Names? Or more cryptic attempts at winding folk up?

What are you proving/stating? He has said there that he went down when he felt contact so he was looking for it, luckily the ref bought it and the rest is history.

Think they have criticised him for being too loyal to past it players like Brunt, and also they have let in a lot of goals, I don't think 3 at the back suits them. Out of the 3 relegated teams, West Brom and Stoke should be doing better, Swansea I think are really reliant on their youth players, with James, Roberts, Rodon, Fulton, McBurnie etc playing integral roles.

No one would complain if they got a penalty they wouldnt deserve. We wouldnt have complained if we got the one Forest did the other week. Agree to disagree, both at the ground and on thw replays I feel like at best he looked for and earnt the penalty, but im very happy that the ref fell for it and we got 3 points.

Seen quite a bit of unrest in the last week or so on twitter towards Darren Moore at West Brom, whose seemingly struggling to get the best out of a very richly assembled group of players, maybe the next manager sacked?

What are you on about chaddy? How am I moaning about it? It looked in front of me to be a blatant dive, and nothing on the replays I have seen suggest otherwise really. I was amazed when he gave a penalty. That doesnt mean I wasnt delighted when he gave it, and to see it put away too. Just as I celebrated when Martin Olsson dived against Burnley. If I see a decision then we get that we shouldnt have in my opinion, I will say so, that doesnt mean I am not grateful or happy. As you said, Forest got a penalty for a dive against us a few weeks ago, and we got one for a dive today. Swings and roundabouts.

“I think it was a penalty. I felt that bit of contact and went down." https://www.rovers.co.uk/news/2018/november/ben-happy-to-do-his-bit/ He basically admitted he played for it.

McClaren was negative but it doesnt excuse refereeing decisions that youd be fuming about if they went the other way. The referee was hopeless all day, wanted to be the centre of attention it seems. But the big decision went our way, and I thought at best he went looking for it (basically said as much post match) and at worst it was a blatant dive. Luckily went our way.

He is definitely right to be aggrieved at a shocking decision for the penalty to be fair. That said, totally agree about their performance. You could never have guessed the form they were on prior to coming here today. Very strange.

It was never a penalty in a million years, blue and white glasses taken off. Was in front of me and he bought it and then some. Couldnt believe that he gave it, not that I was complaining, as you say Lolley got a dodgy one the other week.

Obviously, we have a manager doing well ourselves. All this talk about his personality but surely its about results. Did you celebrate today when we got a penalty from a dive?

Cant argue with Cooks record though.

As you say, is home is never in the centre of midfield, but he doesnt necessarily need to always be a bit part player for us. He needs to work on his positional discipline, but his home is in one of the 3 roles behind the striker, as his strength is running at and committing players.

https://www.rovers.co.uk/news/2018/november/a-horrible-game-but-a-vital-three-points/ Even the manager has described it as "a horrible game" and said that we need to "move on and produce a better performance next week." So he is being "negative" too. The performance was poor, theres no dressing that up. Of course the result is the important thing and people have acknowledged that.

Quite surprised you think Evans was excellent, personally thought he was as bad as hes been all season. He's usually the one who is more likely to play passes through to Dack and find him in space in between the lines, but I thought he was really poor on the ball today and constantly gave the ball away. Think you are a little harsh to call Palmer a showboater and he also did do running going back but he certainly was off the pace when on the ball, both him and Rothwell did nothing really. Agreed with your other comments on Bell, Brereton, Dack and the centre backs.

