For the last 12+ months I have spent deliberating and dodging between thinking that it is all a bit stagnant, and then a result or 2 and I think it is maybe harsh to sack him, and its an endless cycle caused by the managers inability to get consistent results. There may be some signs at the moment that get people excited, perception of attacking football always makes some people more patient, but these signs would be if the manager had been in a few weeks and we was looking for areas in which we can develop over time, not years and years into his reign. This current style is very much style over substance, it lulls people into thinking we are competitive against the better teams, enhanced by opposition managers praising us, pundits gushing over our occasional goal gluts against poor teams, but it isnt getting us results, these better teams create a trap and we fall into it. The situation with absences is of course not ideal but it is par for the course at the moment with an increased workload and of course a pandemic, its not just us. The absent players seemingly have got better whilst injured, Dack and Travis, fair enough, Kaminski a puzzling one as he was close apparently last weekend, Ayala has massive injury history sadly. Beyond that, Bell and Bennett are liabilities, Johnson has a few poor games for every good one, Rothwell has flattered to deceive throughout his Rovers career, and Douglas is new and had a shocker midweek. Time is the one thing that the manager cannot think that he is owed. He has had bloody loads.

Totally agree.

A Birmingham fan and junior journalist has assured us however that we should just give the manager a free pass for the time being. Every team at the moment has absentees, its not an excuse. The manager needs time, hes only had is it 4 years? So could do with a few more months and on the off chance that every single player is available at some point, which rarely happens to anyone.

Absolute shite, anyone banging on about possession, "playing well", attacking football etc after the first time or two against decent opposition and going down the hard done by route has clearly awoken to the managers inability to get results against these teams. Pears looks shite, a little boy lost and for me his positioning for both goals was poor. How on earth does Rankin Costello sometimes play over Nyambe, the latter was our best player, Rankin Costello simply cannot defend as we saw for the second goal following a woeful defensive display midweek, he should never play that role other than in an emergency, but it seems that Mowbray is deluding himself into thinking that we are the Championship Liverpool. Williams as ever is not someone you want in the trenches, Lenihan is but hes all over the place at the moment. Trybull read danger a few times well and is neat and tidy, although very immobile and you can see why he was never a guaranteed starter at Norwich. Evans again was stupidly played in an alien role, he was neat and tidy and didnt do much wrong but to be honest didnt do much at all. Not sure what to make about Holtby, he is technically very good, loves a nutmeg, does he do enough overall? Not sure he does. Up front, no surprise that we are solely reliant on Armstrong to score all of our goals. He clearly was injured throughout the game but had to stay on otherwise any goal threat went, he missed chances and is not the most prolific finisher but he gets the goals, no questions there, where else do the goals come from? Brereton resorting to bumbling fool, every touch all over the place and zero goal threat, hes got his seasonal goal now so thats him done. Elliott had his quietest game too. The Gallagher on the wing shite made another ugly appearance too. Manager is massively at fault which I will mention in his thread. Stagnation is the best word.

Shite yet again, although the commentators keen to repeatedly point out how great weve been. Take Armstrong off before he does serious damage. Sadly our sole goal threat rests with him though.

Evans should be asked to sit with Trybull and give more solidity, play him where he has been playing and he will not do anything. He shouldnt be playing but we dont have much depth there, the alternatives are Buckley and Davenport who arent very convincing either. We should have signed Downing at the start of the summer. Have to win today, weve had a crap start and cant feel sorry for ourselves, there is plenty of senior experience there to get a result.

I never said that, it just seems illogical to consider teams fancied in pre season "underachieving" and teams not fancied "overachieving" both as top 6 rivals seems a bit contradictory.

But if that is the case, Reading surely arent? Not sure its fair to class games as "top 6 contenders" for both those not expected to challenge but currently in the top 6, as well as teams that are struggling but were predicted to do well. We faced Forest when they were pointless, not sure that can be classed as a defeat v a contender!

Notts Forest are in 21st and Cardiff are in 14th. Not sure that they can be classified as contenders.

I do find this very strange. Not an innocent young Birmingham fan and recent junior journalist asking the question on the back of a decent window on paper but one in which we (understandably) didnt actually spend much at all. But the replies. I still cant grasp that not being out of business is reason to be thankful, the lowest of expectations.

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/18833297.no-lasting-defensive-tactical-concerns-rovers-boss/ Seems that Mowbray is naive to the vulnerability we currently have against anyone half decent on the counter attack. He doesnt think it is anything that he has done. Play with 2 full backs as wingers and 2 of 3 central midfielders high up in the current manner and we will keep conceding against half decent sides.

No chance that Pearson comes here sadly, unless we somehow got promoted.

Too much can be made of the formation, even within a 433 both full backs dont have to play so high. People often mention a midfield with Holtby and Rothwell in it, it doesnt leave much defensive protection. Ultimately all a 4231 does is flip the midfield around.

Because it clearly doesnt hence the poor start in terms of results, or at least it hasnt done to date. I think its all about perception. If a manager isnt getting adequate results but hes trying to attack, people tend to give them more patience because they think it seems like its about to all fall into place. Im not convinced it will, not without some serious tweaks. We need to compromise because everytime we have played a decent team we have come up short especially in terms of vulnerability to counter attacks. A lot of the time we only have the 2 centre backs and the holding midfielder against counter attacks. I would consider switching the midfield back to 4231, that way we have 2 holding midfielders in case of a counter attack. We can still press with the 4 attacking players but we can have more confidence in the lesser risk of being open on the break. The positioning of the full backs also needs to adjust, having them both as wingers leaves us open, if one goes forward the other should stay at home.

