I think its unfair to blame Ferguson specifically for the culture that definitely existed of club rivalries overriding any attempts at fostering a healthy national team spirit. I remember watching Ferdinand, Lampard and Gerrard all air similar views on how they were unable to see past their club rivalries. I believe the Spanish team have had similar problems in the past. Ferguson also wasnt alone in being very reluctant to allow his players to go on international duty for friendlies. Thats a club managee mindset that still exists prominently now. Definitely agree on so many big egos clashing but thats one of many factors id argue that held us back. Tactical insufficiences, ie famously sticking to a 4-4-2 and trying to cram too many similar players into the same team. The psychological block that seemed to grow as the years without a major tournament victory went by, and the subsuquent media pressure. Weve often been lacking in depth, for example even when we had that brilliant team around 2004, we lacked pace and had players like Darius Vassell as important subs, plus weve had a couple of famous injuries at bad times. Southgate has done very well to foster such excitement and enthusiasm I must say.

I suspect the main reason for his inability to reach the incredible heights that he reaches at Man City is presumably psychological based on the disgusting way that he is treat by the English media and public towards a top, top young player. He is still effective as an England player but he appears at times to have the world on his shoulders in an England shirt.

"It seems" is hardly proof but you seem totally unable to grasp that no one is saying that the majority of potential walk ons are put off by the surcharge, in fact ive even given numbers of roughly how many people it would take to financially override any additional revenue caused by the surcharge. It is obviously a minority, but there are examples within this thread of people offput by the surcharge, and if that is happening to anyone then it has to be of concern and worthy of investigation. Your second platitude is meaningless. And as other people have said, these potential additional fans are not the hard core. They are those who arent as interested/emotionally invested as us, those who have fallen out of love with the club, those who have yet to get attached, those who have other things to do should they not find value in buying Rovers tickets. Your comment is ignorant and desperate, urging people to "support the team" rather than offer a constructive point about tickets/attendances/surcharges.

I agree with many of your points but I just think that in spite of our pre World Cup failings, we sometimes exaggerare the gap between the calibre of our individual players v the rest of the world. I think Belgium are obviously better but have a fairly similar pool, in that you look around their main 11 and its very weak. Nacer Chadli fairly regularly starting, and players like Boyata, Januzaj and Batshauiy amidst the squad. Its very weak once you go past the 8 or 9 top, top players they have. Brazil have a bit more depth but they have players like Paulinho last time I checked playing important roles, France I think look excellent almost everywhere but Giroud as their main number 9 lets them down somewhat. Stones has developed into a top quality centre back. Sterlings numbers eclipse even the likes of Sane. Kane is an obvious one as is Walker I agree. After them 4 you have a series of very good players performing to a top level in the Prem and for many, the CL. I think Pickford and Chilwell are fine where they are in terms of development. I appreciate the success of Sancho but he appears to be a special talent. Nelson is also doing well at Hoffenheim so I dont discourage it mind you. Im not convinced that he was ever looking at Dack. Mount is very much a Chelsea player and an exceptional young talent who ticks every box in terms of the vision Southgate seemingly has, and the fact that he didnt play him suggests to me that he was just giving Mount a taste of the standards.

I would always prefer to have a first choice defence in terms of gaining an understanding personally. There is a bit of a myth IMO that Williams is worse than Bell going forward, he gets his fair share of assists even if he hardly Roberto Carlos in style! And hes far more obliged to get in decent deliveries than Bell is.

No I dont think he will play Palmer (or Rothwell) but I personally would to look to exploit a very poor defence that has conceded a lot of goals this season. I suspect that Mowbray will have a decision to make though, in that I suspect that there are 6 in his mind to choose 5 from. Evans, Smallwood, Bennett, Reed, Dack and Armstrong. With Bennett now not needed at right back and Evans back from suspension, he has a decision on his hands. Dack is obviously a given. I would personally have Smallwood as the odd man out if it is from them 6, but if I had to guess, Reed will be given an extra few days to recover from his knock. Armstrong has to start after his performance v Rotherham. I would personally have Palmer, Rodwell and even Rothwell amidst that selection conundrum as well but I suspect all 3 of them will be subs.

