At the end of the day, as good and as crucial as Dack and Graham are, Mowbray SHOULD be confident with the resources hes been allowed to improve us in forward areas, with Brereton, Armstrong and Rothwell coming for a large sum of money combined, and Palmer being a very clever loan addition. I partially disagree. Dack and Graham ive touched on above you have a point on, but we are horribly short at centre back. An injury to the prone Mulgrew and Lenihan and we are pitifully short beneath that. Same at right back, and obvious worries with Leutweiler coming in. If Dacks fit enough, he has to start aswell.

If Mulgrew, Lenihan, Dack and Graham all missed out along with Raya, I think id go something like this: Leutweiler Nyambe Downing Williams Bell Evans Reed Bennett Palmer Armstrong Brereton Subs: Fisher, Rothwell, Conway, Nuttall, Rodwell, Travis, Smallwood I dont think Armstrong has done enough when given a place centrally to suggest he is good enough as a striker in the short term. His home may be wide where he terrorised Leeds. Time has to come soon where our 6/7m striker gets a game in his position.

That team news makes for grim reading. Got massive problems at centre back, everyone and his dog could have seen that having 2 recognised centre backs would cause trouble and so it may prove. If Dack doesnt make it, then for me Palmer HAS to be given a go in his best position. If Graham doesnt make it, nows the time for Brereton to be given a chance centrally and step up.

Ive not seen any Waggott quotes about Marriott. Ill have to take your word for it. But them wages are total guesses?

How do you know that? And your second point makes no sense. As you say, we have to change to fit Brereton/Armstrong in, why is that ok but not for Marriott?

Im not sure Rothwells assets favour a central midfield birth at all. I do appreciate the importance of needing to be somewhat defensively capable as a wide man but its about getting the balance. You need a bit of both. Conversely something ive argued at points when Bennett has struggled to contribute offensively is that our "defensive" wide man needs to be scoring and assisting at least somewhat, just as much as our attacking wide man needs to be at least somewhat defensively responsible.

Wonder if, dependant on the length of Rayas injury, that we will consider getting in a free agent keeper in the short term?

Whilst I agree with your points about his style of play. I think its worth noting that for all his promise, albeit in very small cameos, hes not actually done anything at the end of it. The best thing about Dack is the numbers, the goals and the assists he guarantees, for all the entertainment he brings. I don't think Rothwell's problem is just his off the ball play, or his style in general perhaps taking time to fit within the structured team that Mowbray clearly favours. Hes not doing anything conclusive at the end of all of his dribbles, his skills, his speculative shots. He had a guilt edged chance on Saturday and fluffed his lines. Palmer has 3 goals, yes 2 were in the cup but hes showing that he offers a goal threat. Rothwell was involved in the very good goal at Bolton, but that all came from persistence and skill from Palmer. At the moment, that "attacking wide" role has 3 potential candidates, Palmer, Rothwell and Armstrong. I would like them to really push for that place in the team. Armstrong has had a really poor season himself, bar the Leeds game. I never see Rothwell being a central midfielder either, a number 10 maybe.

Dont think we can ever really justify dropping Dack. Amidst any criticisms about his overall game (in the last week hes had to play in the wrong position for over half of it) his goal return remains consistent. 8 (6 league) goals in 13 (12 league) is reason enough for him to be guaranteed a start. As you say, hes our talisman. Needs putting back in his number 10 role playing off Graham. Not sure what to make of these Rothwell comments, or Rothwell himself. Undoubtedly has plenty of flair and ability and I do like to see him play. But feel that in comparison to Palmer, the latter gets a bit of a hard time. That third attacking spot is very much up for grabs with at the moment Dack and Graham, Palmer has done enough to be given a start on Saturday with Rothwell and Armstrong benched. Do find Mowbrays comments a bit strangely timed though. Seemed to be a general consesus from Mowbray that Rothwell has quickly adapted to his requirements and Rothwell himself was speaking as if he felt he now understood what was needed. Maybe hes seen something this week that has pushed him back a tad as I didnt think that Rothwells performance was lacking in effort on Saturday. He did miss a sitter however.

