Again without it wanting to appear to be an episode of Mowbray bashing I'm not sure what the idea was behind Brereton. All this talk about long term projects and one for the future, yet it's the here and now that matters. I'm not sure how or why as a Championship club we are following a process of long term player development so much so that we're short on numbers in games and not focusing on immediate results. Very odd. I can't imagine the likes of Cook, Parkinson, Rowett etc. spending the majority of their cash on players not ready to play in their teams.

Was that not a tea time kick off?

Think the permanent deal is done and dusted but wouldn't surprise me if there was some sort of financial incentive to not play him.

So that will be our home fixture v WBA also live on Sky. Then the club turns round at £25+ an adult and wonders why people aren't flocking in their droves.

Whatever Brereton cost it was too much if he isn't deemed able to start a game in the Championship. Whatever the reasons, whatever the logic behind it, nobody at this level could or should be paying multi-millions on any player who after 4 months still isn't ready to play. He's had no injury issues as far as I am aware, it's not as though he's arrived from South America and has taken weeks to adjust to the climate or English football. He's a lad who at the young age of 19 has significant experience at Forest and has moved a couple of hours up the road. All this could perhaps be overlooked if he was 3rd or 4th choice behind Graham, Samuel, Armstrong who were fit and firing every week, yet Samuel has been out all season (which we knew a long time ago was happening), Armstrong is being used out wide and Graham is unable to play every game. So despite all that we're turning up at PNE without a striker whilst the long term project is sat on his backside until 70 minutes as usual.

A win will make up for Saturday. A draw in isolation would be a decent result but coupled with 1 point from 6 v Rotherham and Preston and it represents a poor return from 3 games against poorer sides. Need to pick up a win to keep the ball rolling.

I interpret that as a plea for more people to buy half season tickets than an apology or acknowledgement of Saturday's debacle. My reading of it is that there is concern at the level of sales to date so they're trying to put the goodwill towards Mowbray on the line to encourage more people to sign up. Wouldn't surprise me if someone is worried, perhaps at the reaction from upstairs, if sales and crowds don't pick up.

Even if it was only £3.5 million with add-ons down the line, which I think is nearer the mark than the £7 million quoted repeatedly, it is still too much for a 'project'. Why are we having a 'project'? Nowt wrong with signing younger players who are likely to increase in value. Sheffield Wednesday are knackered because they spent fortunes on older players many of whom had no resale value, but when the player in question is so far off being ready that the manager even 4 months after he signed isn't prepared to start him in games or even give him more than 20 minute cameo appearances then I really do wonder what the purpose was. £3.5 million on a proven CF and proven CB could have been what we needed to get into the play-offs this season. Instead we're rolling up at our relegation threatened local rivals without a CF on the pitch because Danny Graham, as expected, isn't fit enough to play every game. Ludicrous.

Lets get real. No other club in this league, not even those awash with Premier League parachute cash, would go out and spend £7 million on potential or a 'long term project'. Plenty would spend it on a promising kid but would then find space in their side for that kid. The way things are going we could get to the end of the season and finish 5 or 6 points off the play-offs, a gap that could easily have been closed had we spent £7 million on a couple of proven players. No club in this league can afford to spend millions on a single player if that player isn't deemed up to it or capable of playing from the word go. It's a bonkers strategy but then again we have bonkers owners, it's only those with short memories or delusion who seem to think they've suddenly become sensible or normal. Clubs like PNE, Wigan and Bolton would love to have £7 million sloshing around for spending on new players. The only plus side to Venkys is that they enable us to spend that sort of cash from time to time when many others cannot, but the drawback seems to be it has to fit some bonkers set of long term development criteria rather than being spent on players who are going to immediately strengthen our squad. Meanwhile elsewhere we've relied on loans and frees. Very strange.

I don't believe Nuttall is good enough so I'm not too concerned he hasn't featured. Travis is more of a disappointment as I think he could have a bright future yet it seems he isn't in contention. Trouble is he's often not even playing in the U23s as he's travelling with the senior squad but either not making the bench or not being used from the bench. Davenport something just doesn't sit right with me.

