[Archived] West Ham United 2-1 Our beloved rovers

[AggyBlue]

I hope that in January the club bring in either that Norwegian fella who was linked in summer (Pedersen’s mate) or David Dunn.

I don't think there's any space left in the treatment room for Dunny

[pleasure]

Lack of a creditable opposition. They can basically say what they want and do as they want because they dominate football coverage in this country. When you hear what they charge the BBC and other stations just to show clips from games they cover you realise the ridiculous situation that has been allowed to develop in this country. We need a more level playing field and more competition then we might just get a better, less biased coverage.

very good points.

SKY were pioneers of football broadcasting and revolutionary. the camera work and commentary are still the best around (alan parry and marwood aside).

the main problem is with the pre match build up /guests and discussion. it is being dumbed- down. you see the same guests and interviewees week in and wk out.

i think the fact that they are getting more and more subscribers, has led to complacency and an inferior product.

[Tris]

Not too many Rovers fans made the trip today, and were pretty quiet I hear.

looked about only 150ish on the telly.

I reckon between 500 and 600 away fans - TV must have been deceptive.

That said, there seemed to be very few regulars and a lot of faces I didn't recognise - unlike at (eg) Boro when we were also low on numbers but I recognised far more people.

Consequently, West Ham was quiet cos there weren't many singing (and the usual suspects were being picked off one by one by the old bill for singing £2 an hour).

[pleasure]

Consequently, West Ham was quiet cos there weren't many singing (and the usual suspects were being picked off one by one by the old bill for singing £2 an hour).

even allowing for the fact that they've no jobs/ responsibilities, i'd like to think they'd learn!

Edited October 30, 2006 by pleasure

[Fife Rover]

Lack of a creditable opposition. They can basically say what they want and do as they want because they dominate football coverage in this country. When you hear what they charge the BBC and other stations just to show clips from games they cover you realise the ridiculous situation that has been allowed to develop in this country. We need a more level playing field and more competition then we might just get a better, less biased coverage.

If as you say Sky do get some serious competition we might get a reduction in our monthly contributions, but we will never get any of the media providers to stop their sickening bias towards the "big clubs". Viewing figures and all that!

[Presty On Tour]

If as you say Sky do get some serious competition we might get a reduction in our monthly contributions, but we will never get any of the media providers to stop their sickening bias towards the "big clubs". Viewing figures and all that!

agree with that post.

the other day sky had a bullet in about the rovers team news and nonda was spelt nona!!!!

[Jan]

even allowing for the fact that they've no jobs/ responsibilities, i'd like to think they'd learn!

They won't. They were VERY embarrassing!!! The chant of "you only pick on away fans" was a bit wide of the mark, given they've banned 2 of their own for persistent standing. Those who were standing in the home end will, I suspect, be the recipients of nasty letters quite soon.

I was sitting in front of Tugay's mates and some WAG type girls, who, when told to "get your t*ts out for the lads" responded with "get your a*se out for the gays!" Which is a witty retort to such a bunch of neanderthals.

[pleasure]

I was sitting in front of Tugay's mates and some WAG type girls, who, when told to "get your t*ts out for the lads" responded with "get your a*se out for the gays!" Which is a witty retort to such a bunch of neanderthals.

good on the WAGS!

these idiots are an embarrasment. it's happening at every away game now. i'm expecting more of the same at villa on sunday.

[OJRovers]

very good points.

SKY were pioneers of football broadcasting and revolutionary. the camera work and commentary are still the best around (alan parry and marwood aside).

the main problem is with the pre match build up /guests and discussion. it is being dumbed- down. you see the same guests and interviewees week in and wk out.

i think the fact that they are getting more and more subscribers, has led to complacency and an inferior product.

The Sky coverage of Rovers is rubbish, they just don't know anything about our team any more:

- It was suggested Tugay should take penaties.

- They didn't mention Bentley's goalscoring/ good form at all.

- They said that Benny and Roberts were a new partnership - what happend to the start of the season??

I'd rather watch the fanzone commentary

Edited October 30, 2006 by OJRovers

[Ninjathunder]

The Sky coverage of Rovers is rubbish, they just don't know anything about our team any more:

- It was suggested Tugay should take penaties.

Hardly a crime, given our recent attempts from the spot.

Edited October 30, 2006 by Tooting Rover

[Tris]

I don't agree with the flak being dished out to Gray - as I didn't agree with those who were slagging off McEveley in midweek.

The fact is that neither of them are Brett Emerton - and his remarkable energy which has provided such a valuable outlet for the ball from the back 4 when he's in it - is sorely missed. It's so valuable that Lucas Neill has played on the "wrong" side all season so far.

There are hardly any players who could replicate Emerton's new found role which can turn defence into attack with a few seconds of blistering pace - the player who replaces him in the back 4 has to defend primarily, and neither Gray nor McEveley has made a bad job of it.