The one aspect of your posts which perhaps makes them seem more defensive of the clubs pricing strategies etc is the constant urge to criticise fans who dont attend. Anyone choosing not to attend for example based on the surcharge are likely to be not doing so out of principle more so than affordability, but as weve seen on this thread, that is through some people who genuinely are unable to commit to attending prior to match day, who feel like they are being punished for being in such a position, even though it is out of their control. The 2 reasons that the club have used to justify it but dont hold water, and to be fair you have even said yourself that you dont agree with the surcharge. I still dont get why you are viewing going to watch Rovers almost as some sort of obligation though.

That is a reason that makes a little more sense but if it is offset by anyone choosing not to go because of the principle of it, then it is having a negative effect. If fans come knowing they wont be penalised for being unable to buy a ticket prior to the day of the game then id suggest they are more likely to get into the habit of doing that more often if possible.

Excellent post, further proof that people are put off by the additional, needless barriers that the club are putting up that have the potential to curb attendances. 2 loyal fans, in 2 totally different situations, but both equally affected and either put off/almost put off attending home games by the club that professes to be desperate to get attendances as high as possible.

Surely the fact that there are ways around the surcharge suggests that the reasoning that Cheston gave (to aid predictability in terms of knowing roughly the attendance in advance) is somewhat compromised?

He has done a job I never anticipated he would ever be able to, and there were no signs prior in his managerial career. He has done excellently and I again enjoyed watching us I still think that theres a bit of an underestimation in regards to the calibre of our players mind you. Look at the side today, we had in the starting 11, 3 regular top performers at City (Stones, Walker and Sterling) with one who has played quite a lot himself in the last 18 months (Delph), 2 regulars at Spurs (regular 30 goal a season striker Kane and Dier), a regular at Liverpool (Gomez) a regular at Everton (Pickford) a regular at Leicester (Chilwell) and 2 players who arent necessarily regulars but who regularly feature at United and Chelsea (Rashford and Barkley). Beyond that, you have a series of regulars at big clubs (Henderson, Shaw, Sancho, Alli, Arnold, Trippier) some who get plenty of game time at big clubs (Winks, Lingard, Loftus-Cheek) and big players for good Prem clubs beyond that (Maguire, Maddison, Keane, Dunk, Wilson, McCarthy, Cook) so there is some decent calibre there.

I just cant fathom how you are incapable of realising that people queuing up on matchday or the stat of 800 walk-ons a game is NOT proof that it hasnt put anyone off. Your argument is that MOST people will not be put off by the surcharge and you seemingly have a valid point. But no one is saying otherwise. The fact that 800 are clearly unaffected by paying the surcharge as an isolated statistic is a moot, useless one. Its the people that arent there, and more so the quantity of them, partially or solely because of the surcharge that we are interested in. Obviously there are different stands/age categories etc so its not a 100% true calculation. But if a ticket is say £24 for a game, 100 additional fans would be needed to offset the additional revenue of the surcharge. If the ticket is £27, then 89 additional fans would be needed. (Obviously with that example, there is the added psychological aspect of paying £30, we saw the reaction when Bolton revealed their ticket prices) Then there obviously is the additional benefit of having these fans in the ground, for the boost in atmosphere, for potential increases in additional items (food, drink, club shop etc) and also the hope that they may attend again more often in the future. The justification for the surcharge is also subject to mockery because it does not go hand in hand with an attitude of hoping for as many people to turn up wanting a ticket to boost the attendance on a match day. There is an example below of someone who has not bought a ticket specifically because of the surcharge. In my opinion, I would suggest that he almost certainly isnt the only one to either have decided solely or partially not to attend a game because of the added £3 surcharge. The effect of it is two pronged, it obviously increases the ticket price, and there is also the principle of paying more than other people for the same product. Considering these people arent season ticket holders, they clearly dont see attending as the be all and end all. Franky has hit the nail on the head regarding the surcharge. If there is anyone that is put off by it, then it certainly should be something that at least warrants further discussion and research as to its effectiveness. If Franky is the only person to have been partially or totally persuaded not to buy a ticket because of the surcharge, then I would suggest that the surcharge has been vindicated somewhat, It is if there are more than just Franky, which based on the length of the discussion on here alone, I would suggest there is, then it becomes a point of contention.

Even if you think Bennett/Reed are capable there, would it not bother you to potentially be without either in midfield for a significant period of time should Nyambe get injured again?

