[Archived] Keith Andrews - Rovers Newest Signing

[jim mk2]

Dear old Keef was omitted from the starting line-up at the Reebok and Rovers went on to play some of their best football of the season.

The two events I suggest are not unconnected and hopefully the Ireland midfield maestro will not feature in the Rovers first team for some considerable time.

Now where's his mum to defend him when the lad needs her most .....................??

[thenodrog]

Now where's his mum to defend him when the lad needs her most .....................??

Probably doing the weeekly food shopping with his Dad jonno.

[AlanK]

Andrews is under rated. Just as Atkins was and just as Flitty was.

Every squad needs a player like him. A bit like Fletcher at Utd.

[Stuart]

Andrews is under rated. Just as Atkins was and just as Flitty was.

Every Championship squad needs a player like him. A bit like Carl Fletcher at Utd Plymouth.

Fixed it for you.

Sorry Alan but that comparison is like comparing Mokoena to Essien.

[Plastic Head]

Andrews is under rated. Just as Atkins was and just as Flitty was.

Every squad needs a player like him. A bit like Fletcher at Utd.

No no no no no.

Fletcher has 3 Championship medals and a Champions League medal by the age of 24.

Flitcroft would have got in most Premier League teams in his prime, limited though he was.

Atkins was a very ordinary player who worked out how to play his position and got a Premier League medal.

Andrews has spent his entire career until the age of nearly 30 bumming around the lower divisions and has learned nothing. He has an uncanny ability to find space....but only when we are defending.

I say again, what he does on the ball is sometimes OK, generally poor. But it is what he does when he hasn't got the ball, where he stands and the tardiness of his thinking, that singles him out as well below the standard of all but a very few other players in the Premier.

You could freeze the image of any game when we are defending and he would be a position where he cannot affect the game, he cannot play the position of central midfielder at the level he is at.

[Jan]

SNIP

You could freeze the image of any game when we are defending and he would be a position where he cannot affect the game, he cannot play the position of central midfielder at the level he is at.

And that, in a sentence, is why he is never injured. There is no need for him to be hassled, or tackled, or stopped, because he is very, very rarely in a position to need stopping.

[thenodrog]

Andrews is under rated. Just as Atkins was and just as Flitty was.

Every squad needs a player like him. A bit like Fletcher at Utd.

Alan I just checked and you joined here 8 years ago........ and with one small post you've just destroyed any bit of credibility that you had. As I have asked some members before on occasion ...... does your seat actually face the pitch?

[Bobby G]

I dont rate Fletcher that highly but to compare Andrews with him is a joke.

[AlanK]

Hang on a minute folks. I was not saying Andrews was of the same standard as Fletcher. He is a long way off. What I was saying is that he is the same type of player and that every squad needs that type of player.

Thanks for the over reaction anyway. Gave me a giggle.

Gordon, thanks for checking me out, I do hope I have some credit left. Its vital for my existence.

[Wing Wizard Windy Miller]

Feck all chance of Fulham taking Andrews on tonight' s showing

[Amo]

I'm not going to accuse Andrews' presence alone as systematic of our poor results, but there's no doubting there's a certain malaise everytime he starts a game.

[Plastic Head]

I'm not going to accuse Andrews' presence alone as systematic of our poor results, but there's no doubting there's a certain malaise everytime he starts a game.

Malaise (pronounced /məˈleɪz/, mal-aze) is a feeling of general discomfort or uneasiness, an "out of sorts" feeling, often the first indication of an infection or other disease. Malaise is often defined in medicinal research as a "general feeling of being unwell".

Well I feel unwell when I see him now....

[patrickvalery]

An obvious and unimaginative scapegoat for tonight.

He's crap, but he alone was not the reason for tonights defeat.

[1864roverite]

An obvious and unimaginative scapegoat for tonight.

He's crap, but he alone was not the reason for tonights defeat.

No BUT his efforts contributed SIGNIFICANTLY

[grizfoot]

I do believe it was Andrews who played the through ball towards Di Santo who should have scored early on in the game. Also it was Andrews who played the ball to Benni who managed somehow to slice the ball when he really should have scored. He creates the two best chances of the game yet it's all his fault we lost and not the strikers for falling to convert their chances.

Although I'm not sure what sort of defending Keith was doing for the third goal but he should have done better to prevent the goal, was probably already to late at the point anyway.

[jw_]

There is no way that Andrews should be the scapegoat every time we get beat.He played as well as most in the team and if you don't believe that watch a replay of the game.Why is Robbo not the culprit for abysmal sub standard goalkeeping or Di Santo for missing a golden chance from close range then later heading for goal from an acute angle with Roberts free in the box.What about the close range miss by Chimbonda or Benni's wayward attempt and what aboout the poor unimaginative substitute decision by the stand in manager.I could go on with a lot of poor ball passing skills by several players but the point is that they ALL contributed to a defeat that in the first half looked extremely unlikely.Goals win games and lack of goals which should have been taken plus all the above contribute to a defeat so picking out one player to blame for every defeat is ridiculous and there again why not blame the manager for picking him.

