Yes I was, it was a rhetorical question. Mowbray said post match that it was the best 15 minute performance weve put in all season, which is a huge worry as we didnt come close to scoring. If theres one thing you cannot use in your reasoning as to why a manager wouldnt be any better than Mowbray, being "boring" is certainly not one! The football is turgid to watch.

Did we have a shot in that first 15 minutes, or more pertinently did Sluga have anything to do?

If you see a team that is capable of challenging for promotion then I suspect that you are attending different games to almost everyone else. Next you will be saying that Sam Gallagher can win the golden boot.

Got 1 in the cup and its made no difference. Its a terrible sign as a striker if you arent even getting chances, hes not getting into the positions, not anticipating where the ball will fall. He also quite cowardly passed the buck on at least two occasions when he could have got a shot away instead misplacing passes to no one. First thing Graham did was peeled off his marker brilliantly and got a shot on target. He also peeled off his marker again soon after and it took a superb defensive block which led to a corner. He also did a couple of lay offs to get a bit of life out of Dack, whereas Gallagher repeatedly lost aeriel duels as he often does in the centre. Its an embarrassment on behalf of the manager that our only competent striker is our freebie 34 year old when hes blown 15m on incompetent strikers. We seem totally toothless at the moment.

Think hes going mad.

Downing plays best on the left. And whilst Armstrong is mainly shite, I prefer him right if anywhere to simplify his game. Mowbrays obsession with inverted wingers means Downing spent most of his time coming inside and getting crowded out.

Absolutely rubbish and the perfect summary of why we wont get near the play offs with continued crippling inconsistency and never being far from a shocking result against a crap team. Some will blame the ref I am sure for not handling the time wasting well but that was a self inflicted defeat, with the team looking clueless in terms of what they were supposed to be doing tactically and totally devoid of any urgency Gallagher again was shocking and offers zero goal threat. Armstrong continues to get away with lifeless performances as teachers pet guaranteed a start with his next goal contribution now due next spring. The 15m thrown down the toilet makes an absolute mockery of Mowbray. Armstrong 53, 6, Gallagher 9,0, Brereton 26, 1. 90 appearances, 7 goals is the combined Championship total (think ive worked that out right) and we are 15 millon down. Johnson gets worse with each passing week, Dack looked totally fed up, Walton was all over the place and the only 3 minor positives were Travis, Holtby and Graham.

I dont rate Bennett especially as a right back and still feel he is the weakest component of that back 5. That being said, I have to say that I feel like his recent performances have been massively improved and I hope they continue.

If Jones gets anymore time at Stoke hes very lucky, doing a woeful job. 3 wins in 29.

It isnt his fault but of course his price tag should play a part in how we judge him, you are bound to look of the opportunity cost. Coversely, Dack is even more of a good signing due to the low fee we paid. You are right, not all transfers work out as plan, those that dont will be criticised.

@Paul Mani i found this comment a little strange: "Gally £5m and 8 games in a league where Bamfords get traded at 7-10m?" Bamford is a very good, proven Championship striker. He scored goals at Derby, Leeds and Boro where he won player of the year at this level. Gallaghers goal to game ratio in his overall record as a Championship striker is very undewhelming. Not saying we could have afford Bamfords wages or whatever but just found the comparison a strange one considering the difference in quality. Even with Breretons age, the fee does matter as @Blue blood rightly points out. But ultimately, prior to his injury he was not really close to getting a start, he still seems a way off the first team, we cant really spend 7m on someone so far away from making any sort of impact, its a bizarre situation considering how far away he looks when he does feature and how much hed already played for Foresr prior. And crucially is there any justification on what we have seen that Brereton or even Gally will be "banging in PL goals" or even payback their fees? Also, Rodwell was not fit for purpose as a centre back and Samuel scored 5 League goals and none after November. I would suggest that Mowbrays transfer dealings up until now are very mixed. I suspect that this summers business will prove to be his best window, that being said all the question marks for me surround the big money striker again. But we cant make definitive judgements on any yet or rule any as successes or failures. But I am optimistic.