With Bennett, my attitude when we were in League 1 with him wide was that defensive contribution alone is not enough to justify selection in a wide role, it was the same with Conway. I felt he was really poor in the first half of the season in which he played almost exclusively as a winger if I recall, he had yet to score going into the new year (obviously post Shrewsbury he tended to play elsewhere and was much improved) and had a few assists (similar amount to Derrick Williams) which for a player who is proven at the level above, was below par. I know he has the capability, he got the assist at Hull, the one v Brentford and impressed at Stoke, so he was coupling his obvious work rate/defensive play with something going forward. I also look back to that second half of the season when we went down, he scored I think 4 goals in half a season and was a big part of our attacking play. I know he can contribute considerably to our attacking play even if his selection is often a more conservative one, and I feel its only fair that I point it out when I dont feel he is doing, as he wasnt last season in the first half of the season. Especially when you look at last week, he had I think at least 5 shots which in the main were speculative at best and not the correct decisions. Hes also often culpable for hopeful/hopeless crosses in. Sometimes perhaps his popularity and his undoubted brilliant attitude and character paper over the cracks when hes not doing enough in attack, in my opinion. It says a lot that our wins have all been by one goal. Whilst I feel that I somewhat empathise with Mowbrays reluctance to stray from what he knows best, we have much more in the way of options compared to last season, in terms of adding technical ability/more forward thinking players in midfield without compromising on organisation too much. Rodwell has a better passing range than Evans and in particular Smallwood, and Reed is also more forward thinking. One of Reed/Rodwell with one of Evans/Smallwood, or even Reed and Rodwell on occasion, is hardly a massive risk. Likewise, in games like Rotherham at home, playing 2 more attacking wide players. I think Rotherham is a bit of an anomaly, I actually felt that we did create quite a few good chances to justify the less conservative selection, unlike against both Millwall and Reading where we didnt deserve anything more than a point. I recall in terms of good chances created, the goal obviously, Bell being put through on goal, Grahams header from Bennetts excellent cross (!) and Grahams chance from Dacks lay off the most obvious. Also, worth noting that the counter attack v Forest was with Smallwood and Evans central and Reed and Bennett wide! Our league position suggests Mowbray is winning the argument though at the moment. If we went for it more we might get undone more. - Theres an element of truth to that statement, but its a questionable "might." Don't get me wrong, Mowbrays obviously getting so much right, but I think that he could look at being slightly braver in SOME games, especially at home, and he can do that without going gung ho. Theres obviously a balance to get, but in terms of the smaller teams at home, and our goals tally from open play, hes not getting that quite right at the moment.

Stop being pedantic and winding people up. The point is not that Bennett is necessarily at fault. Its that he is not a right back in the first place, and hes only playing there because we only have 1, who was injured, which will happen at times. Oli Burke, the player who cost West Brom £15m? Whose being unrealistic again?