Im not necessarily saying that we should abandon it right now but when does the point come when we have to compromise and not play so expansively when we dont have the players to do it against anyone half decent? Essentially just leaves the sitter and the 2 centre backs to fend for themselves.

For a bit of context, he missed 9 games last season in which we lost 6, drew 2 and won only 1, conceding 18 goals. Hes undoubtedly had a couple of poor games this season but he certainly isnt a "terrible player." He needs to accept some personal realsponsibility for his form as does the manager for playing a style of play which exposes the centre backs v better teams.

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/18831726.rovers-duo-self-isolating-mowbray-delivers-team-news-update/ Not good news on the injury front, we do seem to tend to have a lot of doubts for one game who tend to then be unavailable for much longer, Ayala and Kaminski still out. Nyambe for Rankin Costello would be a definite change, sadly I am not sure what other changes we could make. In midfield, I suppose Rankin Costello could move there at the expense of Evans, but I would be tempted to play Evans and Trybull together a bit deeper in more of a 4-2-3-1, we still have Holtby, Brereton, Elliott and Armstrong in attack and it gives us a bit more stability and protection in front of the defence.

Lenihan has not had the best start to the season but I think on Tuesday Williams was just as bad if not even worse than Lenihan. The thing with Lenihan is that he is one of very few players whose importance to us since we got promoted is absolutely unquestionable. The points accumulated with him compared to without him is stark, I would suggest that in those 2 years, he was the only proper leader back there who could deal with the physical side of things, Rodwell, a past his best Mulgrew, Adarabioyo and Williams all struggled with that side of the game. I remember when Lenihan missed a few games culminating in Preston away last year and there was a void of leadership and desperation to keep the ball out and we just imploded. Maybe with Ayala here who is also a leader who wins the ball in the air, that Lenihan's availability and selection might not be quite as important, but I still think that those 2 are our best 2 centre backs and that calls in the LT to suggest that Williams could be first choice of the 3 are premature. Williams has proven that he can be a capable short term stand in when played alongside Lenihan but over the course of time I am not sure he has the quality. Lenihan does undoubtedly need to improve his poor form and he never has been perfect, he does have that tendency to be rash and he isnt the best on the ball (none of our 3 centre backs are) but the manager also needs to look at reducing the exposure to the centre backs, especially against half decent sides. Is a side with 2 of 3 central midfielders and both full backs constantly playing really high sustainable in terms of keeping clean sheets? Possibly not.

Very much so. The narrative is that we have struggled with unavailability which you can not argue but it is common across the league, so we cant feel too hard done by.

I never said that, but it is being made out as if that time under Coyle (in which he scored 1 in 4 across the season, its very respectable but its nothing amazing) was a time in which his potential was limited. That was the best spell of his career. If he had then gone to Birmingham and scored more or even the same, then maybe there would be some merit to the point, but I cant see where he has shown enough to suggest that he could get 15 goals+. I certainly wouldnt be changing the attack round, we have a striker who is the top scorer and the attacking side of things is working. Gallagher should just be second choice striker and only ever considered for that position, whether it be with Armstrong when we need a goal or in his absence.

I dont agree that playing under Coyle hindered him. It hindered Rovers, but not Gallagher personally, it benefitted him. Had he bettered that goal tally since or even come close, then maybe there would be an argument that having Coyle as his manager was a hindrance.

He might do, but I think thats a big assumption and not something that correlates with the Sam Gallagher that I have seen, in my opinion.

Again, I took that as being willing to accept "crap" performances if it meant getting consistent results. I am almost certain that no one would prefer crap football over entertaining football assuming the results are the same, and I suspect you are aware of what was meant.

I wouldnt say thrive, more do ok, average. I certainly agree that the choice to play him out wide very much hinders him, but I dont think that he would be able to take over from Toney and start scoring with similar regularity. Gallagher is not a goalscorer, he doesnt sniff out chances, I dont think he would be prolific regardless of the team he was put in because of that. Armstrong is obviously prolific in this team but if you swapped him for Gallagher he wouldnt carry on as Armstrong is doing or even close. For me, the best you would ever get out of him is maybe just about hitting double figures as he did in the season that he was "a breath of fresh air" which I feel is a little bit exaggerated, for me he was ok, nothing more. He lacks the intelligence that Graham had to start thinking about being his successor. Graham could hold the ball up, he could use his body brilliantly, he could link play and he could anticipate where the ball would fall, I think Gallagher is massively lacking on all of those fronts. Gallagher is more mobile (without being particularly fast) and has a better leap to win headers compared to Graham, although again it falls down to intelligence, Graham could use his body to create an angle to nod the ball down intelligently whereas Gallagher rarely can manage that. I feel that his role should just be as very much a Plan B, I dont think he is anywhere near good enough to be playing week in week out for a top half Championship side. Armstrong may get injured at some point or we may want a second striker if we need a goal, in which case by all means bring on Gallagher.

"In a Coyle team" actually involves playing in a very attacking side with 2 wide men and 2 forwards, wrecklessly so without any thought of defending. People often use that season as an example of how he did well under mitigating circumstances but if anything he benefitted from being "in a Coyle side" because it was attacking, and even then his goal record was 1 in 4, so average at best. He also had a really poor spell at Birmingham.