Very, very poor game, but happy tonight as results are all that matter. Mowbray is right to point out that the referee was really poor, bit of a jobsworth really. But hes also benefited from a penalty that never was, and needs to look closer to home in terms of a negative team selection that led to a laborious and slow performance, with the ball constantly going slowly sideways and backwards. That said, the team spirit hes generated is what ground out that win. Its difficult to cast too much of a judgement on the defence in that QPR were totally toothless and clearly intent on getting a nil nil. Leutweiler could have stayed on the bench still, Smallwood could have stayed in net! Bennett was untested in the main but his tendency to dive in is a constant source of worry. Bell was the worst player on the pitch for me, so terrified to run at his man, constantly turned back or gave the ball away and so one-footed its untrue. Lenihan was a colossus and deserved his man of the match award, Williams was ok but the difference is stark with Mulgrew on the ball, and a clear factor in our inability to pass the ball through the lines. I've always thought that our best defence is Nyambe to come back in at right back, with Williams at left back, and the obvious 2 at centre back. Evans had possibly his worst performance of the season, kept giving the ball away, and him and Smallwood being selected together were a fundamental reason behind the game being so boring and slow, we needed a Reed or even a Rodwell in there at home in a winnable game. Armstrong wasnt clever enough to take advantage of the fact that he had such an obvious pace advantage on Angel Rangel, and when he did get around him his end product was poor. Reed was industrious as ever and my favourite part of the game apart from the goal and the final whistle was Reeds tackle at the end followed by him celebrating like hed scored a goal. Dack was poor and got really frustrated towards the end but kept his cool to slot home the penalty and his time wasting at the end was brilliant to watch, such a clever player. Graham was not given any service but should have scored in the first minute. And to the subs, thought Palmer and Rothwell were both pretty poor when they came on, Palmer did some good work tracking back but he was ponderous on the ball. Brereton was bright when he came on, went wide once or twice and gave the ball away with terrible crosses to no one, but looked a real threat in behind when he moved central (where he seemed to be more often than not, bit of a curveball to suggest hes just being considered wide?) and did some excellent work to kill time with Dack. And obviously he earnt the penalty with what was a blatant dive. More signs that suggest to me that I'd really like to see him as a number 9 ahead of Dack. His running in behind could cause problems as it did when he was impressing at Forest.

Mixed team news. Really, really pleased to see Dack, Graham and Lenihan back, hope all are 100% fit. Glad to see the team in general look more familiar than I expected with all the doubts. Will greatly miss Mulgrew. Bennett at right back a concern, would have had Rodwell in midfield and Nyambe at RB, and Palmer shouldnt have been dropped.

Ah right sorry. They need to keep Paul Cook at all costs. Very, very good manager.

Youve stated more than once that you wouldnt play him wide. So whats changed?

Brereton signed with a promising reputation, on the back of playing for Nottingham Forest for over a season, primarily as a centre forward, week in, week out in the Championship. The game he made his name was as a striker against Arsenal, ripping them apart. That said, I think my expectations and thoughts are fair in that I DIDNT expect him to come here and instantly take that mantle, regardless of his price tag or desire to come here to play football. I expected Graham to continue as our first choice, but Brereton to offer much fiercer competition than Samuel and Nuttall have in the past, maybe playing if Graham was unable to, replacing him off the bench, hell, even playing wide occasionally if Graham was still on the pitch! I didnt expect him to be first choice striker, taking everything in his stride, already on 10 goals etc. The brunt of the criticism seems to have strayed towards Mowbray, on the assumption that he gave the green light to sign off the deal. From what I've seen, Brereton does not look comfortable or look of any use playing in a wide position. Armstrong is a fair example but he took to it straight away, hes quicker than Brereton, hes more nimble, he runs at players more comfortably, and hes far smaller so I can somewhat understand the logic. He's also still considered to be a striker. Most of my criticism doesnt even come around the fact that I dont see the logic or any real signs that Brereton could make an effective wide man, based on what I have seen so far and based on his struggles there for Forest according to their fans. Lets assume that Brereton suddenly becomes very effective in that role. Even then, it would leave us short up front, as we were prior to the summer. We have Palmer, Rothwell and Armstrong already competing for that solitary attacking wide role that Mowbray employs. Beneath a 33 year old Danny Graham, we then resort to playing our best player out of position there, and even Kasey Palmer has been mentioned for that position, highlighting the lack of depth we have. Ergo, Brereton wouldnt be fit for purpose for what we was missing. If Mowbray had signed a striker AND Brereton then maybe this discussion wouldnt be taking place.

