[Archived] Stoke City Preview 18th April

[Eddie]

Agreed. He's decent in the air and all he had to do was win headers against their frontline for most of that game. He did it well and it was encouraging to see him handle it as well as he did, but it wasn't as if he had Henry in his back pocket or anything like that. In the end he only missed one header that I can think of, but that was lead to the goal.

[JAL]

Agreed. He's decent in the air and all he had to do was win headers against their frontline for most of that game. He did it well and it was encouraging to see him handle it as well as he did, but it wasn't as if he had Henry in his back pocket or anything like that. In the end he only missed one header that I can think of, but that was lead to the goal.

An important missed header Eddie that led to us conceding a goal but others think he was wonderful.

Interesting how people are influenced or misled by the TV and the so called pundits.

[den]

Nelsen was superb yesterday. As were all the back four.

[gumboots]

An important missed header Eddie that led to us conceding a goal but others think he was wonderful.

Interesting how people are influenced or misled by the TV and the so called pundits.

Not influenced by anything but the evidence of my own eyes. Nelsen played very well yesterday. What was unfortunate is that all the mistakes we made came in a few second spell that led to the goal. Givet had played well but let himself be beaten for the goal. robinson had saved the only other shot that came at him all game but fluffed that one. The goal was a catalogue of mistakes with everyone who could have prevented it making their mistake in sequence.

[Eddie]

...apart from the crappy goal that Givet in particular was at fault for you mean

An important missed header Eddie that led to us conceding a goal but others think he was wonderful.

Interesting how people are influenced or misled by the TV and the so called pundits.

I live in France, haven't read a match report, haven't seen match of the day. I said similar things in the chat as the match was going on and as I was seeing it happen. The back four played well, but they let in a goal they should have prevented. You can't put that down as "superb" or "wonderful". It's not as if they withstood a barrage from Arsenal or United, they dealt reasonably well with a fairly poor Stoke performance. I don't see anyone on here calling for us to snap up Stoke's back four after they kept us out, so why do our players deserve such special praise for limiting them to only one goal?

[JAL]

Nelsen was superb yesterday. As were all the back four.

Cheers den, makes me feel a whole lot better with that.

...apart from the crappy goal that Givet in particular was at fault for you mean

I live in France, haven't read a match report, haven't seen match of the day. I said similar things in the chat as the match was going on and as I was seeing it happen. The back four played well, but they let in a goal they should have prevented. You can't put that down as "superb" or "wonderful". It's not as if they withstood a barrage from Arsenal or United, they dealt reasonably well with a fairly poor Stoke performance. I don't see anyone on here calling for us to snap up Stoke's back four after they kept us out, so why do our players deserve such special praise for limiting them to only one goal?

Eddie they have Beattie, Fuller, Etherington and Lawrence as their attack, all ex-champonship players, not exactly world beaters are they, problem with assessing is you have to know and understand the level of the opposition to give a more accurate as possible account. Sadly a few on here dont know how

limited these players are.

[den]

I live in France, haven't read a match report, haven't seen match of the day. I said similar things in the chat as the match was going on and as I was seeing it happen. The back four played well, but they let in a goal they should have prevented. You can't put that down as "superb" or "wonderful". It's not as if they withstood a barrage from Arsenal or United, they dealt reasonably well with a fairly poor Stoke performance. I don't see anyone on here calling for us to snap up Stoke's back four after they kept us out, so why do our players deserve such special praise for limiting them to only one goal?

Don't talk crap Eddie. "it was only Stoke" - for goodness sake. It "only used to be Wimbledon" too, but the name of the club makes no difference. Stoke make it very difficult for defenders. The back four have to stand up and be counted and they have to take a physical battering - which they did manfully. Many a team haven't stood up to that battering this season, but our lads did. Oh and by the way, it wasn't a poor Stoke performance, it was a typical Stoke performance. The same kind of performance that has seen off better teams than us.

[Eddie]

Believe that if it makes you feel better.

