[Archived] Fulham Vs Rovers

[herbergeehh]

The misjudged tackles gave Fulham two goals. Particularly the first one was on Nelsen, there was no way Chimbonda could pick up the run AND cover Duff's left foot.

Anyway... Why did we take off both our strikers in the 2nd half? When has a double striker switch ever worked? I would prefer keeping Roberts to allow Benni to get into the game, before unleashing Kalinic later on.

Good first half, great in fact. Delighted to see us put pressure on our opponent again, and away as well. We didn't create a lot of chances though, we need to put the ball into the box more when we enjoy such long spells of possession. I noticed two right footed players on the left being less able to do that, although both of them did okay. If Di Santo had scored, we'd be looking at a totally different game though, so fair play to Rovers for playing well.

Bring on Stoke!

[broadsword]

That is ridicilous. Imo we have one of the strongest squads in a long time. We have a very young and exciting squad with prospects like Kalinic and Hoilett. We have very good back four and good depth in the midfield region.

EH????????????????????????????????????????

TOTAL AND UTTER ROLLOCKS!

Hoilett is raw and wants away, Kalinic hasn't done anything exciting yet (although I haven't written him off yet), who else is very young and exciting then? Erm ... let me see, er ... no-one? di Santo, has he excited you then? He's not even our player. Who else?

The back four isn't too bad, although given our amount of right-backs maybe that shouldn't be a surprise. Other thna that, it's a poor do, and I include the 'keeper there, he just isn't consistent enough.

[JAL]

Got back an hour ago. What struck me was the lack of pace and creativity in the side. Fulham nullified Dunn and therefore prevented us from getting any meaningful ball to the strikers. We had no ideas whatsoever, completely lacked any dynamism or cohesion after they had scored and reverted to lumping balls up to the front two who were only ever on the fringes of the game.

Hoillet needed to be introduced. Diouf was shocking. Grella was relatively composed and Andrews did ok for 45 mins. Dunn did little but, as mentioned as our only creative outlet he was an obvious threat which Fulham marked out of the game. He also played too deep to make an impact. Strikers tried hard but couldnt get any service. Not sure that Di Santo and Roberts is the way forward.

Overall: Depressing. Devoid of any ideas for the second half and made a poor Fulham side look good. A defeat can be stomached but not one so poorly contested. We never looked like getting a result from half time onwards. They should have had 4/5 by the end.

A win against Stoke will just about make up for tonight but that performance was concerning. .

I think your post highlights the fact that the club needs to invest in another quality player who can be as creative as Dunn, dont know who except it simply has to happen.

[berkshireblue]

watched the game from my usual bar stool and 1st half we mullered them,they score with there 1st usefull attack/robbo/spit/grella all to blame.oh to have a player like duff,dunny was negated and we struggled,macdonald showed why he belongs in division 3,pathetic substitutions,why he took both our centre forwards of i'll never know,di santo lovely player,but could not score in pasha.roberts huffs and puffs,and bloody u-tube is grabbi re-incarnated

even you scored in pasha waggy

[JAL]

Let's not forget Fulham only had 4 shots on target resulting in 3 goals, a frustrating night for the Rovers, it just wasn't to be.

Whats the goalie being paid for ?

[CAPT KAYOS]

Just a couple of observations from what was jeckyll and hyde football from both teams last night -

Why when loosing do we make one pass forward, 3 sideways then all the way back to robbo/nelson to then hoof it up the pitch down a well protected channel, such negativity was scary and all it did was leave jay and di santo chasing ghosts, outnumbered, frustrated and largely pretty damn useless.

At last somebody appears to have answered something that was really bothering me last night (will get to it shortly)

Wasn't at the game nor did I see any of it - but after I got the text message through pre kick off about the changes last night I feared the worst. As per many, why change the winning side especially in our midfield when trying to build up momentum - so unless properly justifeid with injury then no excuse.

Sounds like we where back to our normality and confused player syndrome with yet again no back up plan, bar panic which only leads to what we have seen on countless occasions and our ability to totally collapse at will. Add to this the uncanny knack of other teams finding us easy to score against especially when thy score one and us needing a hundred and one chances.

