In my opinion obviously. Obviously it is my opinion, you think they are genuine reasons, I think they are flawed reasons. Dack is a miss, of course he is and it is bad luck. What do we miss in his absence? Goals. Is it unreasonable to expect a set of attackers, especially the main 2 expensive ones to at least cover that deficit substantially? Of course. They havent touched the sides. The conspiracies that the owners are refusing to rubber stamp is for me a stretch. We signed Dann for a decent fee, then we had Duffy signed for a fee and Hanley who established himself for a couple of years. Then our assets were sold off piece by piece and we havent spend any substantial fees full stop until the 2 strikers that Mowbray has signed. Gallagher a player he seemingly always wanted back and Brereton a player who took his eye when we played Forest. Its passing the buck suggesting that he hasnt been allowed to spend on defenders. Average wage budget, very healthy net spend, more time than any other manager. Competitive is fair. The manager himself said he was aiming for top 6 at the start of the season. The captain conceded on Tuesday night that its been a dissapointing season to miss out. But that alone is not why people are skeptical that he can take us forward. Its the points tallies, tactics, poor transfer record etc. This argument that these are experts is not fair either. Should we just concede any opinions because we arent as knowledgable? Or can we see the The argument is certainly not that he could have avoided these injuries. Its that the players hes signed at noticeable expense should have been able to at least make up a decent chunk of the shortfall of goals. Notably the 2 forwards scoring to compensate for Dacks absence and big earning Johnson (who has been poor, I also dont think his style of play suots the tactical changes Mowbray has gone for) could have covered Evans who has always been in and out under Mowbray. What do you make to the recent tactics, false 9s, inside forwards, and the tactical direction that the manager is going in? Any concerns? Or totally understand and see positive shoots? Are you worried that we have collected 9 points in 10 games? Do you think in terms of results we have progressed from last year? Is it a fair concern? 60 points both seasons, admittedly we might get up to 6 more but the season is over in reality.

In the last day or two I have seen a couple of genuine reasons. The main one is the injury one which has an element of truth to it but is not a reason to keep him on and it is a reason with limited credibility. Dack has beem out for half a season, thats undoubtedly unfortunate. Do you not think that spending over 15m on forwards somewhat removes that excuse? One that cost 3m has very much been a success, so fair play there. The 12m duo have been embarassingly short and not even covered a fraction of the shortfall. Then theres Samuel, Rothwell, Chapman etc who havent filled that shortfall either. Evans has always been in and out under Mowbray and injury prone throughout his time here. The circumstances again, fair play, unfortunate, to misa half the season. But again the argument is unravelled when he signed a player on big wages in Johnson who has not been capable of nailing down a spot even with that injury due to poor performances. He also signed Downing to more success, but who has been also needed in 2 other positions including his natural wide position to cover imbalances that still exist there over 3 years and 20m spent down the line. And has also signed Davenport and indeed Smallwood. Cunningham is unfortunate again, why didnt Mowbray look for another loan in January considering that Cunningham went back? Lenihan, hes been fit for most of the season, and for an injury prone player to miss only I think 4 or 5 games injured is very good going. Holtby struggled for fitness initially because he was signed so late, then his major injury caused him to miss a couple of games then lockdown meant he was back as soon as the season resumed. Only to be misused. Blind loyalty (which has been a reason) is not a reason to stick with a manager. Neither is fear of appointing another Coyle. The latter is one I am continiously seeing and it is almost accepting of the fact that Mowbray isnt the man to take us forward. You said in the other thread that youd fancy Mowbrays chances if he had a healthy budget. Considering the above, may I ask why? Weve had very competitive budgets and not made the most of them.

He may have done but there are many examples where incredible former players have struggled in management. Roy Keane was a fantastic player who will command respect but it doesnt mean that he is a good manager. I wouldnt want former playing careers to come into a search for our new manager, whenever that is.

But they "have other businesses and coronavirus is bad in India." Surely that justifies not giving a shit about a Championship club that you own and adopting anything but proactive processes consistently throughout their tenure? And we should accept it rather than mentioning it again?

Playing career often has little correlation to managerial success. Putting Mowbray down against former Premier League legends just takes the focus away from the real issues at hand, lack of progress in terms of points tallies, transfer horror shows, bizarre tactics etc. Roy Keane (who I like as a pundit) would not be a good appointment.

I dont think it was career ending, I might be mistaken but I think that is a myth, not that it makes it much better. He retired I believe with an injury to the opposite knee.

Because its contiously causing problems and its topical because Mowbray has again complained it in his frustration. I dont know how you can be so dismissive about it as if its normal.

Absolutely ridiculious either way and embarassing to see Mowbray continiously have to utter his frustrations to the local paper because our idiot owners dont give a shit.

Loyalty is an even more flimsy reason than fear of picking another Coyle. Mowbray has done a good job but not a perfect job and has had plenty of patience, plenty of time and been im sure remunerating very well too. You cant give him an extra year out of loyalty/pity. Mixed is very generous. In terms of signings that we have paid fees for, the ratio is one gem for one expensive failure with numerous low cost players thrown in for lower fees that have failed to ever convince, Bell, Rothwell, Chapman, Davenport, Samuel, Gladwin, Hart etc. He has a much better record in the loan market but in terms of building a squad, loans should be used for that final push.

I do wonder if Mowbray is being tactical with his comments in the press, again saying that our clueless owners still have given him no indication on the budget. As if to put the blame slowly back onto them? Doesnt feel like next season is one to be excited about, feels like groundhog day.

https://www.rovers.co.uk/news/2020/july/an-opportunity-for-others/ As expected, seems like the team will be basically the same.