[den]

Believe that if it makes you feel better.

Great point Eddie.

[TimmyJimmy]

Just read some of the comments stating we need a total clear out at the end of the season. Nonsense. We have some very good players, but no matter how good you are you can't play without the ball. The defense is very solid and I'm happy with it and the cover for the positions, so no changes required there IMO. The strikers are top quality when they are doing what they are known for eg Bennys a positional box player who has unstoppable runs but what use is that without the ball. He's not going to beat many from outside the box is he, and outside the box with back to goal staring up into the clouds for the ball, forget it. Rocky, top quality but we can't get him on the pitch. Jason, a powerhouse who can hold anyone off in the box but again he needs balls played in to his runs. The attack is OK for me so no changes. The midfield as everyone knows and has been saying since before last season is dire. They are the unit who are intended to take possession from the back four and make ground and then look and make for searching passes. Its clear to all they cannot do that (with the exception of Grella IMO). If you don't have a midfield who are good on the ball then you need a Sutton style Velcro man (as my mate called him). Throw anything at him at any height or speed and it stuck. That bought time for the midfield donkeys to catch up and support the attack. We don't have a Chris Sutton so that's not an option either is it. For the last two years managers have known that to come to Ewood and beat the Rovers all you had to do was press the midfield constantly, clatter them when you can, give them no time and they will eventually go for the long stuff - virtually taking the quality of the strikers away because they get no service. Only Shearer could thrive without a midfield and we don't have one of him either. I agree with you all - we must spend big on the midfield, we just must. For the record I think we have strength in the board room too. JW is a top man who knows what he's doing and is passionate about us, can't ask for more. He cannot get blood out of a stone though and at the moment that's where our finances are - buried under stones. Incidently if we have such a poor midfield pairing why don't we follow the Alf Ramsey plan for the last few games ie pull the wingers in to join the other two and form a block through the centre circle. Our 'wingers' really aren't capable of playing on the wing, they just don't have the skills of a Duffer or a Wilcox or a Ripley (even a Brotherston) in other words they may be midfielders but they aren't wingers so don't put them out there where they don't contribute anything. I'd be stunned if any of the above caused anyone on the board much grief, it's all pretty much common sense that has been said umpteen times already. But my point is don't go running round thinking EVERTYTHING has to be changed because I don't think it has to. Buy big in midfield, try to cop some cheap striker prospect from the Tuva and we'll be OK. The nose singing will be entertaining as well

[DE.]

It's funny how people are calling Stoke a Championship side. WBA are a Championship side, and will be back there next season. Stoke are clearly not, or they wouldn't have 39 points. Like it or not, their brand of football has kept them safe, and they're a premiership team.

This thread alone is proof that many, many of our fans have absolutely no clue.

The "brand of football" is not the issue... people talk about how we have to create a style that suits our team... well what f'n style is that? Neither Ince or Allardyce has managed to get the team playing anywhere near a decent style of football. Sam's brand of footy has worked against Fulham, Hull and West Ham RECENTLY, to name a few. 3 out of the last 4 games have been bad, but we are decimated with injuries to the point of ridiculousness. Anybody pointing the finger at Sam has no clue and needs to have a word with themselves.

The players are the problem... Jose Mourinho couldn't get a performance out of those we currently have available for selection, excluding our defence our team is dire and not premiership standard. Our best hope is that sam's football works against Wigan/Portsmouth/City/WBA and a few injuries clear up. If so, we should be okay. Thank God the teams below us are so @#/?.

[Eddie]

How much is Allardyce paying you?

[DE.]

[Eddie]

Great point Eddie.