Now back to the comment from ptholt above ... (this is aimed for those primarily that attended the game) which leads me back to the comment above

Mcdonald commented after the match that they set out in the second half with the intention of trying to score without conceding - now isn't that what the game is about anyway?

However, to follow on from this and this is where the question is for those that attended - did we really capitulate that much in the second half and does that comment seem to explain why - or was it a case of one of those games (even though my opinion re the 1 -101 chances stands)?

The statement from Macdonald is a very negative one IMO considering we where on top in the first half by all accounts and yet again adopted the sam stance ' of trying to nick a goal' from limited chances - something which does not tick in my book.

[JAL]

Same here. I never imagined we would see those two paired in midfield again. I can't believe we dismantled the core of our win over Bolton. Was Nzonzi carrying a knock or something?

I know Grella & Andrews did alright in the first half, but once Fulham stepped up a gear they lost control of the game.

In the Telegraph the reporter had Grella as man of the match - dont know what game he was watching but Grella just doesnt seem to add anything to the team similar to Keef.

[1864roverite]

I have watched the goals and read the reports. Still not best pleased.

Nelson had a nightmare, two horrendous mistakes and 2 goals.

The 2nd goal was a country mile offrside but if there is a blame it has to both Samba and Robbo, both failed to take charge of a ball coming into the 6yrd box.

Midfield was toothless. Play Andrews and we play like we have 10 men. He was awful by all accounts.

Got to be a change on Saturday.

[duffbear]

I was at the game last night and arrived early and kept an eye on Di Santo during the warmup and him, Andrews and Diouf we having ball layed of on the edge of the box taking and touch and shooting they probley had about 7 or 8 goes each. Di santo buried about half of his chances, couple were saved and couple were miss hit.

A couple of the goals were great finshes the misses were pretty awful. I think he can be a good finisher but not constitantly I think you will see some great finshes at times and the odd one (like at the start of the game) would leave you scratching your head. Diouf was finishing really well in the warm up. Andrews well I think he scored about 2 of his other chances went flying into the crowd and I thought that was one of his strong points?.

I know Andrews tries hard and he should be commended for his work rate unfortunatley that does not make him a premiership starter and he can only mark space for so long until he gets found out. Will we really be losing anything by trying Salgado there he cant be as bad surely? I think we should try him in that postion against Chelsea in the cup because lets be honest we are unlikely to get anything out of that game so we can see how he gets on. I think he could suprise us he seems to still have a good engine on him and at least he can tackle and pass a ball surely that would be an inprovement?

As others have commented I thought Grella was playing well was keeping possesion playing some nice passes, 2nd half he tired (as to be expected having just come back from injury) and should have been taking off after an hour and replaced with Nzonzi. I think if he can stay fit he will be a solid player for us. Andrews did ok first half and great ball for Di Santo which he should have buried. He did not have a good 2nd half but then only Dunn and Samba really did anything 2nd half and was a poor performance

In my opinon Andrews, Roberts and Diouf should be squad players at best they should not be starting games if we have the majority of players available. Diouf would be a perfect sub to bring on if we are trying to hang onto a lead because he is great at holding the ball up, time wasting and winding up the oppostion. Roberts as well bring on last 10-20 minutes if we are winning or losing will not give there defenders a rest.

Start Hoilet yes he could leave in Jan but can he really do any worse then Peds or Diouf?, and who knows if he plays well keeps his place in the side he may want to stay what have we got to lose?

I think every game for a while we should start with Di Santo and Kalnic/Mcarthy. I think Di Santo is pretty good and holding up the ball and good with flick on's etc. Last Night it was clear to see Roberts first touch is quite often a pass to the oppostion and both Mcarthy and Kalnic have a much better touch than Roberts. They are also both more integllent players and most importantly the both are goalscorers (yes I know Kalnic has not scored yet in the legaue but he is a proven goalscorer/finisher. Yes Benni is lazy but boy is he talented he will always get you goals. Not saying he has not already told Benni this but Allardyce need to say to him you want your chance to play. I am going to give you a chance everyone knows you know were the back of the goal is and we need you to work hard as well and close down more. If you lose the ball chase back and win in back (I dont know about anyone else but there are not many things more frustrating then when a player loses the ball and rather than chasing the ball moans or flap the arms in the air like it is someone else fault)

Kalnic looked lively when he came on and the few times the ball was played up to him he showed good strength and looked good he will get goals and I believe he is now ready to be starting games. Give him 3 or 4 games and I think he will start scoring.