Lets hope this free week can see us get some of our walking wounded back. Raya/Leutwiler Nyambe Lenihan Mulgrew Williams Evans Reed Bennett Dack Palmer Graham Subs: Leutwiler/Fisher, Rodwell, Smallwood, Bell, Armstrong, Brereton, Rothwell A lot of ifs and buts there. Downing if Lenihan isnt fit enough. Bell if Mulgrew isnt. Like to see Dack and Reed in their favoured roles and Palmer deserves another start

Even though this post wasnt aimed at me, what do you have to substantiate such a boastful yet empty statement? You say that @47er seems to "resent anyone coming on with a different view." From what he was saying, nothing could be further from the truth. He was encouraging you to give your view, which you stated that you prefer to withhold until it is proven correct. You clearly do care less because you have been quite vocal on the fact that Mowbray knows more than anyone on here, something not one person has suggested anything to the contrary about.

Suppose theres less of an urgency for Davenport to come into the first team imminently with the numbers we have in there at the moment. Never been particularly convinced by Nuttall to be honest, but certainly agree that he needs a loan, and should have been loaned out in the summer. How was Lyons? Thanks again.

Thanks for the updates Stuart. How was Davenport and how did Nyambe look on his return?

Both of you I feel are failing to judge the comments or the individual match in isolation though. I dont think anyone underestimates the job that Mowbray has done. Even Mercer, one of his most obvious critics, acknowledged the job hes done. I also think its very dangerous and counter-productive to seemingly try and create an environment (on a messageboard of all places!) whereby people cannot air their opinions, good or bad, as they go, game by game, team selection by team selection, sub by sub, etc. And i can not fathom why @unsall you refuse to say anything post game, we want more opinions. Mowbray is more qualified than both of us combined but he wont always be right, and I think opinions, whether they agree or disagree with him, should be equally encouraged. If you went onto any messageboard, for example, Man Citys, I bet people will air their opinions too, its part of what football is about, and not every one will match Guardiola's. I personally dont post during games, usually as I'm at the game, therefore I will tend to respond after games when the emotion has simmered slightly. I stand by the thoughts I had when I saw the team line up on Saturday, I wasnt in agreement with the Dack up front experiment continuing, and I still dont think it worked even now after the game. You could turn round to me and say, it worked because we got a point, but I dont think that selection earnt us the point. The 2 primary factors for me were a Reed wonder goal (a very successful Mowbray signing) and unbelievable team spirit on show yet again. (kudos to Mowbray again for that)

Mercer also has a pet nickname for a manager who essentially took us down. One poster isnt indicative of all these fans "who arent keen on him." Even Mercer acknowledged he has done a decent job so far. Backhanded praise but praise nonetheless. No one said "sack the manager hes useless" and such posts suggest you are on a wind up. Chaddy for all his flaws has stated more than once in the last week that he disagrees with this Dack as a false 9 experiment Mowbray has been trying. He also gives the team he would play every week. Hes clearly got his own set of opinions (sometimes hidden away admittedly) which is why he is on the messageboard. Its a game of opinions, whether as a qualified manager or a supporter. Where are all these "Tonys lost the plot" posts?

I know versatility is important but where we differ is that I seemingly place more importance on putting players in their natural positions than you. We had 8 midfielders starting. Some (Palmer, Rothwell) I felt are neither here nor there, they can play them roles only slightly less effectively than their natural central roles. Rodwell (and laterly Williams and Travis) at centre back and Bennett at full back I feel are the result of a slightly imbalanced transfer recruitment, we need more depth there. Dack up front is a failed experiment. My messages towards unsall were in regards to comments stating that he doesnt state his opinions pre match if they are in anyway opposing the selection of Mowbray. The messageboard is a platform for opinions regardless of if they are shared by Mowbray. Just like your (valid) complaint about Dack not being a number 9. Besides, he doesnt need a bodyguard.

You say we all have different opinions but you are refusing to allow yourself one.

Obviously he does! But why are you on a messageboard to discuss Rovers if thats your argument? Have your own opinion, whether that matches Mowbray or not. Coyle knows more than we do too.

Yeah I went. I dont think we were the better team all round, I felt we had the better of the second half before Rayas injury but felt a point was fair overall. Neither side played to their full capabilities. I dont agree with the manager on the issues I raised, notably the experiment of Dack up front. I also feel weve got too many players out of position at the moment. I think overall he is doing a good job though, obviously.

