[Archived] Rovers v Chelsea

[Wing Wizard Windy Miller]

How is it? You've obviously not looked at the chalkboard because most of Diouf's successful passes were 5 yard passes.

A central midfielder - especially the supposed playmaker (I am trying not to laugh) should in theory have twice as many passes as any other member of the team as the play should come through them. The fact that Diouf actually attempted more passes during the game in a more advanced wide role shows just how innefective Pedersen was.

WWWM, I've uploaded the pictures for you

As you can see Diouf's passes were short too.

And I think the chalkboards show the completion ratio of throws, corners & free kicks.

EDIT: I love these stats, Samba didn't make (or have to make) one tackle in the game

Hang on - I remember Pedersen completely skying 2 (cough) crosses - can't seem to see those on your little toy picture...and where's his foul throw?

[RIML]

A central midfielder - especially the supposed playmaker (I am trying not to laugh) should in theory have twice as many passes as any other member of the team as the play should come through them. The fact that Diouf actually attempted more passes during the game in a more advanced wide role shows just how innefective Pedersen was.

On MOTD Pedersen was circled and Alan Hansen said he was a 'holding player'. I know Jones was the defensive midfielder but Pedersen tracked back too.

So who was the play maker out of Emerton and Pedersen? I'd say Emerton because most of Pedersen's passes were in his own half and Emerton's in Chelsea's half. You said the supposed play maker should in theory have twice as many passes but Emerton had less passes than Pedersen, so how does that work?

[RIML]

Hang on - I remember Pedersen completely skying 2 (cough) crosses - can't seem to see those on your little toy picture...and where's his foul throw?

I don't think anyone can say that was a pass

[RIML]

The fact that Diouf actually attempted more passes during the game in a more advanced wide role shows just how innefective Pedersen was.

I've only just noticed that Pedersen actually played a massive part in our goal, he headed the ball back into the box, Samba headed the ball and won a corner, Pedersen took the corner short to Diouf, Diouf back to Pedersen, Pedersen whipped in a great ball, hand ball appeals, Chelsea clear but Pedersen wins back the ball and knocks it down to Diouf who put in a lovely ball for Benjani. Great team goal. Full credit to Samba, Pedersen, Diouf and Benjani.

[47er]

Well done for singling mine and BPF's posts out, after all we were the only two people to predict we'd lose.

Didn't we lose after being level at half-time? I'm sure that despite an improved performance that's what I saw.

Kudos to Sam for finally caving in and changing the previous totally ineffective tactics, which of course you were fully behind because you blindly follow everything the manager says or does, but I said needed to be changed to stop us going down.

So other than making yourself look daft, what exactly was the point of your post apart from trying to score cheap points?

The point was not about predicting the score wrongly--just about everyone did that (including me!). Its this incessant stereo-typing of the manager. Both those posts I quoted were adamant that stubborn old Sam would learn nothing from the Liverpool game and would pick the same team with the same tactics and we'd be slaughtered. Abbey was the same (inevitably) but I couldn't be bothered quoting any more.You had your little laugh about it but you couldn't have been more wrong could you? One of the best games of the season and we were the equal of the Champions. Will it teach you to be more circumspect in future? Doubt it, given your attempted and pathetic attempt to stereotype me as well!

Anyway, credit to you for for giving the manager some kudos, albeit very grudgingly--"caving in" indeed!

[JAL]

On MOTD Pedersen was circled and Alan Hansen said he was a 'holding player'. I know Jones was the defensive midfielder but Pedersen tracked back too.

So who was the play maker out of Emerton and Pedersen? I'd say Emerton because most of Pedersen's passes were in his own half and Emerton's in Chelsea's half. You said the supposed play maker should in theory have twice as many passes but Emerton had less passes than Pedersen, so how does that work?

RIML they ALL have to be play makers

[des]

The sad fact is that top teams take there changes and the bottons team do not. Thats in a nut shell is why there won and are top and we lost and are in the botton three.

Answer when good changes come take them or at least make the keeper work.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

On MOTD Pedersen was circled and Alan Hansen said he was a 'holding player'. I know Jones was the defensive midfielder but Pedersen tracked back too.