Well to be hones there's not much more I can say. Stoke are grinders and we dealt with their long throws, but that's all they really threw at us. They didn't attack that often and for the most part the ball stayed in the middle of the park and not much happened. It was a stalemate due to a total lack of creativity on both sides. They managed to create two good chances (the Etherington header and the actual goal) and we created none. Up against Stoke a very good performance from our back four would mean a clean sheet. If you don't keep a clean sheet in a game like that then barring a 35 yard rocket I don't think you can put the defending in the excellent category. We've got very big defenders and really Stoke play to our defensive strengths: they aren't too quick, they don't put together intricate passing moves and they rely on out-muscling defenders and winning headers really. The fact of the matter is that with a back four of Ooijer, Samba, Nelsen and Givet that should be fairly easy to deal with.

I'm not saying our defending wasn't good and if you could remove one terrible passage of play on our part we would have deserved the clean sheet, but it was simply the better part of a dreadful performance. Sitting midfielders in front of a back four and soaking up pressure in a game against Stoke that we really should have been trying to win doesn't impress me too much.

[des]

wells its not sams fault that we are no midfield plyers and a team of unfit forwards, withput good players any manager can be made to look a fool

[den]

Well to be hones there's not much more I can say. Stoke are grinders and we dealt with their long throws, but that's all they really threw at us. They didn't attack that often and for the most part the ball stayed in the middle of the park and not much happened. It was a stalemate due to a total lack of creativity on both sides. They managed to create two good chances (the Etherington header and the actual goal) and we created none. Up against Stoke a very good performance from our back four would mean a clean sheet. If you don't keep a clean sheet in a game like that then barring a 35 yard rocket I don't think you can put the defending in the excellent category. We've got very big defenders and really Stoke play to our defensive strengths: they aren't too quick, they don't put together intricate passing moves and they rely on out-muscling defenders and winning headers really. The fact of the matter is that with a back four of Ooijer, Samba, Nelsen and Givet that should be fairly easy to deal with.

I'm not saying our defending wasn't good and if you could remove one terrible passage of play on our part we would have deserved the clean sheet, but it was simply the better part of a dreadful performance. Sitting midfielders in front of a back four and soaking up pressure in a game against Stoke that we really should have been trying to win doesn't impress me too much.

Well, from where I was standing they threw more than long throws at us - and don't underestimate how difficult it is to clear your lines when the ball is continually arrowing into your own area. You don't ever get a free header against them, they knock you all over the place Eddie. It was nowhere as easy as you make out from the chat room.

For the record, nor do I go along with your charge that we didn't try to win the game. We did, but first and foremost you don't lose it. We didn't win it, not because we didn't try for it, but because we aren't good enough.

[philipl]

Don't talk crap Eddie. "it was only Stoke" - for goodness sake. It "only used to be Wimbledon" too, but the name of the club makes no difference. Stoke make it very difficult for defenders. The back four have to stand up and be counted and they have to take a physical battering - which they did manfully. Many a team haven't stood up to that battering this season, but our lads did. Oh and by the way, it wasn't a poor Stoke performance, it was a typical Stoke performance. The same kind of performance that has seen off better teams than us.

Spot on den.

It is a different type of challenge but Stoke away is a nightmare game.

I always felt confident that our back 4 would handle it and handle the physical high ball suff superbly is exactly what they did- that is what makes the defeat all the more painful. Midfield totally failed to do its job, not for the first time recently.

We didn't put nearly enough pressure on what is a very limited bunch of hoofers and MGP was just back to being woeful again.

The fear I had over Andrews came true- he has been playing out of his skin putting in decent performances despite being way out of his depth at PL level. He was so comprehensively destroyed throughout the game at Liverpool that his nerve/confidence level looked to be shot to pieces at Stoke yesterday.

The moment he slotted that pass perfectly into the path of the Stoke player, I just knew it was the game changing moment. Rovers were breaking forwards so for once there were holes at the back for Stoke to exploit. One look at where players were at the moment of that worse than atrocious pass and we were going to be very lucky not to conceed. But for that pass we were going to have ground out the direst of 0-0s at a ground where only three teams have triumphed so far this season.

Wigan is now going to be such a massive game, it is frightening just to think about it.

