrough who are getting around 18000+ a week at present but are being pushed up by recent spells in the Premier League and will likely drop significantly if they don't go up again. As the figures show, a few thousand extra a week through the turnstiles obviously helps, but in the scheme of things when comparing to external investment, tv money and player sales it pales into insignificance. As you say - WBA and Boro getting bigger gates - but both have had it far better than we have in the last 8 years - WBA just out of the Premier League, Middlesbrough were up there too and have had 2-3 promotion pushes and play-off campaigns recently. Bolton are struggling to attract new owners but others have managed it - Watford, Bournemouth, Wigan, Reading and don't seem to have done too badly as yet.

Big point being that the wage bill was significantly lower than the previous year and I expect now resembles the sort of level we should be at in the Championship. It will never look much better than above at this level unless we get promoted or find a few players to sell off every couple of years to cover it (which likely prevents promotion from happening). That's a fact of life Venkys or not, sadly that is the way the Championship has gone and continues to go, and we like everyone else need wealthy owners injecting money. That's as much credit as I will give Venkys - every year they seem to be content to find money under the mattress to keep things going. Another interesting point was that our revenues in that year dropped by £6 million due to a decrease in TV income, yet still stood at £10.1 million (£2.8 million on matchday, £2.8 million from media and £4.4 million from commercial). By comparison the previous year Sheffield United had revenues of £10.6 million (so 'only' £500,000 more than ours in League One despite significantly higher numbers through the turnstiles each week - perhaps demonstrates the ever decreasing importance of attendances). Bolton's that year in League One was £30.8 million. Not sure how that figure was so high as I don't think they were getting parachute cash by then.

I think he came off the bench tonight for his first (?) action since being out long term with injury.

Yes. I can absolutely buy into the long term plan if that genuinely is what is taking place and the owners are buying into that and will support it, and they will fight to keep the assets and will support Mowbray with serious cash for new players. My concern comes in that these owners have thrown their toys out of the pram before when a 'long term' plan failed to secure promotion after a couple of attempts, they then pulled the plug and it has taken nearly 4 years to recover back to where we were under Bowyer. As you say, long term plans are lovely if everything works out as hoped and planned for, but in our case all it takes is the seemingly inevitable Dack departure and aging to Mulgrew/Graham and we've a huge job on our hands in just replacing those boys. If they'll throw another couple of Armstrong and Brereton fees into the mixer then that should enable us to compete financially at this level but Mowbray needs to get the signings bang on. These are the sort of owners who seem to work on bizarre 'trust' lines and are completely unpredictable and inconsistent which is why we might need to strike whilst the iron is hot rather than run the risk of them 'losing interest' again as they have previously.