I also think the 1 up front should not be abonded I think on occsion it would be a good formation to play away from home against teams in the same sort of postion as us in the league.

Against Stoke at the weekend I would line up with

Robinson

Chimbonda Samba Nelson Givet(if fit if not replace givet with Jacobsen or Salgado)

Grella

Nzoni Emerton(if fit if not Salgado)

Dunn

Di Santos Kalnic/Mcarthy

Grella should be gving strict instructions to sit (which would suit his game anyway) and give Nzonzi and Emerton strict insructions for only one of them to push forward at any one time. To be honest that would be mainly Emerton getting forward and just have him sit when Nzonzi goes up front for set pieces due to his arieal threat.

Before anyone says anything about me going back on what I said earlier about Hoilet starting I think the other formation that could be used is

Robinson

Chimbonda Samba Nelson Givet

Emerton Dunn Grella/Nzonzi Hoilet

Di Santo Kalnic/Mcarthy

Give Dunn license to get forward at will and Grella/Nzonzi to always sit and I believe Emerton has the engine to go box to box all game, thoughts?

[ptholt]

However, to follow on from this and this is where the question is for those that attended - did we really capitulate that much in the second half and does that comment seem to explain why..

in a word.. YES

To show just how sad it got, i have this recollection of either (or perhaps even both) admiral and dunny closing down the right back and keeper on one or two occasions while the rest of the team stood around watching, presumeably working out how long was left and what that worked out to per minute on there weekly wage, or which london night club they were going to get hammered in, the mind set was clearly not on football second half.

As for Stoke i would start with salgado as at the moment we can do with someone who can run with the ball, and go wide down the right, tho he will need taking off mid way thru second half.

would also start with belly mclazy and niko up front with dunny just behind, or is that just wishful thinking...

amazed to find myself saying i really wished bert played last night as well :s

[adopted scouser]

Can we not get Souness back ?

[AggyBlue]

Can we not get Souness back ?

We could do with him in midfield but I believe his legs have gone.

[Claytons Left Boot]

Roy Hodgson was sacked by Rovers 10 years ago because he wasn't good enough.

He wasn't good enough at that specific moment in time. His overall track record is pretty impressive.

One of the reasons I stated that I would have been happy with a point at Craven Cottage is this - there are four or five very good teams in this league who don't lose very often. There are a couple of very bad ones who don't win very often. All the rest, of which Rovers are one, can beat each other on the day. Yes, there's an element of good home form for some and, in Rovers' case a very bad away record, but generally for most of the rest, there is very little difference.

It's not going to change.

[John]

Mistakenly was full of hope going into last night's match. Having plenty of the ball means nothing, especially if don't convert the chances you get, and if you cannot "penetrate" the opposing team when you have the football.

All in all a poor result and a horrible/painful hangover at work today to vouch for it.....

[Paul]

Were you at the Reebok on Saturday ? The lad looks a proper footballer to me, which is more than be said of his current strike partner or the laggard McCarthy.

I was and I can see why you say he looks like a proper footballer. The trouble is he's meant to be a proper striker, signed as the great hope for this season - sorry the great hope for half a season. Other than his Burnley goal - for which some afforded him the status of "legend" (God knows what Garner thinks) - I've yet to see him make a strike on goal. 1 goal in 8 games is hardly impressive. I've seen nothing of last night's game but from what I gather he missed a gilt-edged opportunity and considering the team collapsed after Fulham scored that miss may have been crucial?

[47er]

I was and I can see why you say he looks like a proper footballer. The trouble is he's meant to be a proper striker, signed as the great hope for this season - sorry the great hope for half a season. Other than his Burnley goal - for which some afforded him the status of "legend" (God knows what Garner thinks) - I've yet to see him make a strike on goal. 1 goal in 8 games is hardly impressive. I've seen nothing of last night's game but from what I gather he missed a gilt-edged opportunity and considering the team collapsed after Fulham scored that miss may have been crucial?

If we collapsed after that 1st Fulham goal then we should be looking at Robinson------England's No 1 my ****.