I'm with Chaddy here on this one. No dingles at this club please. In addition I have an intense dislike of Cook due to a number of reasons, the main one being his disgraceful behaviour and language in the dugout. Some will say it's petty or narrow minded, but there's thousands of managers and players in the world, no reason at all to appoint one that is ex Burnley.

Why would Mowbray use the vast majority of his transfer pot on a player he doesn't trust or doesn't think is capable of playing in his team for more than 20 minutes? Why would Mowbray prefer to use no striker than his expensive striker? Why would Mowbray sit on that cash all summer then throw a bid in for Brereton at the last minute completely out of the blue? Surely you can see why people are baffled by that piece of business.

The Brereton deal has looked dodgy from the word go. Mowbray's stubborn refusal to play him and the lengths he will go to try and find an alternative 'solution' only add to the bewilderment. Still don't believe for one minute that we've committed to £7 million on this lad. Perhaps one reason we ain't starting him is to avoid financial commitments that kick in if he starts X number of games for us? I appreciate what Mowbray has done but if a manager ever needed a crash course in how to annoy your own supporters it would be similar to what he did yesterday. Turn up at your local rivals without a CF, start the game way off the pace, end up getting embarrassed by local rivals and then turn around afterwards with a series of excuses and attempts to absolve himself of responsibility. I'm afraid the excuse re. Danny Graham won't cut it. Not when he's spent millions on Brereton and Armstrong and refuses to play either in the positions we're short in. He needs to respond accordingly on Wednesday.

This game is against a side bang out of form unlike yesterday which was a side bang in form. Normally that would be a positive but it won't really make any difference if we turn out like we did yesterday. These next two are an opportunity for serious points against two struggling sides out of form. Sadly we seem to struggle against the poorer teams when there is expectation on our shoulders. Can't remember the last time Wigan won a game but they are tough to beat at their place and don't lose many. 3 points will make up for yesterday with interest. A point stops the rot but a defeat and this good start sees us looking over our shoulders. Sitting in the top half at this stage doesn't rule out a dogfight developing quickly. Would be nice to turn up with a CF and to keep a clean sheet.

The game plan was out the window after 2 minutes. I'm sure had we weathered their fast start and got to 15 minutes at 0-0 then we'd have seen a different final score, if not result. The trouble with us is that when Mowbray's initial plan fails and he has to change things it can unravel even more. Happened at Bristol when we were actually playing well and were deservedly ahead, they came back and got their noses in front and so Mowbray went gung ho and we were pasted. Yesterday it was very disappointing that we didn't threaten more after getting the goal back so soon in the second half. As someone else has said it was almost as though we sat back having scored rather than gone at them for a 2nd. They engineered a lull in the game with their two 'injuries' that took all the tempo away and ran a good 5 minutes off the clock. Then when the game eventually restarted they were fresh and quick to it whilst we were stood around looking half asleep.

I'm finding it increasingly difficult to accept that we've supposedly spent £7 million on a centre forward from Forest, but are going into matches with no CF on the pitch because inevitably Danny Graham can't play every week. A blind man would have seen a problem with Graham coming sooner or later. Why with this apparent huge pot of cash available did be invest it all into a player who he point blank refuses to start in a game, preferring instead to meddle with the team and come up with some bizarre line up in Graham's absence? Any other Championship club who has allegedly spent £7 million on a player only to refuse to start him even when short on numbers and depth? Just what is going on? Look around and other clubs with less cash and resources than us have assembled squads with depth who can cope with injuries e.g. Preston. We're turning up and starting with no striker and have a 7 million lad sat on the bench only allowed to play for 20 minutes in a wide position. Utterly bizarre and really when you sit and think about it something just doesn't feel right about that signing. The way it came about, the money involved and what has happened since.

I presume they're basing it on how many were bought during restricted sale and how many were bought on open sale and weren't registered against a customer number. Again though referring to the take up for PNE away at 3pm on a Saturday is always going to be misleading. Probably the most popular away trip of the season and for many Rovers fans it will be easier to get to Deepdale than it will Ewood. Better off looking at the proportion of season ticket holders at places like Hull, Derby and Middlesbrough in a few weeks. Likely to be much higher.