The thing that goes against Armstrong is that up until maybe November, he was poor to the extent that most of us wanted him dropped.

Very true you cant be discriminating against people based on age like that. Plus the further problem, if your daughter might not go you might not either out of enjoyment or principle. Most teams with either bigger numbers of season ticket holders and/or smaller grounds are gonna have some serious logistical issues going about this.

True, if its 30% capacity thats 9k, if its 50% thats 15k so depends on how many are allowed. The problem is if STH numbers are more than the capacity, even though as you say that some will naturally be uncomfortable, how do you go about it initially? Maybe asking STH's to apply and hoping that when all applications are in they come to less than the capacity?

Correct. Suspect he will be typically generous and Samuel will be here next year though, we know what Uncle Tony is like with contracts. Would let Graham go too, can barely run.

I think you have to be quite controversial and illogical to be thankful for Venkys for merely not letting us go out of business, thats a bloody low bar. Especially after all of the shit theyve put us through.

Not very difficult but not very fair either, especially within families. That being said, I cant think of any ways of doing it bar first come first served so lets hope that demand is lower than the limited capacity!

I cant say ive seen anything on here that has made me "feel bad for" Bennett at all. Nothing for example that was any more critical than your fairly regular criticism of Chapman even when hes not playing and Gallagher when he is. Not that I have a problem with that by the way. If you feel that the inclusion of a player especially in a specifically uncomfortable position reduces our chances of winning, youve come to the right place on an internet messageboard to state it. And even though you havent specifically stated as such, just as in the Bennett criticisms (although most people do centre their arguments about why Mowbray keeps picking him) there is still that assertion that the criticism is of the manager. Its people directly tweeting him whereby I just dont get it at all. Then again as @Mattyblue pointed out maybe everyone gets something out of that. Bennett gets his ego stroked by the majority charging in and telling him how great he is, they in turn get the likes they crave and those who have nothing better to do than angrily tweet footballers get to vent. All very bizarre but it all works out in the end!

1. The Dack point is an excuse, and total conjecture as pointed out by others. We hadnt been in the play offs all season when Dack was fit either. Surely the 12m worth of strikers should help with that? But I suspect your response will be "do we need to go over this again" as if its a minor issue. 2. Second half, I think we had as many shots on target as in the first half. Millwall obviously were less bothered about attacking but we NEVER looked like scoring. The false 9's and inside forwards arent a one off and they clearly dont work. Is there any reason why you are so blaze and unconcerned? Do you think these tactics will work eventually? And if so, why? 3. This European scouting network seems to be a huge thing to you without actually having seen how its going to work. I know that Mowbrays recruitment up to now has gone from being hit and miss in League 1 (more successful than his Championship record but reliant on successfully getting the players already at the club onside) to really poor since promotion. But no, if I owned the club I would not demand to a new manager that he has to sign x or y, or players from x or y. He can sign whoever he wants, improved scope for transfers is only going to be beneficial but if he signed players that are good, I dont care if they are British or from abroad, and likewise if they are shite. Its not a valid reason to keep a manager on. 4. Loan signings are very valuable but the problem is that for us they have put us a bit up the league but still nowhere close, whereas at those sides, both finished top 6 last year, both also added permanent players of quality whereas we did neither. And again, the goalkeeping situation is not one to be dismissed, not unless it conflicts with your view that Mowbray should stay of course. 5. Again, a flimsy excuse to suggest that "we dont know" the reasons why he didnt sign certain players. It also makes no sense as to why he signed who he did sign, which is all we can ever judge on. Which is a below par striker who he doesnt know how to use. 6. Again, conjecture.

We might be but I wouldnt listen to it considering our manager has no clue what hes working with!

Oh sorry I wasnt saying you was. I agreed with you! I went off on a tangent somewhat!

Thanks for pointing out the specific post. A big help. And a few points to follow: 1. You say we have improved, but our points tally is the same. We may artifically improve it ever so slightly now the season is over competitively for us. Is this ENOUGH progress? 2. Tactically, we seem to be becoming more and more confused? 1 false 9, 2 false 9s, strikers on the wing etc culminating in that shit show yesterday. Does this concern you at all? 3. You mention the European scouting network. Until this shows success im skeptical. But why cant another manager take advantage of this? 4. You mention his signings. Tbe only good ones are the temporary ones. Does it not reflect badly on Mowbray that we are in a worse position going into next season after this seasons business? (lost our goalkeeper and our signings on over 1 contracts have not really done much.) Again, is this progress? 5. Why do you think Mowbray is the man to sign all of these players we need? He didnt last season and you called him out for it when he spent the money on Gallagher over Jansson/Hector/Cooper I think you personally referenced. Now he has no money due to the pandemic. Whats going to change? 6. You say "we are so close" we have never broke into the top 6 and our season is mathematically over with 2 games to spare. Surely since you made this statement that impacts your view?

I have seen plenty of people with credible reasons to remove the manager. Points tallies year on year, poor recruitment, tactical issues, players out of position etc. Those wanting the manager to stay seem desperate to avoid making constructive reasons as to why, preferring instead to maybe focus on the manner of some of those more critical or by creating hypothetical disastrous scenarios.

The reason that people repeatedly pick him out as a weak link is that he is repeatedly a weak link. Hes not being scapegoated, he has a consistent negative impact on the team in terms of results when he plays. The fact that he tries his best makes it unacceptable that a minority of idiots decides to send him tweets (very mild ones from what ive seen) but lets not pretend that hes an underappreciated but necessary member of the team because hes not good enough anymore. The majority of criticism is aimed at the manager for picking him.

We played a 4222 for half of yesterday that defied any sort of logic and didnt suit any of our players so unless we are selling the whole squad, I would suggest not.