[Archived] Wolverhampton Wanderers Away

[BRFC15]

Only managed to get there just before half time, train was delayed then we all got kicked off at crewe so it was taxis from crewe to wolverhampton (Y) brilliant

[Ossydave]

Only managed to get there just before half time, train was delayed then we all got kicked off at crewe so it was taxis from crewe to wolverhampton (Y) brilliant

Same happened to quite a few I know, something to do with a fire wasn't it?

[BRFC15]

Same happened to quite a few I know, something to do with a fire wasn't it?

Yeh we were stood still for over an hour then as we rolled into crewe they were watin and threw us off.

[ewoodnews]

Lets see what you all think about this.....it may make you laugh

http://roverstalk.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2918&p=76097#p76097

[daveoftherovers]

Lets see what you all think about this.....it may make you laugh

http://roverstalk.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2918&p=76097#p76097

This was great, the Wolves fan, his mates from Fife and of course Mr O Connor should take a bow, a job well done!

[ewoodnews]

This was great, the Wolves fan, his mates from Fife and of course Mr O Connor should take a bow, a job well done!

I am MR O'Connor (JAMES) (and before anyone on here says anything no i did not play for burnley :|) and thats what makes it even better my mates found the site and told me about it.

Glad you enjoyed it because i did

[MarkBRFC71]

Your opinion is completely second hand, based entirely on what Jason Wilcox saw. At least concede that, as an arguing platform, it is hardly a convincing one.

Im pretty sure you stated that it was Sam's fault that the likes of Kalinic werent finishing decent chances, and that because Sam brought him here it was therefore his fault yet again. I think that about sums up everything in your argument. If you're desperate to blame Sam for anything and everything, then you're eventually going to find a way.

He made mistakes yesterday but the players in front of goal should have done a heck of a lot better. They didnt convert the chances, the blame is more with them then Sam on this occaision. His tactics and subs were suspect but we still created enough despite that to win the game.

As opposed to yours - an undeniable Samette, who watched the game on a dodgy internet feed?? As I said before, I think Wilcox was in a much better position, both physically and rationally than you to provide a well-informed, unbiased opinion.

I didn't say it was Sam's fault about the finishing, merely asked two questions - who bought the £6m frontman, and who is responsible for training them week in week out? You can lay the blame where you want based on the answers.

I agree the players should have done better with the 1 or 2 chances, but an experienced manager like BFS should have known that Wolves would come out all guns blazing after half-time. By reverting to 4-5-1, we are naturally less attacking, and are liable to sit back. This was only exacerbated when McCarthy sensed that we were trying to defend and switched his team to 4-4-2 and pushed us back further.

We should have rode out the first 10 mins of the second half, and stuck with the formation that had served us well in the first. Unfortunately Sam bottled it, and the end result is we let two valuable points slip. And after yesterday's results that negativity looks even more foolish.

Anyway, we've done it to death and we'll have to agree to disagree!

[47er]

As opposed to yours - an undeniable Samette, who watched the game on a dodgy internet feed?? As I said before, I think Wilcox was in a much better position, both physically and rationally than you to provide a well-informed, unbiased opinion.

I didn't say it was Sam's fault about the finishing, merely asked two questions - who bought the £6m frontman, and who is responsible for training them week in week out?

I agree the players should have done better with the 1 or 2 chances, but an experienced manager like BFS should have known that Wolves would come out all guns blazing after half-time. By reverting to 4-5-1, we are naturally less attacking, and are liable to sit back. This was only exacerbated when McCarthy sensed that we were trying to defend and switched his team from 4-4-2 and pushed us back further.

We should have rode out the first 10 mins of the second half, and stuck with the formation that had served us well in the first. Unfortunately Sam bottled it, and the end result is we let two valuable points slip. And after yesterday's results that negativity looks even more foolish.

Anyway, we've done it to death and we'll have to agree to disagree!

And you learned all this from just a simple radio!

[MarkBRFC71]

And you learned all this from just a simple radio!

No, it comes from common sense, experience and knowing SOMETHING about football - all things you appear to lack.

[47er]

No, it comes from common sense, experience and knowing SOMETHING about football - all things you appear to lack.

So it doesn't come from Wilcox then?!!! Its your invention based on a game you didn't see?

[MarkBRFC71]

So it doesn't come from Wilcox then?!!! Its your invention based on a game you didn't see?

Stop being pedantic. It's a combination of that, and Wilcox's view. But you knew that anyway.

[LeChuck]

You're justifying borrowing Wilcox's opinion, whilst condescendingly arguing that makes yours more valid, on the fact that he's an ex-player etc.

Obviously I won't expect you to get the irony of you questioning everything Sam does tactically despite Allardyce having many, many years more experience than Wilcox.

You can't have it both ways.

[MarkBRFC71]

You're justifying borrowing Wilcox's opinion, whilst condescendingly arguing that makes yours more valid, on the fact that he's an ex-player etc.

Obviously I won't expect you to get the irony of you questioning everything Sam does tactically despite Allardyce having many, many years more experience than Wilcox.

You can't have it both ways.

It's called forming an argument, based around expert opinion.

I don't question everything BFS does - I praised his boldness in his starting line-up on Saturday, but it was just a shame his negativity bubbled to the top and he reverted to type. But of course you just wanted to jump in on the defensive - again.