So who was the play maker out of Emerton and Pedersen? I'd say Emerton because most of Pedersen's passes were in his own half and Emerton's in Chelsea's half. You said the supposed play maker should in theory have twice as many passes but Emerton had less passes than Pedersen, so how does that work?

If Emmo's our playmaker we really have got problems. Having said that he'd be in my team before Pedersen any day.

[Amo]

On MOTD Pedersen was circled and Alan Hansen said he was a 'holding player'. I know Jones was the defensive midfielder but Pedersen tracked back too.

So who was the play maker out of Emerton and Pedersen? I'd say Emerton because most of Pedersen's passes were in his own half and Emerton's in Chelsea's half. You said the supposed play maker should in theory have twice as many passes but Emerton had less passes than Pedersen, so how does that work?

I don't think anyone can say that was a pass

I've only just noticed that Pedersen actually played a massive part in our goal, he headed the ball back into the box, Samba headed the ball and won a corner, Pedersen took the corner short to Diouf, Diouf back to Pedersen, Pedersen whipped in a great ball, hand ball appeals, Chelsea clear but Pedersen wins back the ball and knocks it down to Diouf who put in a lovely ball for Benjani. Great team goal. Full credit to Samba, Pedersen, Diouf and Benjani.

I'd hate to see your reaction when Pedersen has a GOOD game.

[RIML]

I'd hate to see your reaction when Pedersen has a GOOD game.

But Pedersen never has a good game

[Amo]

But Pedersen never has a good game

Which is why I can sleep soundly.

[92er]

...or Drogba would have brought it down himself and scored. It was a massive punt upfield from Cech that caught us out with Salgado out of position it forced Samba to go and close down Malouda out in a right-back position. That left a massive gap in the centre of the defense after Nelsen went to try and win the header and clear the danger. You could argue Jones should have been tracking Anelka's run better but it's difficult to stop a goal like that when the header is perfectly into the path of the incoming striker.

I noticed at times that they had somebody like Drogba near Salgado, passes were then made in the air and the Chelsea player would try to knock it on to a colleague.

What I had envisaged if Olsson had been out jumped was that Nelsen would have had a reasonably good chance of getting the knock down.

I entirely take your point about Jones tracking Anelka better.

[RoversSG]

Good game by the lads but i really can't understand some of the tactical decisions by Sam? Why was Chimbonda not brought on instead of Olsson? I like Olsson but it's obvious he's no defender. Also, why bring off Diouf, our most dangerous player this season, and not Pedersen?

Let's hope Sam learn something from this game and it's not back to hoofball against Wigan.

[MarkBRFC71]

The point was not about predicting the score wrongly--just about everyone did that (including me!). Its this incessant stereo-typing of the manager. Both those posts I quoted were adamant that stubborn old Sam would learn nothing from the Liverpool game and would pick the same team with the same tactics and we'd be slaughtered. Abbey was the same (inevitably) but I couldn't be bothered quoting any more.You had your little laugh about it but you couldn't have been more wrong could you? One of the best games of the season and we were the equal of the Champions. Will it teach you to be more circumspect in future? Doubt it, given your attempted and pathetic attempt to stereotype me as well!

Anyway, credit to you for for giving the manager some kudos, albeit very grudgingly--"caving in" indeed!

Your posts do an adequate job of stereotyping you - 'blind Sam acolyte' in three words.

Be honest did you expect us to do anything other than play 4-5-1, hoofing long balls up to an isolated striker? That's not stereotyping, that IS exactly how we've played this season apart from the first half against Arsenal, and how every Rovers fan expected us to play.

It was a pleasant surprise when we didn't, and hopefully it proved to the manager and the less enlightened on here that we CAN play football with these players. BFS had to change the style/system though, because we were heading down by sticking to hoofball - just glad he seemed to realise it before the damage was irreparable.

[Majiball]

Good game by the lads but i really can't understand some of the tactical decisions by Sam? Why was Chimbonda not brought on instead of Olsson? I like Olsson but it's obvious he's no defender. Also, why bring off Diouf, our most dangerous player this season, and not Pedersen?

