vintageadidas Posted December 16, 2008 Posted December 16, 2008 I think Ince was confused when Dunn said "boss i will lead from the front! This is my team and i will play till i bleed" Hence, Ince played him upfront...........it was like the end of the Souness era 17 games in. Atleast we had some super times under Souness. I only enjoyed Everton Away this season.
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
sambo Posted December 16, 2008 Posted December 16, 2008 Rumours are Pedersen and MAYBE Santa didn't go the Xmas party because they didn't want to celebrate that performance at Wigan - if true good professionalism although I think it should have been cancelled. I don't know what to predict, but I have a sneaky feeling on: Rovers 1 - 0 Stoke 18,234 Roque Santa Cruz
vintageadidas Posted December 16, 2008 Posted December 16, 2008 Rumours are Pedersen and MAYBE Santa didn't go the Xmas party because they didn't want to celebrate that performance at Wigan - if true good professionalism although I think it should have been cancelled. I don't know what to predict, but I have a sneaky feeling on: Rovers 1 - 0 Stoke 18,234 Roque Santa Cruz 12,500 rovers fans?????
sambo Posted December 16, 2008 Posted December 16, 2008 12,500 rovers fans????? Stoke bringing 4000 Maybe a few more though now, although I was thinking about the attendance earlier today before the Ince news, could bulk out more now. Maybe 20k?
Mc Love Posted December 16, 2008 Posted December 16, 2008 I hope there is a good crowd for this, wish i could be there!
RevidgeBlue Posted December 16, 2008 Posted December 16, 2008 I don't see what's so strange to think that we shouldn't be going down with the players we've got. The new man may not produce 7th place form, My take on that is that the players aren't that good otherwise they wouldn't be down in 19th with nearly half the season gone. Regardless of who the manager is/was.
Tyrone Shoelaces Posted December 16, 2008 Posted December 16, 2008 My take on that is that the players aren't that good otherwise they wouldn't be down in 19th with nearly half the season gone. Regardless of who the manager is/was. You're dead right the players aren't that good but Ince and co were poison for us . Player wise there's about 8 teams who's players either aren't any better or worse than ours. Thing is they all have manages who know the score, let's hope we have one for Saturday.
tony gale's mic Posted December 16, 2008 Posted December 16, 2008 My take on that is that the players aren't that good otherwise they wouldn't be down in 19th with nearly half the season gone. Regardless of who the manager is/was. ...or they wouldn't be 7th with all of last season gone. It's the same defence that played last season but last season they had the 7th best defence in the League, this season theyre suddenly the worst defence in the league. I'm not saying the players are not at fault at all, some of them need to take a long hard look at themselves and I'm sure we don't have the 7th best group of players in the country. But then Hull don't have the 6th best group of players in the country either. The number 1 biggest factor here is Paul Ince. By far.
philipl Posted December 16, 2008 Posted December 16, 2008 How many times did we play a settled defensive unit with a left back at left back, a right back at right back and two central defenders during Paul Ince's time at Ewood? Let me paraphrase, did we ever have a defensive unit when Paul Ince was manager? Getting the players to play as a unit is going to be extremely difficult but thankfully, we are playing just about the most basic team in the League on Saturday so getting the basics right should get us through. Therefore it has got to be 4-4-2 with not a player out of position (except at right-side midfield where we have nobody) and all players told to win their individual battles with emphasis on cohesive movement and handling transition from attack into defense from the front on the training field between now and Saturday. Do that and we have a decent chance.
Paul Mellelieu Posted December 16, 2008 Posted December 16, 2008 How many times did we play a settled defensive unit with a left back at left back, a right back at right back and two central defenders during Paul Ince's time at Ewood? Let me paraphrase, did we ever have a defensive unit when Paul Ince was manager? Getting the players to play as a unit is going to be extremely difficult but thankfully, we are playing just about the most basic team in the League on Saturday so getting the basics right should get us through. Therefore it has got to be 4-4-2 with not a player out of position (except at right-side midfield where we have nobody) and all players told to win their individual battles with emphasis on cohesive movement and handling transition from attack into defense from the front on the training field between now and Saturday. Do that and we have a decent chance. To be fair Ince struggled to find two central midfielders to play hence his use of Warnock.
tony gale's mic Posted December 16, 2008 Posted December 16, 2008 To be fair Ince struggled to find two central midfielders to play hence his use of Warnock. One of them could and should have been Johann Vogel.
Paul Mellelieu Posted December 16, 2008 Posted December 16, 2008 One of them could and should have been Johann Vogel. OK. And who else?
tony gale's mic Posted December 16, 2008 Posted December 16, 2008 OK. And who else? Should've started with Tugay then brought on Mokoena/Andrews when his legs got tired depending on the situation (whether we were winning or losing). Still pretty mince but at least they would've had fresh legs. We needed Warnock at LB though with our defence being so terrible.