I have seen no one suggest that Dack is anything other than a superb signing. Ultimately it doesnt make very good debate when everyone agrees I suppose. You also say that "transfers arent infallible." No one ever said that they are. Or that Mowbray should have a perfect transfer record. Equally that doesnt mean that his signings cant be criticised which in Breretons case is very justified.

Based on his season in League 1 for us, definitely not.

Would you agree then that during the course of the season, it would be very difficult (IMO impossible) to reach our play off objective without our striker contributing goals along the way?

Walton Bennett Lenihan Williams Cunningham Travis Holtby Armstrong Dack Downing Graham Subs Leutwiler Gallagher Rothwell Chapman Johnson Tosin Evans

12 players?

Neither do I, you are making out as if I am unhappy with a win. Absolutely nothing that I have said warrants you taking the moral high ground. I have merely said that our striker will need to contribute at least some goals in order for us to meet our objectives.

But you were implying that Gallagher cannot be questioned as he is part of a team that has hit some good form, so surely by the same token if we are judging individuals based solely on the teams results then he was only deserving of criticism during Coyles tenure as even though his goal tally was as impressive as it ever has been in his fledgling career, the team was losing? Ive not said that he isnt offering anything or that he doesnt have any attributes of any use, because of course he does. I also have read @Atko's Engine and whilst I slightly disagree that hes "mainly" played wide (against Charlton, Fulham, West Brom and Reading he played central, against Hull, Boro and Cardiff wide, as a sub v Millwall mainly central) and I totally appreciate that his game is different to Graham. I dont believe a striker yet to score's contribution can be described as excellent to be honest. I also think it is very fair to demand that at some point, our (£5m!) striker starts adding goals to his game as we can not be solely reliant on other positions scoring all season in absence of our seemingly now main striker, especially as we are far from free scoring anyway. I have not put specific demands on how many goals, I dont expect him to score 20 goals, or to be honest even match Grahams tally, but we must never lose sight of the main purpose of a striker regardless of what else he might offer, its not enough without goals.

Absolutely. Mentioned earlier that good strikers miss chances even when they arent scoring, by getting into the right positions.

So surely by that same token you were unhappy with his contribution when we were losing every week in his last spell? Even though he scored some goals, albeit 1 in 4 is very average. Its obviously true that he was in an inferior side last time but ultimately and factually, Coyles tactics seemed to suit Gallagher more than Mowbrays have done, in either spell. He was far more of a goal threat under Coyle in his 442, with Emnes or Graham with him, and wingers either side. To clarify, I am well aware that Coyles tactics and management as a whole were obviously terrible as a whole, and he is a terrible manager. He does have some attributes to his game that ae helpful but I think as our striker it is pretty obvious that he needs to start scoring goals to merit his place going forward.

Waggott said we were 10th to 16th last season but with Downing, Johnson, Gallagher and Holtby amongst our signings you would suspect that that figure has gone up considerably.

So should we not critique the team on anything but the result? Ie if we win but theres an area of potential improvement, we shouldnt mention it, and conversely, if we lose but someone plays well we shouldnt mention that either? A striker who has started 7 and come on in the 8th of our league games this season and is yet to score a goal (or rarely even threaten) is something to consider. We will need our striker to score goals over the course of the play offs in order to make the play offs.

I am not opta, how should I know. Not that many which ties into my earlier comments about good strikers always getting chances regardless of form, they get into the right positions.

He has plenty of tools especially physically but, as much as I appreciate the methodology behind phasing out a veteran striker for a young striker, if he continues to not score goals youd presume that Graham would have to come back in. Against Luton next week could be a perfect chance for Gallagher to get a goal mind.

Good strikers even when not in goalscoring form repeatedly get into goalscoring positions. The worry is always when them chances are not coming very often. Dack has 40 goals in 100 games and I struggle to remember one outside of the box. For all of his tricks and nutmegs he is brilliant at anticipating where the ball will fall in the penalty area. Much about goalscoring is about movement off the ball and anticipation. Im not convinced Gallagher has that strikers instinct to sniff out potential chances.