And to make it real simple for you - 3-5-2 we won 1-0. 4-5-1 we lost 1-0. Which worked best again?

[waggy]

Why are we trying to hold on from the 57th minute by reverting back to 451 against a team that up till today had scored 10 yes 10 goals at home all season???? The pressure we have been under since then has been incredible, I doubt wolves have had the ball in the final third that much all season at home.

We've shown consistently away from home that we cannot hang on in there against anyone. I was delighted after so many failed attempts to see him try something different today but the second we were under a bit of pressure he reverts back to the only way he knows. Fortune favours the brave, even when they equalize we just swap Roberts for Di Santo.

Sam is so negative that if you were to give him a minus number, it wouldn't generate a positive.

This is a game we should have won we beat ourselves today.

well said

[RIML]

Did we lose two points because Sam changed the formation? Or did we lose two points because Givet had a lapse in concentration? Why is it always Sam's fault! Where's the blame for Givet? He did have a good game but he should have been marking Ebanks-Blake.

[Amo]

From what's been said so far by people who went to the game, Wolves changed something at half time to get all over us at the start of the second half. We apparently created more chances after bringing Andrews on. Maybe our formation won us the first half because Wolves weren't expecting it or weren't used to playing against it but we all know where 3-5-2 falls down defensively - down the wings, which is where Wolves started attacking.

This was already addressed. Wolves came out of the dressing room with a flea in their ear, and it's only natural for the home side to have a spell of domination (even one as poor as Wolves). I felt more confident with our team going forward as a 3-5-2/4-4-2 than the hopeless hit and hope 4-5-1 we employed afterwards.

Did we lose two points because Sam changed the formation? Or did we lose two points because Givet had a lapse in concentration? Why is it always Sam's fault! Where's the blame for Givet? He did have a good game but he should have been marking Ebanks-Blake.

Because at 1-0, sitting back against the opposition, it was always possible for them to get back into the game. That's the point people, such as myself, are making.

[BRFC95]

Because at 1-0, sitting back against the opposition, it was always possible for them to get back into the game. That's the point people, such as myself, are making.

Sitting back?

Did you go?

[Amo]

Sitting back?

Did you go?

I watched the game. We eased the pressure on Wolves in the second-half and thumped it aimlessly towards Roberts. All it did was give Wolves the incentive to get back into the game. I can only theorize he thought he'd indulged the fans long enough with the 3-5-2.

[LeChuck]

And to make it real simple for you - 3-5-2 we won 1-0. 4-5-1 we lost 1-0. Which worked best again?

I've said Sam's tactical change cost us the win, but that's oversimplifying it in the extreme. Ever considered why it's called 'a game of two halves'?

It's called forming an argument, based around expert opinion.

You constantly talk about 4-5-1 being no good for us, championing the 4-4-2. An expert opinion (to use your rationale with Wilcox) strongly believes otherwise. To copy your mentality from before when dealing with opposition to your judgement on Saturday's game; you can't argue against it because you're not qualified to do so.

Personally I think that's all bullshit, fans see enough football to form opinions every much as valid as people professionally involved...I just think you were being hypocritical using Wilcox to support your own argument whilst being heavily critical of Sam's tactical choices.

[Blue blood]

Am amazed at all the criticism of Sam for his swapping of Andrews for Kalinic. Wolves were beginning to look like they'd got the hang of the formation towards the end of the first half, something confirmed in the second half, and the substitution actually improved us as a team (never thought I'd say that with Andrews). We then cut down the number of chances Wolves had as well as having some very dangerous counter attacks of our own.

You can criticise Sam for the team starting to hoof it as soon as we got the goal.

You can criticise Sam for taking off Roberts at the end.

You can criticise Sam for starting with Basturk who wasn't properly fit.

But the formation change itself was bang on, and should have won us the game.

[b12_simon]

Lets see what you all think about this.....it may make you laugh

http://roverstalk.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2918&p=76097#p76097

I wondered why the home fans were so angry!

(I was sat a few rows back but didn't see this O'Connor)

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

I only saw the game on MOTD so I can't really comment.

Some stats - Possession Wolves 58% Rovers 42%

Passing accuracy- Wolves 72% Rovers 58.5% The lowest in the Premier League again. Next lowest was Big Club at Villa with 65.7%. Without going to too much trouble and working it out the average this week must be in the mid 70's.

[ewoodnews]

I wondered why the home fans were so angry!

(I was sat a few rows back but didn't see this O'Connor)

all the fans around me were laughing their heads off at me i was slightly drunk but it was a really good day out just a shame we didnt win

[b12_simon]

all the fans around me were laughing their heads off at me i was slightly drunk but it was a really good day out just a shame we didnt win

It was a poor game but such a good laugh. Definitely one of the better away days I've had this year.

[thenodrog]

And to make it real simple for you - 3-5-2 we won 1-0. 4-5-1 we lost 1-0. Which worked best again?

Sounds very simple until you factor in that Wolves altered their style of play too. Then it becomes very difficult.

I watched the game. We eased the pressure on Wolves in the second-half and thumped it aimlessly towards Roberts. All it did was give Wolves the incentive to get back into the game. I can only theorize he thought he'd indulged the fans long enough with the 3-5-2.

Something that we've nearly always done. KMD, Souness and Hughes all did that once we got in front.