Before anyone says anything I am not a fan of Andrews but I just think he's no worse than a few others in the team, who for some reason put in sub standard games with little criticism by comparison.

[tcj_jones]

I do believe it was Andrews who played the through ball towards Di Santo who should have scored early on in the game. Also it was Andrews who played the ball to Benni who managed somehow to slice the ball when he really should have scored. He creates the two best chances of the game yet it's all his fault we lost and not the strikers for falling to convert their chances.

Although I'm not sure what sort of defending Keith was doing for the third goal but he should have done better to prevent the goal, was probably already to late at the point anyway.

Good post. The through ball was actually real quality. He was by no means our worst player, but he as good as disappeared in the second half (although, so did the rest of the team).

It's funny, at the end of the first half - as soon as the whistle blew - the guys sat behind immediately laid into Andrews. Maybe some do have a point about there being bias toward Andrews before a kick has been made.

Don't get me wrong, I still think that he is one of the weakest players in the Premier League and that, while his first half performance was pretty good, these are far too much of a rarity. But he doesn't really deserve the criticism he's getting.

Oh, and fair play for being put on the right and doing a decent job.

[den]

There is no way that Andrews should be the scapegoat every time we get beat.He played as well as most in the team and if you don't believe that watch a replay of the game.

There were other poor performances to be sure. Andrews and Grella play in the most important positions in the team though and while a winger might have an off day, he can get away with it. In the second half Fulham walked right through the middle of us. Andrews went missing AGAIN. It happens every time we play away from home and is a major reason why the lads at the back come under so much pressure.

[Exiled in Toronto]

There were other poor performances to be sure. Andrews and Grella play in the most important positions in the team though and while a winger might have an off day, he can get away with it. In the second half Fulham walked right through the middle of us. Andrews went missing AGAIN. It happens every time we play away from home and is a major reason why the lads at the back come under so much pressure.

Good point, apart from the minor detail that Andrews played right side midfield the entire game!

[den]

Good point, apart from the minor detail that Andrews played right side midfield the entire game!

He didn't play as an out and out winger though, nor did he play as an attacking midfielder - Dunn did that. His role at Fulham was to keep things tight in midfield, as was Grella's. Fulham walked through our midfield at will in the second half, just as pretty much all other teams have done when those two have played.

Don't you agree?

[Exiled in Toronto]

He didn't play as an out and out winger though, nor did he play as an attacking midfielder - Dunn did that. His role at Fulham was to keep things tight in midfield, as was Grella's. Fulham walked through our midfield at will in the second half, just as pretty much all other teams have done when those two have played.

Don't you agree?

He was right side midfield, not touchline hugging but who is these days. Policing the central area of the pitch was not his primary role. We were 4-4-2, not 4-3-1-2. He did some good stuff out there first half.

Dunn however, was central, played the most abysmal straight out of play passes of the night, tackled no-one, ran down numerous blind alleys, created nowt and went missing after 30 mins.

Grella should have been subbed after 60 mins for understandable fitness reasons, but 1st half he was excellent.

Don't you agree?

[den]

He was right side midfield, not touchline hugging but who is these days. Policing the central area of the pitch was not his primary role. We were 4-4-2, not 4-3-1-2. He did some good stuff out there first half.

Dunn however, was central, played the most abysmal straight out of play passes of the night, tackled no-one, ran down numerous blind alleys, created nowt and went missing after 30 mins.

Grella should have been subbed after 60 mins for understandable fitness reasons, but 1st half he was excellent.

Don't you agree?

OK, if you want.

[T4E]

An obvious and unimaginative scapegoat for tonight.

He's crap, but he alone was not the reason for tonights defeat.

You know a player is crap when this is the best someone can do to defend him.

[Roaming Rover]

You know a player is crap when this is the best someone can do to defend him.

To be fair T4E, I don't see that as defending Keith, PV is just pointing out that others on the pitch had something to do with the defeat. If that's what you class as defending someone, I hope to God your not a lawyer

[Stuart]

Come off it, Andrews made some great balls and did some good defensive work, first half he was as good as anybody for us.

One time he got the ball and people were having a go at him straight away almost hoping he messed up, he then played a world class ball to Di Santo.

Poor bloke can win with some people. He was by no means great but nowhere near as bad as you want him to be.

Apologies TCO but I've moved this over from the match thread as my response seems more appropriate here.

I wasn't intending to post so soon after the match today because I tend to upset people - and for that reason I must point out that of course I don't hold him soley responsible for today's result - but I have to say that Andrews was/is dire.

I've decided that the reason makes these superb through-balls is nothing to do with skill but the law of averages. He seems to have this idea about dinking balls foward or hitting it first time to find an attacker but 9 times out of 10 he lands it nowhere near a team mate or even the danger area. Every so often the ball finds an attacker running through and it looks like he's made an inspired pass.

It'll be interesting to see our results without him if he is injured for any length of time.