Bar Dack and Graham (who himself should be on double the goals tally hes sat on) I don't think any of our other players can really say that they have contributed significantly going forward to be honest. 2 assists and 0 goals is not impressive, albeit my comment was more aimed at his stats in League 1, the fact that 2 assists makes him our joint most creative player makes sense when coupled with the very low number of goals scored from open play that you highlighted after the Rotherham game. I feel like Armstrong has been particularly poor this season, bar a couple of very impressive performances recently, and his goals/assists tally is well short. Palmer has 3 goals, 1 in the League, Rothwell nothing, but both could point to a lack of playing time, as could Brereton. I dont feel like weve stumbled across the best attacking formula at the moment, with Dacks incredible goal/assist tally a godsend at the moment. I think Mowbray needs to start being braver and more trusting with his selections at times (he was v Rotherham and it was only horrendous finishing that caused us to drop points really) and also I feel like our attacking players do hold much of the responsibility themselves. Nyambe is undoubtedly our first choice in that position, something I am very happy with, but has just missed a chunk of games through injury, not for the first time. I think the consensus of those giving the "flak" about Bennett are more aiming their comments about the fact that he is very much filling in, he is not a full back, and a lack of natural cover for Nyambe means that not only does it leave Bennett in a position he is for some a bit of a liability in, but he is taken away from playing in midfield where he is best. A bit of a pompous comment, yes the SPL in general is pretty poor but if Celtic came into the Championship I suspect they would win it. Rangers would more than hold their own too, and there are players beneath that (McKenna at Aberdeen to name one) who could more than hold their own. You overestimate the quality of the Championship. Agreed. I also suspect that Williams and Rodwell would also not be effective fill ins at centre back for more than a solitary game or two. Williams made a horrendous error at West Brom that we were incredibly fortunate to see missed by Rodriguez, and Rodwell wasnt tested v Rotherham but hes not a centre back. plus I'd like to see him in midfield give us a more technically capable alternative to Smallwood. I understand what they both do, but they are both playing in the same position. I dont think that being defensively willing is enough to guarantee someone a start in an attacking role, they have to I don't think any of the players we have played wide this season have contributed enough in an attacking sense, something I have explained in detail above. I also understand about versatility and its a good skill to have. Especially mid game where you obviously dont have all the players in your squad available when you want to change something up, or if you have a couple of injuries in one position. But I also appreciate that players play best in their natural positions. Square pegs in square holes where possible. Bennett hasnt been "more than good enough" at right back, in mine and clearly some others opinion. He was really poor in our last 2 defeats, and dives in too often and is prone to being caught out of position. The whole point is not about criticising Bennett as a right back or Rodwell and Williams at centre back. They arent naturals in that area, they can fill in for a game but you dont want them there for a prolonged period. The point is, in a transfer window, it surely makes no sense to prioritise signings in other positions when we are short of NATURAL depth in 2 key areas. It worked against Stoke I acknowledged earlier. But in general I think that I would understand one of them being on one side, but I would like at least one of Armstrong, Palmer and Rothwell in the side, if not two. Aside from your cliches about Bennett being "the third name on the team sheet" (weve been through how Raya, Lenihan and Nyambe are surely more important based on alternatives in their position but forgetting that for a moment) Bennett should NOT be guaranteed a place. He offers so much to the team, but you cant make such statements regardless of form.

We got the win against Stoke and I appreciate that but I stand by that it would be a negative selection considering the fact that it would leave Armstrong on the bench following a man of the match performance. He would give us a threat on the counter attack and you say what has he delivered in terms of end product, I could in the main throw the same argument to you about Bennett for when he has played wide in the last 18 months. I agree that the full back on the other side (Bell) has also been poor, which is for me another reason to sign a centre back to ensure that when Mulgrew picks up an injury, it still allows us to still select Williams at left back. That said, I felt that Bennett was very poor against Sheffield United and Swansea in particular in that position and has a reckless tendency to dive in too much that leaves me nervous. In his defence, he is not a full back, he is a midfielder.My point is not that he should be better there, its that we should have a natural right back outside of Nyambe. Reed was superb centrally v West Brom and against Rotherham his injury affected him for a lot of the first half before he was taken off. Evans would be a definite for me, an alternative I wouldnt mind thats slightly more conservative is Evans and Rodwell with Reed wide and Palmer also making way. I think that would give us stability as well as that bit of added technical ability to hopefully be better from open play and have more chance of controlling the game from midfield rather than be so reliant on long balls and set pieces. I dont get your comments about me being obsessed with Bennett either, you have said the same about Lenihan. Whilst I do question his attacking output quite a lot, I dont understand why that is frowned upon, but my point about him playing as a right back is the same about Williams and Rodwell playing as centre backs. It makes logical sense to prioritise signings in areas where we lack any sort of depth without moving players from other positions.

I really hope that isnt the midfield against Preston, thats incredibly negative. Armstrong surely has to play, and I like to see Palmer on the other side. Not sure Bennett can justify a starting place based on recent form, and Reed should play in his best position, driving the team from there alongside Evans. I dont get that mentality at all. We dont need a centre back, even though our 2 back ups are a left back and a central midfielder. Not only are they naturally going to be slightly less effective out of position, but they surely will be needed in their natural positions, especially Williams with Bell appearing to be not really up to it. That should surely be above the priority list of a position where we have Armstrong, Palmer and Rothwell all fighting for a place. Totally agree on right back. Bennett hasnt been up to it no matter how you dress it up or say "he can play there." Wouldnt send Palmer back at all, definitely has something to offer. And Brereton should be considered as a striker full stop really, we cant afford the luxury of a 7m striker signed and not even considered for his natural position.

