Sadly

[Saxo1man41]

The voices of brfcc and telegraph site were right, we are unconvincing. Shrewsbury winning late on a real blow as well.

[Saxo1man41]

Don't blame you all for disappearing. Its a real reality check wake up call, and a full week until the next game. A long time to feel on a downer..

[AucklandRover]

Just woke up to the bad news. Very disappointing.
It sounds as if we never got going.
No - the "voices" you mention only ever focus on the negatives.
As I said to you the other day, your view that we should stroll to victory in every match is just not realistic.
I am more despondent at the fact that our level of performance dropped so much, and that ISN'T going to be down just to Conway replacing Payne - as, I have no doubt, the Mowbray-haters will be claiming on others sites.
Of the three new players, Payne was the least impressive against Walsall, and Conway certainly isn't an awful player.
These defeats are a matter of collective responsibility - manager AND players.

[Saxo1man41]

Its not just Conway as a player aucks. Its what his presence represents. The approach to the game. We play in a cautious manner when he is on the team sheet and the opposition know it. It hands them the initiative to come at us, knowing we are on the back foot..

I also noted the opener was from a poorly defended set piece again, so problem clearly not solved there.

[AucklandRover]

I doubt very much that an opposition team is going to play differently because they see ONE change in Rovers' line-up.
I've often said to you, over the years, not to try to draw too many conclusions from one game - whether it be a good victory or a poor defeat.
I still have no clear idea why things can change so much from one game to another, and I don't mean just Rovers; I'm also referring to games I've played in, teams I've managed, and football in general.
This is why I always come back to rejecting the idea that everything is down to the manager. I've seen situations where there are NO changes of any kind, but a team still performs badly, compared to the week before.
Fans forget that a football match is a dynamic process. There are lots of bodies involved, lots of movement, and lots of unforeseen elements (like the referee, the performance of the opposition and the bounce of the ball). This is is not clockwork. There is even an element of chaos theory involved.
We make predictions on form and what has gone before, but we don't factor in all the unpredictable elements.
The media have led...and we have followed: if a team plays badly (or even it plays well, but still loses), it is the manager's fault. This is self-evident nonsense to me, but there you go.
Incidentally, I am not saying a manager doesn't bear the ultimate responsibility. A boss has to carry the can in the long run. It's just that trying to pin everything on a single factor defies logic. If Mowbray plays Conway instead of Payne, does that excuse the other ten players for under-performing? You'll never convince me on this one.

[In Dyche We Trust]

Sadly - Plymouth won today

[Saxo1man41]

Sadly - Plymouth won today

This will be my final reply to you, to let u know I'm gonna do all you need to do with my postings, ignore them.

10 without a win, chin chin, bye bye..

[Despair]

We didn't perform, we didn't deserve, therefore we didn't collect any point/s - simples.
Now we dust off ourselves off and move on. What's so complicated about it?

When I start to consider and take any notice or credence from the majority that post on the LT I'll need sectioning.

[AucklandRover]

We didn't perform, we didn't deserve, therefore we didn't collect any point/s - simples.
Now we dust off ourselves off and move on. What's so complicated about it?

When I start to consider and take any notice or credence from the majority that post on the LT I'll need sectioning.

What I don't quite understand, Despair, is why so many people had such a violent reaction to Mowbray's appointment in the first place.
I thought he was a bit of a safety-first choice, but given the randomness of some of the previous selections, that was understandable.
As it turns out, he has been better than I expected.
There seem to be some posters on the Telegraph who WANT him to fail - because failure will prove them correct. THAT I will never find acceptable.

[Saxo1man41]

What I don't quite understand, Despair, is why so many people had such a violent reaction to Mowbray's appointment in the first place.
I thought he was a bit of a safety-first choice, but given the randomness of some of the previous selections, that was understandable.
As it turns out, he has been better than I expected.
There seem to be some posters on the Telegraph who WANT him to fail - because failure will prove them correct. THAT I will never find acceptable.

I have a very basic view on football aucks. Players perform and its their shirt to lose. There should have been no changes to the team today..

Mowbray has come out and said he feels at fault today because he didn't make ENOUGH changes.

I can't agree with that at all, and fear history is about to repeat itself, whereby another of his teams fall away second half of the season, as has been the case under him at middlesboro and Coventry.