Firstly, out of curiosity did you attend the game yesterday? And which was the second stone wall penalty appeal? Quite simply, there were not only 2 players out of position. You seem to have muddied the waters between a players natural, favoured position and positions in which Mowbray may feels players can play/do a job in. I appreciate that versatility is important but you want to keep players in their correct positions where possible. Rodwell is a central midfielder, not a centre back. He played most of the game at centre back with a left back alongside him, until Rodwell himself had to go off and be replaced by a midfielder to play at centre back in Travis. Going into midfield, Palmer and Rothwell are not natural wingers, and Conway as you say was out of position. Dack was also out of position, and practically ineffective. I must say that the players showed the team spirit and work rate that weve come to expect from them in difficult circumstances yet again, in a game that I felt was sorely lacking in quality from both sides. I just think that we need to look to try and play players in their correct positions. That brings me on to imbalanced recruitment. I've no doubt that Mowbray has brought in some shrewd additions, but we are lacking in certain areas, and this becomes much more difficult to understand when we spend 7m on a striker who either makes cameos out wide, or doesnt feature at all. Something @Mercer pointed out earlier, and you subsequently laughed at. Mowbray has 3 centre backs, one of whom he clearly doesnt trust at this level. He also doesnt have any natural wide men, and also only one natural right back. I am a fan of tactical consistency and players knowing exactly what they are doing, something that was evident during the second half of last season. I have tended to think that when Mowbray has tinkered with the formation, whether it be 3 at the back or Dack as a false 9, neither experiment has worked.

regarding not playing a striker think that’s the only game he’s done so don’t think it will be a regular occurrence - did it for half an hour v Leeds and Swansea, therefore its clearly not a one off. he didn’t set up for a point - he didnt play any strikers! Going back to Coyle, he religiously played 4 4 2 every game - the reason for his ineptness was not playing the same formation every week. Klopp plays 4-3-3 every week, Sarri plays 4-3-3 every week, Guardiola plays 4-3-3 every week, in our league Wilder plays 3-5-2 every week, Lampard plays 4-3-3, there a lot to be gained from tactical consistency and a team of players knowing their exact role. Thats why Mowbray gets criticism for playing too many players out of position. Dack doesnt look at ease as a 9, nor does say Brereton wide or Bennett at right back. Or Smallwood in net! At times, one of Mowbrays historical un-doings has been him over complicating things tactically, for example changing formations, playing players out of position and over respecting opposition players. Hopefully the Dack as a number 9 experiment will be cast into the failed experiment section.

As much as I would love Reed permanently, Dack is a level above and is our main goalscorer.

Isnt that his first ever goal? Wouldnt believe a word that man says chaddy.

Turned into a very good point which I would have taken before the start. The main positive, it is undoubted that Mowbray has built a team with an incredible bond and team spirit which was really tested once Raya went off. Never seen an outfield player go in net live before and it was a bit terrifying but luckily they didnt muster any shots up in that time. As I will go on to in a minute, that team spirit may often get us points like yesterday against the odds. Thought West Brom were really poor in general, and lacking in ideas. Also the performance of Reed in midfield was a real plus, and his wonder goal was needed in the absence of strikers. I stand by the fact that the team selection was full of square pegs in round holes, and that Mowbrays team selection sprung up more questions than answers. Once Mulgrew went off, it was only him and Lenihan that we were missing yet we used 2 midfielders and a left back as centre backs. We all know that we needed a centre back in the summer and need to hope that Mulgrew and Lenihan can be patched up until January. I dont understand why the Dack up front experiment is being persisted with but it again didnt work. All the while our best player this season in Graham and our 7m striker Brereton get splinters on the bench. Palmer, Rothwell, Bennett and Conway also all out of position. And then Smallwood! I think that it was a very good point in the circumstances, and another occasion in recent times where I have come off a game feeling proud about the current team. That said, I feel that Mowbrays team selection yesterday and some of the tactical selections he keeps making (some of which are caused by imbalanced transfer recruitment) were very strange and I hope we dont continue to do them.

To clarify, is your opinion of Brereton still that we shouldnt use him wide? (or Dack central) Amidst your repeating of Mowbrays interviews, I am unclear as to whether that has changed in the last 3 days.