Definitely need a centre back as we only have Mulgrew and Lenihan who are natural there, bar Downing who isnt good enough and should be moved on. Williams and Rodwell are naturals in other positions. We also need a right back as Bennett is a weakness when he covers there, and we havent seen Reed there (apparently very good at Norwich at right back) but hes first choice in the middle. Beyond that, would love a natural winger, suspect a striker will be more likely but Brereton should be used there. Downing should be moved on, and Nuttall, Travis and potentially Davenport if fit again should be loaned out to League 1 clubs.

Darragh MacAnthony has to be the most unprofessional chairman (Peterborough) around. I'm amazed anyone would work with him. Pandering to the fans and calling the teams performance "a shit show", amidst giving random fans information on player wages (confidential surely), transfer negotations etc. Some will defend it as open and honest but it is the unprofessional, undermining ramblings of an attention seeker.

Out of all of them hobbies that you list, and again its critical to realise than not everyone is like you. Following Rovers is by far your costliest hobby. Watching TV and occasional meals and nights out are nowhere near on that scale. The whole discussion in on how the club can increase attendances. The 800 figure is irrelevant in terms of knowing how many extra fans would choose to come last minute or be more tempted to do so should the surcharge be dropped. For example, if a game was £24 without the surcharge, and this isnt a totally fair scenario I appreciate as there are concessions etc. It would take only an extra 100 walk on fans on top of the current 800 to break even on the surcharge, which certainly isnt an unrealistic number in my opinion.

It is an expensive hobby. Even for us, if you dont think spending over 300 a year solely on tickets for home league games, thats before away tickets, travel etc is a big expense then you obviously have far more money than me. Football is an expensive hobby. I never denied any of that but the fact that the players are fully committed is a minimum requirement, and not a reason alone for the crowds to come back. Mowbray is doing as much as he reasonably can but ive never doubted that he hasnt. No one that I have seen has mentioned a lack of committment from the players or manager as a reason that they dont go. I meant that it is irrelevant in that we might get 800 walk ons now. We dont know either way whether that would stay at 800 or say increase to 1000 if the surcharge was removed. Thats the important stat, not how many walk ons we have with the surcharge. So we dont know for sure whether the surcharge is reducing the attendance or contributing to it and if so, by how much. I think we all know it wouldnt be a massive number but we need as many fans as possible. It would suit you or more likely it would be easy for you to relate to as you have kids on your own yes. I said that because you struggle to empathise with anyone with any personal circumstances different to yours. I never said your ideas were bad on this suggestion, in fact getting kids into the habit is an idea i agree with you on. The only idea i shot down was the weekend ticket as like I explained I suspect that the main people taking it up would be current full season ticket holders so in essence they would be downgrading.

Mulgrew is our most consistent player for me. Bennett has dropped below 7 out of 10 quite a few times recently and at the moment for me isnt doing enough to justify a place either at right back or at the wing in the starting 11. That said, as long as hes not guaranteed a place every week, this is undoubtedly good news as he is an important player to have and its good to see how much he gives and how much he cares.

It is a very costly hobby full stop. It is my main hobby so I can justify it, I also have no kids to pay for. Your random hypothetical scenario is obvious but these fans who could add say an extra few hundred-couple of thousand potentially onto our gates are obviously people who do have other things to do, or do not consider it ther primary hobby or avenue to spend their money. As much as Mowbrays doing a good job, effort and hard work is a minimum requirement, and that "they try harder than they used to" is hardly going to get fairweather fans into the stadium. Everythings relative, we are in a far worse position than say pre Venkys but better than under Coyle etc. No, neither of us know whether that number would go up without the surcharge, the amount of walk ons with the surcharge is irrelevant.

Im not justifying it in that it doesnt need to be justified. You get fairweather fans at every club, I dont understand why you seem to think thats a problem. Or something you are seemingly quite bitter about. Attendances vary on the success of a team. We still would like them fans to come back if possible. I never said that hoardes of fans are claiming to not want to go because of the surcharge. Im saying its a potential and marginal additional barrier for those weighing up the idea of attending last minute to not go. One that doest need to be there and one that you dont agree with anyway!