[47er]

I do apologise - I was away all weekend, went home for a few hours and then have been away since Monday again ... I must pay more attention to this MB.

I did manage to see the Bolton game on TV (my match ticket went unused) - and all I would say is thank goodness there are teams in this league which are that poor. Against Bolton, we did play well and deserved the result - it's just as well because we will need those points.

We didn't totally dominate the first half last night. We had a lot of the ball, but seemed incapable of doing anything with it. I said to someone at h/t, it's like watching cricket. You can glance up from the newspaper once every couple of minutes and may see something interesting (like a throw in), but in between time, there's nothing to watch.

It was really really poor yesterday, I've slept on it and I'm still fuming. What a waste of 30 quid, and an entire evening.

My point is, and I'm sure you get it, is that you appear to come on here only when things go wrong. I honestly can't remember your last positive post.

[mellison24]

If we collapsed after that 1st Fulham goal then we should be looking at Robinson------England's No 1 my ****.

Or the players in front of him who allowed Nevland through far too easily?

[jim mk2]

How was your spell on mod-watch?

Same as yours

One more late-night drunken missive and you'll be over the line too.

He wasn't good enough at that specific moment in time. His overall track record is pretty impressive.

Hodgson had to go because Rovers were in freefall at the time and heading for relegation. His dealings in the transfer market were pretty unimpressive too. £4m for Nathan Blake ??

[Miker]

In the Telegraph the reporter had Grella as man of the match - dont know what game he was watching but Grella just doesnt seem to add anything to the team similar to Keef.

That's because you'd have to be blind not to notice Grella breaking up play at every opportunity he had in the first half and being at the heart of a lot of our moves, spreading the ball around to our players and sending balls up into channels for the strikers and wingers to run on to. I won't bother arguing Andrews, but I will come back and defend Grella each time because he is quality and showed on Wednesday why he was one of the best players at the last World Cup.

[jim mk2]

I was and I can see why you say he looks like a proper footballer. The trouble is he's meant to be a proper striker, signed as the great hope for this season - sorry the great hope for half a season.

Di Santo has the raw attributes to be a top-class player but at present is a young man making his way and he needs time to develop physically and mentally, and is nothing like the finished article. Hopefully he will be able to develop into a top-class striker with Rovers.

[Parsonblue]

If we collapsed after that 1st Fulham goal then we should be looking at Robinson------England's No 1 my ****.

Totally agree. I've seen every game he has played since he arrived at the club and he is no better than average. He is excellent at instinctive saves, but his positioning, particularly on crosses, is questionable and he is beaten at his near post far too often. His performance at Fulham was poor and I feel sure that Brad would have saved at least two, if not all three, of the goals.

Having said that, I think the real problem in terms of defence rests with the central midfield players. Samba and Nelsen are given no protection and are often drawn out of position to make challenges because of our lack of a decent holding player in front of them.

[Ozz]

Their first goal came when Nelsen dived in and left his position in the back four, lost the challenge and left a big whole on the right. The shot was no more than inches from Robinsons feet, and was a very soft goal for him to concede.

The other two were again CHs over omitting too far out, Samba I think, leaving Andrews to get bullied and rolled over.

Somebody has to coach this out, as it happens too often.

[thenodrog]

we brought on 2 strikers to replace those who had spent the evening chasing long balls, this seemed a totally bizarre choice to me, we could hardly get the ball to the strikers anyway, so why bring on two others we could hardly get the ball to when the game was going on wayyyyy behind them :s

Indeed it proved a bad substitution by Macdonald imo. It did not make a ha'peth of difference. A change in emphasis was needed more at 2-0 down. Throwing caution to the wind and changing to a 3-4-1-2 with the one paced Nelsen going off Benny coming on to play the '1', and Dunny going wide left, EHD wide right, N'Zonzi playing center with Grella and with KA making way might have changed the emphasis and 'thrown' the by then comfortable Fulham defence.

Alternatively we might have conceded a third...........

[tcj_jones]

It was quite clear that we needed width and pace so Hoilett should have been the first to come on. Hoilett for Diouf, Benni for Di Santo and N'Zonzi for Grella / Andrews.

They're the changes I would have made.