Paul Mellelieu Posted December 16, 2008 Posted December 16, 2008 Should've started with Tugay then brought on Mokoena/Andrews when his legs got tired depending on the situation (whether we were winning or losing). Still pretty mince but at least they would've had fresh legs. We needed Warnock at LB though with our defence being so terrible. Vogel and Tugay together? They play in the same position. And we say what too many games does to the old man at Wigan.
tony gale's mic Posted December 16, 2008 Posted December 16, 2008 Vogel and Tugay together? They play in the same position. And we say what too many games does to the old man at Wigan. Well theyre meant to play in the same position given theyre centre mid, but I assume you mean the same role? I agree its a hindrance but I'd say having proven quality in there as opposed to Mokoena and Andrews should have more than made up for it. And if Tugay tired, we couldve rested him for a game or two. But there was no need to give Andrews that many games, especially with Mokoena.
joey_big_nose Posted December 17, 2008 Posted December 17, 2008 Well theyre meant to play in the same position given theyre centre mid, but I assume you mean the same role? I agree its a hindrance but I'd say having proven quality in there as opposed to Mokoena and Andrews should have more than made up for it. And if Tugay tired, we couldve rested him for a game or two. But there was no need to give Andrews that many games, especially with Mokoena. I think it is a bit of a stretch to say Vogel would definately have been decent. He has a lot of pedigree, but there must have been something seriously amiss for him not to make the squad for that long, no matter how much of a numpty Ince is.
tony gale's mic Posted December 17, 2008 Posted December 17, 2008 I think it is a bit of a stretch to say Vogel would definately have been decent. He has a lot of pedigree, but there must have been something seriously amiss for him not to make the squad for that long, no matter how much of a numpty Ince is. I don't know, we're talking about a man who signed Fowler. NOTHING was past him. At the end of the day whatever the reason was, since he wasnt injured Ince should have at least given him a go a lot sooner when it was obvious our CM was such an issue.
RevidgeBlue Posted December 17, 2008 Posted December 17, 2008 If there's one area in which events conspired against Ince, it was definitely long term injuries to our THREE first choice central midfielders Dunn, Grella and Reid. The fall backs (Mokoena, Tugay, Vogel and Andrews) just aren't good enough and if any two out of the first three had been fit I don't think we'd have seen a lot of the second bunch at all. If the new man can as a minimum have Dunn and Grella to call upon, that looks a far different proposition altogether.
AussieinUk Posted December 17, 2008 Posted December 17, 2008 If there's one area in which events conspired against Ince, it was definitely long term injuries to our THREE first choice central midfielders Dunn, Grella and Reid. The fall backs (Mokoena, Tugay, Vogel and Andrews) just aren't good enough and if any two out of the first three had been fit I don't think we'd have seen a lot of the second bunch at all. If the new man can as a minimum have Dunn and Grella to call upon, that looks a far different proposition altogether. Have to agree with you Rev. To have 2/3 that you have mentioned 'on call' will be tough, considering their injury record. Not going to predict a result on this game yet, as there is still too many variables to consider before match day
dingles staying down 4ever Posted December 17, 2008 Posted December 17, 2008 normally after a manager has been sacked, I'd back a team to get a result. Unfortunately we've seemed to appoint Tweedle dumb and Even Tweddle Dumber, and who exactly? as our temporary management team. Unless we make a permanent appointment quickly all I see is more DOOM, DOOM and more DOOM!
Paul Mellelieu Posted December 17, 2008 Posted December 17, 2008 Well theyre meant to play in the same position given theyre centre mid, but I assume you mean the same role? I agree its a hindrance but I'd say having proven quality in there as opposed to Mokoena and Andrews should have more than made up for it. And if Tugay tired, we couldve rested him for a game or two. But there was no need to give Andrews that many games, especially with Mokoena. Position? Role? We both know what we're talking about. For most part of the season Ince didn't have anything like a decent midfield pair, and this as much as anything else was the key weakness in the team.
broadsword Posted December 17, 2008 Posted December 17, 2008 If there's one area in which events conspired against Ince, it was definitely long term injuries to our THREE first choice central midfielders Dunn, Grella and Reid. Were events conspiring against him, or was it a weakness in the training methods employed? We've had so many injuries with less than half the season gone I'm inclined to think it's more than just bad luck.
Bobby G Posted December 17, 2008 Posted December 17, 2008 So many injuries? I dont buy that. Our back 4 has been fit all season long, and so have the majority of our midfield and forward players; other than Grella, Dunn and Reid who we all know isnt half the player he was before his last injury. Grella was just settling in, which means Dunn was possibly the only guaranteed regular who has been missing, and I dont think he would carry the team on his own, and make that much of a huge difference. If Roque had been injured all season we could argue oh we missed his goals, but as we see his goals have been missing anyway this season!
philipl Posted December 17, 2008 Posted December 17, 2008 Vogel is undoubtedly one of our front line midfielders. Ince not playing him was suicide. Given the problems on the left, perhaps more effort might have been made with resident loon Sergio Peters. I doubt we will get to see what line-up Mathias/Knox would have come up with as I will be very surprised if AN Other isn't running the show by Saturday.
CrazyIvan Posted December 17, 2008 Posted December 17, 2008 I doubt we will get to see what line-up Mathias/Knox would have come up with as I will be very surprised if AN Other isn't running the show by Saturday. I hope we don't either.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.