Let's hope Sam learn something from this game and it's not back to hoofball against Wigan.

Perhaps you haven't heard about Chimbonda's performance against Rochdale.

[Barnesy]

Think you'll find its one up against Wigan as I think this falls into Sam's category of "Must not lose" match rather than the Chelsea one which fell into his "Nothing to lose" category. It kept the fans happy but I expect we shall not see the next attack- minded game plan until Spurs away.

[waggy]

we certianley gave chelski a game,pity givet went off as his replacement was responsible for the 2 goals we conceded,roberts proved on saturday why he will never be a 1st choice striker,as for pedersen

[den]

Your posts do an adequate job of stereotyping you - 'blind Sam acolyte' in three words.

Be honest did you expect us to do anything other than play 4-5-1, hoofing long balls up to an isolated striker? That's not stereotyping, that IS exactly how we've played this season apart from the first half against Arsenal, and how every Rovers fan expected us to play.

It was a pleasant surprise when we didn't, and hopefully it proved to the manager and the less enlightened on here that we CAN play football with these players. BFS had to change the style/system though, because we were heading down by sticking to hoofball - just glad he seemed to realise it before the damage was irreparable.

Don't waste your time 47er.

[gumboots]

Good game by the lads but i really can't understand some of the tactical decisions by Sam? Why was Chimbonda not brought on instead of Olsson? I like Olsson but it's obvious he's no defender. Also, why bring off Diouf, our most dangerous player this season, and not Pedersen?

Let's hope Sam learn something from this game and it's not back to hoofball against Wigan.

I don't know, but I suspect Diouf had run himself into the ground.

[booth]

Think you'll find its one up against Wigan as I think this falls into Sam's category of "Must not lose" match rather than the Chelsea one which fell into his "Nothing to lose" category. It kept the fans happy but I expect we shall not see the next attack- minded game plan until Spurs away.

Problem with that is that we seem to be a bit cagier when we're playing the "Must Not Lose" games, or at least some of the time.

Think West Ham at home last season. Never before has their been a team more ready for the taking and we held off all game.

[Miker]

Think you'll find its one up against Wigan as I think this falls into Sam's category of "Must not lose" match rather than the Chelsea one which fell into his "Nothing to lose" category. It kept the fans happy but I expect we shall not see the next attack- minded game plan until Spurs away.

Eh we played 1 up against Chelsea. So I'm not sure what your point is to do with that?

[MarkBRFC71]

Don't waste your time 47er.

Thanks for that stunning post Den, superb stuff. I take it you're still blindly flogging the dead horse about how we didn't hoof it 9 times out of 10 before Saturday, that the way we played against Chelsea was exactly how we've been playing since the Messiah took over from Ince, and that these players aren't good enough to string two short passes together? Open your eyes FFS.

[47er]

Don't waste your time 47er.

good advice Den!

[den]

Thanks for that stunning post Den, superb stuff. I take it you're still blindly flogging the dead horse about how we didn't hoof it 9 times out of 10 before Saturday, that the way we played against Chelsea was exactly how we've been playing since the Messiah took over from Ince, and that these players aren't good enough to string two short passes together? Open your eyes FFS.

Yeah I know Mark. We hoof it. Got you first time.

Interesting, I'll give it some more thought.

[sambo]

Yeah I know Mark. We hoof it. Got you first time.

Interesting, I'll give it some more thought.

Just a question: have you been happy with the standard of football this season? Its hard to argue that the majority has been absolute crap.

But nice to know we have another member, along with a few others, who feel it is necessary to constantly belittle others for their points of view, especially given the opinions presented are hardly radical and off the mark.

Some people really seem content with dragging the board down the pan, and it seems to be more prominent amongst the 'older' members. Fair enough disagreeing, but your attitude is appalling.

edit: I feel it is right to praise Sam for the change on Saturday, but many saw it fit to change it quite some time ago. The end of last season proved we can play some good stuff, so waiting til we're in a bit of a dogfight at the bottom of the league before mixing it up was a bit frustrating.