Why would either of those clubs loaned us a player for 6 months who was due to be out of contract in 6 months? If they did it would have been for the same price we paid.

The fallout that may not have happened at all?

So we bought the wrong young Swedish keeper with exactly 1 international cap.

That made me curious about another slightly bizarre and ultimately pointless signing from the past, Brad Lyons. Now seems to be a regular for Kilmarnock in the SPL and got a Northern Ireland cap in October.

I'm assuming he means Hill being recalled. I can't see Hyam or S. Wharton being particularly likely departures.

I don't think there is any chance whatsoever we would accept that level of bid for Szmodics. I think that'd be it for me until Venkys left if we did.

You literally just argued he's being dropped at all costs, and argued that his being dropped is a myth, in the same post. His value deteriorates if he is dropped, fact. If we just wanted to sell him for max value, we would keep playing him until January, and certainly play him in the right position when he plays.

This theory doesn't stack up. If you want to maximise player value and attract bids, you don't reject bids, drop the player and play him out of position. I think it's fairly obvious Travis has been sidelined because he doesn't really have the technique to play the current style, and this has seen him supplanted by Tronstad.

It would be beyond bizarre, when we have a tawdry budget and are dangerously lacking at GK and CF, to invest 500k in a 20 yr old CB (who is also only seen as a fringe player for now it seems), whilst quite well stocked with CBs. I can only assume we have a CB leaving, or a sudden addition of at least 3 million to the transfer budget (Raya isn't moving til the summer and the funds will be drip fed). Given the situation in India still seems iffy, the latter seems very unlikely. Though I admit there's always the third possibility - we just don't know what we're doing.

My first thought with this deal, if true, is that Hill must be going back.

I've seen the 'can't do any worse than X' argument countless times over the years. I've also seen plenty of players then come in and indeed do worse. Hilton would almost certainly highlight this.

Then how has he kept some clean sheets, if he's worth at least a goal start for the opposition?

It doesn't sound like Hilton is any kind of answer, and the other keeper isn't available, not to mention is also guilty of continuing to make mistakes. I think the squad is running on fumes rather than not trying. But I do think some pragmatism is needed at times. There doesn't seem to be a Plan B.

Where are you getting 30 games since he left from? He has played 18 in all comps for Villareal (mostly off the bench of course) and 6 in 2023 for Chile, not sure how many of those were after he left us. Did you mean 20 or something?

4-0 away against QPR wasn't convincing? Or 3-0 Stoke? Beating Norwich 3-1 with ten men?

Amazing neither team has scored since it went to 2-1, especially Wolves. Nsangou nearly scored a spectacular goal from some 40 yards or so with the keeper off his line, and Wolves should have had 3 really. Some very close shaves.

Ref is soft as fuck. 2-1 now after a free kick out of nothing.

Gilsenan subbed off at 71 minutes. Presumably with an eye on him sitting the bench at the weekend. Him and Bloxham are players who always seem pretty decent to me on the few occasions I've seen them.

Excellent goal from Gilsenan. Thought the pass to him was over hit but he somehow stretched his foot onto it to leave the keeper stranded, did well to keep it in play at the byline and finish from a fairly tight angle.

Bloxham 1 nil. Didn't see that coming. He didn't mess around with the finish after we got a lucky break into space.

O'Grady Macken sent off for a second yellow. Must have been watching Brittain in the first team.

Not sure who Mullarkey-Matthews is either, first time I've heard that name.

I wonder who the trialist is.

This is one of the most telling posts on this thread. I'm sure even Chaddy would admit he is highly prone to taking the club's side on matters and finding a way to justify what they do. So when even he is criticising the move with such strong words as 'pathetic', 'daft and stupid', what argument can there really be that it's anything other than precisely that? Someone needs to get the higher-ups at the club to take a look at this thread. I haven't seen a single post remotely supporting this decision. With that being the case, why do anything other than reverse it? Any negligible savings in printing, posting and packaging will easily be offset by lost revenue from reduced sales, and then some. Stop cutting off your nose to spite your fucking face, Rovers!

No need. If you've been a Rovers fan since Venkys arrived, you've already had a savage beating.