BigUts Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 Bolton need to get 'nasty' - I think that was one of the points I was trying to make. I believe he left Burney in 14th...which is a lurch most people would be glad to have. As for Bolton I really have no idea what you are talking about. Hopefully he gets this mob through. I suspect when he has time to play the game the way he wants you will be choking on your words. I look forward to that. I obviously don't know you personally, Nicko, but from what I can tell you seem like a typical 'reporter' (politician esque). It's clever how you use a very negative word and try to put a spin on it. I don't see how you can call yesterdays game 'ugly'. Mourinho played very similar tactics with Chelsea to win a lot of their games, was this described as ugly? Unless you're in Vogue, you've got no chance of getting a positive reaction from the British media! Sad, but true!
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
tony gale's mic Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 Don't see why people are getting on nicko's back so much. I am dead against our fans slagging Sam off for his style of play - we're either winning or we're losing and it would be lovely to win whilst playing flowing football but that would just be the icing on the cake - it's a secondary issue. If we're losing I'm not that fussed if we attempt to play triangles stupidly in defence and lose or if we hoof it up to the opposition and lose. That's because as a supporter rather than a spectator, winning should be paramount. And currently we're winning and as a fan that is FAR more entertaining than losing whilst trying to play nice football. However there's two ways of watching football, as a fan and as a neutral. And if you're watching as a neutral it is pretty ugly football. You wouldnt stop what you were doing to watch yesterdays' game, however you might stop what you were doing to watch Arsenal vs Barca for example. As a manager you're responsible to your own fans. You have to play the football that will keep the majority your fans happy, and ultimately as this seasons ups and downs have shown thats when you're winning games.
thenodrog Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 As for Bolton I really have no idea what you are talking about. Hopefully he gets this mob through. I suspect when he has time to play the game the way he wants you will be choking on your words. I look forward to that. And you might both be choking on your Coca Cola!
tony gale's mic Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 Mourinho played very similar tactics with Chelsea to win a lot of their games, was this described as ugly? It's one of the main reasons why he got sacked.
nicko Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 I obviously don't know you personally, Nicko, but from what I can tell you seem like a typical 'reporter' (politician esque). It's clever how you use a very negative word and try to put a spin on it. I don't see how you can call yesterdays game 'ugly'. Mourinho played very similar tactics with Chelsea to win a lot of their games, was this described as ugly? Unless you're in Vogue, you've got no chance of getting a positive reaction from the British media! Sad, but true! Just a quickie. Were you at the game? How many 'moves' were put together in the first 40 minutes? The tactic was to pin Bolton in their own third. This worked effectively. The first long throw exposed their weakness in the air and their keeper's ever-growing reliance on staying on his line. From then it was looking for corners - which you almost scored from - and free kicks from any range. That's how the game was...and it worked. AND I AM NOT REALLY INTERESTED IN CHELSEA OR MOURINHO...
thenodrog Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 The first long throw exposed their weakness in the air and their keeper's ever-growing reliance on staying on his line. I thought Jaaskelainen came off his line plenty of times and especially in the first half. .... Glad he did at the Reebok too!
braddock Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 you keep going on about the first 40 minutes, but we beat them 2-0 in the final 50
Kelbo Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 I noticed similarities with both Burnley and Bolton yesterday, they didnt use the 'three moments' in the game properly!! When they were in posession they were decent, when they were in a defensive position they werent too bad, their problem was when possession changed, both teams were slow to react from possession to not in possession. Eagles and the Korean especially, Mears as well,the left full back for Bolton who looked as though he was looking for a booking on every tackle!! Villa invited Burnly on, its ok, you can have possession in certain areas, hold them there, then when you win the ball, get it forward quickly, Villa with pace, Rovers with the ball into the box, hoofball or whatever, Villa could do it with their pace, we have to rely on pressure on the back four and keeper! Both those tactics worked and it will as Nicko says, keep us up, hopefully higher than budgeted and more cash to spend in the summer.
Tyrone Shoelaces Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 We had 61% against 39% possesion yesterday. The Guardian has it the other way around, given the fact our successful passing stat was 55% as opposed to Boltons 63.5% they may be right.
1864roverite Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 Funny that one Kelbo, I noticed it too. Boton were as shyte as Burnley
Backroom Tom Posted February 22, 2010 Backroom Posted February 22, 2010 There were glimpses of nice football early on I remember Olsson picking the ball uo doing a Zidane 360 turn and playing a nice one two Also a bit later he played another one two with Diouf which was only slightly overhit In fact most of our football started at the boots of young Olsson EDIT Did anyone else think Steinsson could have gone for his hack on Kalinic, it looked high and nasty to me could have been a leg breaker
DavidMailsTightPerm Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 Interesting comments by everyone - especially interested in Nicko's comments as a neutral (well except his obvious love affair with OC ) Sam doesn't play pretty, pretty Arsenal football - he plays percentage football. The best teams are the ones that can mix the percentage football with a degree of skill and flair. Arsenal, probably the best footballing team in the Premiership, should beat teams like United and Chelsea - but can't because they can't play any other way. Back to Rovers - yesterday showed Sam's tactics at their best - i.e. play all your football in the final third. At times it ain't pretty - but there was more flair on show than I think Nicko gave us credit for. We haven't got Rooney's, Lampard's etc. but the youngsters do show some promise to add flair to the team. The one thing that always struck me about Bolton's football when he was their manager - it was always exciting. I can remember games against them - when we were by far the better team - but they always seemed to put us under pressure. Yesterday we put Bolton under pressure - and had added flair and ability as well. I would be interested as to Nicko's views on Kalanic - he is starting to show why we paid £6m - indeed, if he continues to improve as he has this season - Bilic may be correct in his assesment for next season.