[tashor]

Don't talk crap Eddie. "it was only Stoke" - for goodness sake. It "only used to be Wimbledon" too, but the name of the club makes no difference. Stoke make it very difficult for defenders. The back four have to stand up and be counted and they have to take a physical battering - which they did manfully. Many a team haven't stood up to that battering this season, but our lads did. Oh and by the way, it wasn't a poor Stoke performance, it was a typical Stoke performance. The same kind of performance that has seen off better teams than us.

In 10 years this is a first for me. I also believe that Eddie laddie

[Guest Vinjay606]

Wigan is now going to be such a massive game, it is frightening just to think about it.

Well I hope the players don't go into the game with fear. Don't want cowards playing for this club.

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

Lets just cut to the quick eh folks....... due to various factors we're an absolute shambles right now but NOW is when we want this so-called team of ours to be performing.

We can only hope there are three teams worse than us come seasons end...three 'on-paper' winnable home games to secure our Prem future but personally my confidence is shot to pieces with this side of our's total unpredictability and lack of form.

Strap yourselves in tight Roverites!

[tashor]

How much is Allardyce paying you?

I thought about reporting this post - but as I have NEVER done such a thing I thought a better approach would be to expose it for the offensive tripe that it is. Eddie - I now have my beadie eye on you. Keep posting this drivel and I will drag you into the void - I have nothing to lose - how about you lurvie

[thenodrog]

Well to be hones there's not much more I can say. Stoke are grinders and we dealt with their long throws, but that's all they really threw at us. They didn't attack that often and for the most part the ball stayed in the middle of the park and not much happened. It was a stalemate due to a total lack of creativity on both sides. They managed to create two good chances (the Etherington header and the actual goal) and we created none. Up against Stoke a very good performance from our back four would mean a clean sheet. If you don't keep a clean sheet in a game like that then barring a 35 yard rocket I don't think you can put the defending in the excellent category. We've got very big defenders and really Stoke play to our defensive strengths: they aren't too quick, they don't put together intricate passing moves and they rely on out-muscling defenders and winning headers really. The fact of the matter is that with a back four of Ooijer, Samba, Nelsen and Givet that should be fairly easy to deal with.

I'm not saying our defending wasn't good and if you could remove one terrible passage of play on our part we would have deserved the clean sheet, but it was simply the better part of a dreadful performance. Sitting midfielders in front of a back four and soaking up pressure in a game against Stoke that we really should have been trying to win doesn't impress me too much.

Eddie you denegrate Stoke but please explain to us all Stokes admirable points total from their home games. The Brittania stadium has seen precious few teams come away successful. The again forget it, I cannot be bothered debating further with you. Theorise about BRFC and football in general all you want but it must be obvious to all that what you know about football would fit on the back of a postage stamp.

[Plastic Head]

Just read some of the comments stating we need a total clear out at the end of the season. Nonsense. We have some very good players, but no matter how good you are you can't play without the ball.

Name them please?

[DE.]

In the middle of the park and in attack we have players that in the past have shown ability, but are showing none of it this season.

Can't argue that defensively we are solid and Ooijer(just about), Nelsen, Samba and Givet all fall under the "good" category to me. Sadly, they alone cannot keep us up.

[Eddie]

Eddie you denegrate Stoke but please explain to us all Stokes admirable points total from their home games. The Brittania stadium has seen precious few teams come away successful. The again forget it, I cannot be bothered debating further with you. Theorise about BRFC and football in general all you want but it must be obvious to all that what you know about football would fit on the back of a postage stamp.

Well I can't argue with that then can I! I'll say this once, just because you didn't have the sense to either debate the issue or stay out, we've gone head-to-head in the past few weeks a few times (as well as me against a few other posters) and I think over the past few months my record shows that I probably know enough about football to justify me having an opinion on a football messageboard (Santa Cruz, Fulham, Arsenal, Liverpool, Spurs and based on the changing tide on this messageboard: Allardyce). Let's not insult each others footballing knowledge, you have no idea what I know about football, debate the issue and save those comments for the forum you helped get shut down.