[John]

The reason Gray came off was because he clearly was not (match) fit.

[colin]

The football media all week have been in a state of panic over the serious state of affairs on the pitch at West Ham.......

Mmm.... a characteristic that seems to have affected The Times, The Daily Telegraph and The Guardian all of which reported on a game that West Ham played, with scant attention to the opposition. In fact The Daily Telegraphs' coverage was so lacking in detail of anything Rovers' contributed that West Ham may as well have been playing against its own reserves.

Still, I'd rather not lose eight games on the run for that kind of coverage. Only five more to go.........

[Paul Mellelieu]

If we lsot eight on the bounce noone on Fleet St would be the least bit interested. However a club like WH, who have won nothing and done nothing for secades are lauded as a great club with pedigree.

[thenodrog]

Agreed about the 4-5 bit theno, but who would you suggest for the 1? The only way I could see it working is to drop Benni back to be an attacking mid, but to be convinced that would work.

We really need to protect our only two forwards now (until Nonda returns) so playing just one is the best way to do that. Benni played that at Porto I think, and I'm sure that Jeffers could make a decent fist of it too. They are strikers not midfielders so pick one / bench one is the safest option from an injury point of view. The guy behind at attacking mid would be Bentley. Emo right wing, Oijer behind him with an olive branch shared by Todd and Sparky. Rest of the team virtually picks itself.

[92er]

We really need to protect our only two forwards now (until Nonda returns) so playing just one is the best way to do that. Benni played that at Porto I think, and I'm sure that Jeffers could make a decent fist of it too. They are strikers not midfielders so pick one / bench one is the safest option from an injury point of view. The guy behind at attacking mid would be Bentley. Emo right wing, Oijer behind him with an olive branch shared by Todd and Sparky. Rest of the team virtually picks itself.

If you wanted that set-up, you could have Henchoz instead of Todd.

[AggyBlue]

We really need to protect our only two forwards now (until Nonda returns) so playing just one is the best way to do that.

Utter crap.

Let's protect them both and play none

[G Somerset Rover]

Bit worrying when were talking of protecting Franny Jeffers Lets just hope Nonda gets fit ASAP.

[joey_big_nose]

We really need to protect our only two forwards now (until Nonda returns) so playing just one is the best way to do that. Benni played that at Porto I think, and I'm sure that Jeffers could make a decent fist of it too. They are strikers not midfielders so pick one / bench one is the safest option from an injury point of view. The guy behind at attacking mid would be Bentley. Emo right wing, Oijer behind him with an olive branch shared by Todd and Sparky. Rest of the team virtually picks itself.

If we were going to play 451 I would go for:

                  McCarthy

      Peter                      Bentley
             Savage  Gallagher
                      Axe

    Niell     Zurab    Ooijer  Emerton
                  
                      Freidal

It gives Tugay a rest for the weekend and I think it would ultimately be quite attacking with gally, Peter (MGP if you like, but I think Sergio should keep his place), Savage and Bentley all breaking from midfield. Gally would suit this formation well too with his ability to play the through ball. At home I think it would be extremely difficult for us to pick up anything less than a point with that.

Edited October 31, 2006 by joey_big_nose

[mjs]

very good points.

SKY were pioneers of football broadcasting and revolutionary. the camera work and commentary are still the best around (alan parry and marwood aside).

the main problem is with the pre match build up /guests and discussion. it is being dumbed- down. you see the same guests and interviewees week in and wk out.

i think the fact that they are getting more and more subscribers, has led to complacency and an inferior product.

I can't remember the last time I actually bothered to watch the pre and post match bull offered by Sky. Same old crap week in and week out. And as for Jamie Redknapp, he is as boring as Shearer, Townsend and the rest of the BBC and ITV numpties. What does they offer us over and above what we already know - nothing. Sky could save themselves and us a fortune if they just cut it out completely.

[Fife Rover]

I can't remember the last time I actually bothered to watch the pre and post match bull offered by Sky. Same old crap week in and week out. And as for Jamie Redknapp, he is as boring as Shearer, Townsend and the rest of the BBC and ITV numpties. What does they offer us over and above what we already know - nothing. Sky could save themselves and us a fortune if they just cut it out completely.

I think the pre and post match analysis is aimed not at the knowledgeable football supporter but is intended for the benefit of the huge number of Sky subscribers that are not regular attenders (aka couch potatoes by some people)

[Steve]

They also mentioned every time Rovers crossed the ball that we missed Jason Roberts aerial ability, also mentioned a few times that we use Roberts as a target man usually???

[thenodrog]

If you wanted that set-up, you could have Henchoz instead of Todd.

You could and hughes prob would but Todd is a better defender ino.

Utter crap.

Let's protect them both and play none

Thanks for that Aggy. We need more deep thinkers like you on here.