If Cook goes that would be crazy.

If this is true, then it isnt a system I agree with. I dont think that its healthy or often constructive for someone aside from the manager to make the final decision on players. I disprove of Director of Footballs and the like for the very same reason. We needed a striker, and signed one for a lot of money with a burgoning reputation. Its a big if but if hes been signed above Mowbray, then that would make sense in that he seemingly has some belief in his potential but he doesnt trust him or see him as a player in the position that he was signed in. Leaving us short up front still and with a 7m player he isnt entirely sure what to do with at the moment. Exactly. When Alex Ferguson signed Bebe, Kleberson or Djemba Djemba, im sure fans still trusted him whilst they slagged off them individual signings. Half the time, it isnt putting your view across. Thats what people are encouraging, but rather than give your view, you say "trust Mowbray" which is implying that any opinion you, I or any other fan holds is inferior. Please can you quote people calling you positive or stop saying it ad nauseum.

Seemingly now in the role of Mowbrays assistant manager feeding back cryptic, vague teasers Alan Nixon style that could never be proven/disproven regardless. May I ask, presuming the team line up is as unbelievable as you say, why fans wouldnt be instantly concerned about it. Just here solely on the wind up it seems now.

The thing is, a striker was always the main target in the summer. We spent 7m on a striker, we dont consider the striker to be a striker, and now Mowbray is saying he is a striker short. Regardless of how successful/unsuccessful he has been or will prove to be wide, I dont see how people pointing out the illogical nature of that process to be "over-entitled." I appreciate that signing the right striker isnt necessarily easy but I refuse to accept that it is impossible to sign a striker fit for purpose, to challenge Danny Graham. For all intents and purposes we had signed a player to at least provide some form of competition, we could have understood if for now he was Grahams understudy I also think that @philipl and his claim that there is evidence to show that the choice was Brereton or nothing is totally unsubstantiated. You mentioned fans being over-entitled and unwilling to allow him time, but the confusion manly stems around how he is being used. We have a 7m project who has featured occasionally out of position. Of course hes not been signed to be at his maximum levels this season, but firstly im not sure we can really afford to sign such an expensive player solely for the future, and I also dont think that considering he played fairly regularly over a couple of years at Forest, that he wouldnt be able to contribute a lot more now should he play in his natural position. I expected Graham to be the main man, and Brereton to be initially his understudy, he could learn plenty from Graham, he could provide the fresh legs off the bench or play when Graham is injured etc, and I am aware that there would be an adaptation period regardless. What people seem to be of the opinion that Brereton needs is to play in his best position! Something you agreed with strongly last week! And I would suggest that assuming that a player finding form and confidence more likely and more easy to come by in his natural position is a fairly logical conclusion to come to, but you also make a good point by saying "you are talking alot of rubbish" as if ive judged Brereton personally and made a massive character assassination. Again with unsubstantiated claims that there are loads of fans who dont trust Mowbray, without proof, without names, just trying to stir the pot.

Everyone hopes that Brereton scores tomorrow and we win. And the majority of "recent criticism" has not been about the player himself. It has been about the way he has been used and the amount of money he cost in light of the other deficiencies in our squad and how differently we could have spent the money, no one has blamed him for the fee though, that doesnt make any sense. Whilst he continues to play out of position, the spotlight will be on Mowbray more so than Brereton himself. I also dont need to meet Brereton as I never said it may affect his confidence based on his personality. It is based solely on playing anyone out of position, nothing to do with Brereton himself. I based my theory on if a player is placed somewhere aside from his natural position, he is less likely to play well. Simple as that. Meaningless platitudes such as "patience and time is needed" and "trust Mowbray" will naturally fall on deaf ears on an internet messageboard, in a thread dedicated to the player in question. He will be judged like anyone else on a game by game basis, and even though the fans in general trust Mowbray, people will always trust what they see with their own eyes over anything else.