47er Posted February 22, 2010 Posted February 22, 2010 The other tactic that seems to be working is bring Roberts on with about 20 mins to go and attack a tired defence with 2 strikers. People can criticise Sam all they like but years of experience mean he knows what he's doing.People were going on about how he still doesn't know his best eleven and keeps changing the team all the time. The fact is, we are a work in progress. If he'd listened to these criticisms, Ollsen wouldn't have had his chance, Pedersen wouldn't be flourishing and Porky Mc' Carthy would still be ambling round the pitch. Kalinic wouldn't have made it either.
roversmum Posted February 23, 2010 Posted February 23, 2010 I love Roberts coming on late. The looks on the opposition defenders' faces says it all, the last thing you need when tiring is him arriving as you know you are going to get grief. It's the best use of the man. Martin is a revelation. Very well done, young man, more please. There was some 'dirty' play from Bolton, some of it was very nasty, they got away with most of it. Think it might be an idea for Owen to change out of his pyjamas for the match... Thank God Reebok don't design OUR kits.
Majiball Posted February 23, 2010 Posted February 23, 2010 The other tactic that seems to be working is bring Roberts on with about 20 mins to go and attack a tired defence with 2 strikers. People can criticise Sam all they like but years of experience mean he knows what he's doing.People were going on about how he still doesn't know his best eleven and keeps changing the team all the time. The fact is, we are a work in progress. If he'd listened to these criticisms, Ollsen wouldn't have had his chance, Pedersen wouldn't be flourishing and Porky Mc' Carthy would still be ambling round the pitch. Kalinic wouldn't have made it either. Most on here have said that about Roberts for ages.
yoda Posted February 23, 2010 Posted February 23, 2010 Firstly, I don't give a toss about pundits who don't watch games in full. Their opinions mean nothing to me. Secondly, I don't get why people should be upset about what is glaringly obvious. If my team had to win games to survive I would be delighted to see them using a tactic that works. Ultimately, in the Premier League, results are all that matters. This is a means to an end. When Big Sam was at Bolton he did the same, he played on the opposition's weaknesses. It's one way of playing the game. I'm not saying I would pay to watch it, but it shows organisation and planning and it means you will stay up. There's nothing wrong with being ugly... FFS WTF is ugly football? Can somebody please define it
Hughesy Posted February 23, 2010 Posted February 23, 2010 Think it might be an idea for Owen to change out of his pyjamas for the match... Thank God Reebok don't design OUR kits. Or that we dont have that awful sponsor of theirs!
Gav Posted February 23, 2010 Posted February 23, 2010 FFS WTF is ugly football? Can somebody please define it Man City v Liverpool - Sunday afternoon.
Hughesy Posted February 23, 2010 Posted February 23, 2010 Man City v Liverpool - Sunday afternoon. But still made it on 1st on MOTD2
CrazyIvan Posted February 23, 2010 Posted February 23, 2010 But still made it on 1st on MOTD2 It was second after Villa V Burnley.
gumboots Posted February 23, 2010 Posted February 23, 2010 Blackburn's record at home this season is better than that of Tottenham or Aston Villa. Nice to know that.
BigUts Posted February 23, 2010 Posted February 23, 2010 Just a quickie. Were you at the game? How many 'moves' were put together in the first 40 minutes? The tactic was to pin Bolton in their own third. This worked effectively. The first long throw exposed their weakness in the air and their keeper's ever-growing reliance on staying on his line. From then it was looking for corners - which you almost scored from - and free kicks from any range. That's how the game was...and it worked. AND I AM NOT REALLY INTERESTED IN CHELSEA OR MOURINHO... Yes, I was at the game. The same as every other week. Where you REALLY there? Or was it a case of watching in the pub?? AS other's have pointed out, I think it's quite upsetting that a 'neutral' 'reporter' is so Owen Coyle positive. Ever heard of being objective? I can think of a few moves in the first 40 minutes. So, are you now saying that 'Ugly' football is effective football or indeed vice versa?? Please clarify.
gumboots Posted February 23, 2010 Posted February 23, 2010 Yes, I was at the game. The same as every other week. Where you REALLY there? Or was it a case of watching in the pub?? AS other's have pointed out, I think it's quite upsetting that a 'neutral' 'reporter' is so Owen Coyle positive. Ever heard of being objective? I can think of a few moves in the first 40 minutes. So, are you now saying that 'Ugly' football is effective football or indeed vice versa?? Please clarify. I was doubly annoyed to spot the words "nasty edge" in there too. Who were the team with a player booked? I didn't mind the bully boy tag too much when it was applied by Wenger and others to say that we wouldn't lie down and let his little darlings walk the ball into the net, but we don't really play that kind of game any more. It seems that Mr Nixon is remembering what we were like and seeing the game through a filter of his expectations on this occasion.
BRFC95 Posted February 23, 2010 Posted February 23, 2010 FFS WTF is ugly football? Can somebody please define it It's the way unfashionable clubs play. The less a club is liked by the journo, the uglier the football. In reality the term means sweet FA and is often associated with sour grapes and bitterness.
only2garners Posted February 23, 2010 Posted February 23, 2010 I was doubly annoyed to spot the words "nasty edge" in there too. Who were the team with a player booked? I didn't mind the bully boy tag too much when it was applied by Wenger and others to say that we wouldn't lie down and let his little darlings walk the ball into the net, but we don't really play that kind of game any more. It seems that Mr Nixon is remembering what we were like and seeing the game through a filter of his expectations on this occasion. You're right. If we have a nasty edge it's not showing through in the number of bookings we're getting. At the weekend we didn't have any - Liverpool had 6, Sunderland and Everton 5 and Spurs 4 (on top of which definitely Defoe and arguably Bale should have been sent off).
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.