The manager shouldn't be there. The idea behind these meetings was for owners, owners representatives or board members to be available to answer questions from supporters on the governance of the club. The rule was introduced due to concerns about a number of owners buying clubs then running them from behind a veil of secrecy and supporters facing a wall of silence. We all like listening to Mowbray but there's plenty of opportunities for that. These meetings are special occasions twice per annum when supporters were to be able to go higher than the manager. I notice the owners eyes and ears and club employee Pasha still hasn't found time in his busy schedule to attend the meeting, even though his presence would be more useful than anyone else bar the owners themselves. How many is that he's missed? Lets not let Mowbray's excellent work on the grass detract from what the point of these meetings is and ignore that Mowbray's good work is providing them with an effective shield to hide behind.

Like most other areas of football - players, coaches, scouts, managers, media - once you've got a name for yourself you're set. No matter if you fail miserably, wreck clubs or get caught up to no good, just let the dust settle and someone else will take you on.

It's all the BIG CITY clubs!

Yeah that's right. But those plans could be revisited and amended. We admittedly don't need to increase capacity to that level, but a new Riverside could be built with a capacity of say 5000 which would keep capacity similar or slightly higher than it is at present. The aim of the project isn't really to create additional capacity which is unlikely to be needed, but to improve the stadium, the facilities on offer, increase our internal space for something like a hotel or offices which can generate extra revenue for the club on non-matchdays. The facilities on the Riverside are among the worst in the Championship these days even though it is 'only' 30 years since it was done. Can't think of many other stands with uncovered seats, uncovered concourse, only 2 sets of toilets and food kiosks, and obstructed views. Just not really fit for 21st century standard although I suspect a lot of those who sit in there are quite comfortable with it. I reckon it could be done to keep it in harmony with the rest of the ground. Single tier, floodlights in the roof, no obstructed views, internal concourse with modern toilets and food kiosks and then internal space behind for boxes/hotel rooms/office space etc. Build it nearer to the pitch without a walkway at the front and close the gaps to the BBE and DE and I think it would massively upgrade the look, facilities and enclose the atmosphere. Interesting that Waggott referenced talking to the council about it, so it seems it has passed first base of merely thinking about it and some conversations have been had. It's ok saying we should wait until we get to the Premier League before doing it but then we'd end up with a building site down that side whilst in the Prem. Makes sense to get it done and dusted now whilst we've the surplus capacity to enable it. Ultimately we're quite lucky with Ewood in the Riverside should be the easiest stand to build. No houses or businesses behind it, plenty of space behind.

Interesting reading Waggott's comments on the Riverside stand. Talking about making Ewood into a better venue I'm sure if that was ever redeveloped it could include facilities to be used on non-matchdays. I've already said I think Rovers have missed the bus on building a hotel at Ewood. In the last few years there must have been 5 or 6 hotels opened in the area with the Travelodge, Premier Inn X 2, Marstons at Guide, and now the plans for Whitebirk. There's clearly demand for hotels in the area and Rovers could have got a head-start on this years ago. Bolton seem to do quite well out of their hotel.

Thought they sold out quickly to season ticket holders or gold/platinum members (whatever they are). Not sure but I certainly recall the extra allocation was available to members.

One thing we can all be confident of is a tight game. From our point of view we never put teams to bed and our wins are usually by an odd goal, that's the way we play under Mowbray. We're also hard to beat and rarely except the latter stages at Bristol City have we been put out of sight by the opposition. PNE seem to be getting back to their ways of last season where they were defensively solid but didn't score many. We've a relatively clean bill of health whereas they've had a bad couple of weeks for injuries.

That's the 'magic wand' and solves virtually all the issues in one swoop. But until that happens more effort needs to be made in making Ewood an exciting place to be. There's more to it than just relying on the football. Bristol City have done very well since renovating their ground in providing various bars/entertainment for their supporters to hang around before and after the games.