[Archived] Rovers versus Manchester City, 25th April 8pm

[JAL]

Thats a little harsh JAL? they've been great this season, and to be honest they shouldn't have been moved last night with Citys poor following, plenty of room.

Its right though Gav as harsh as it may seem.

[Paul Mellelieu]

4-4-2 against Man City's midfield was never going to work. We didn't get a touch for 20 minutes, until Benjani or Roberts started dropping off to make the fifth midfielder.

Mid week Kean had been reflecting on the Liverpool game, and stating that we need to go back to that kind of performance. I reckon that's why we went 4-4-2 last night. Surely a good manager looks at the oppositions strengths, in this case Man City's midfield, realises the first thing a team has to do is stop them from playing and pick a side to do that - not ignore the opposition in front of you and pick a side based on a game 2 or 3 months ago.

Spot on Den. When we lost the ball we played with three against five in midfield for most part. As for not bringing on Peds after their goal to take the corners, throw-ins, etc we were likely to get. Lost for words.

[Mattyblue]

Tom Finn himself has said that the majority of Darwen Enders don't bother going to the games that aren't included in their STs.

[Paul Mellelieu]

I'll say it once again we played 4-1-2-1-2 for the entire game (well up until the last 5 minutes when Mame Diouf) came on, we never at any point resorted to playing one upfront. Roberts and Benjani were clearly told to play high up the pitch at all times and never dropped back into midfield as you suggested, yes they were asked to work hard and chase down from the front but this is always crucial when playing two upfront especially in a diamond formation. The problem in the early stages was that we didn't press enough to begin with. Once we started closing down higher up the pitch and not allowing City time to dictate the play, we suddenley started to look the better team.

I agree five in midfield generally does make a team look more solid. But I thought bar the first 15 minutes we defended quite well even with the diamond shape in midfield.

I can see your argument, but in reality that didn't happen, as City moved the ball from flank to flank pulling Emerton and Olsen out wide to support the full backs. This left huge spaces in central areas leaving Jones to defend, with the sometime help of Dunn. How City did not bury us in the first 25 minutes is just a case of good luck on our part.

[thenodrog]

I thought rochina was a brave move and could've snatched us the winner.

foolhardy and amateurish. At the time we were enjoying our best spell of the match with 75 mins gone. A point would have been acceptable against City at that stage. A fine example of if it aint broke don't try to fix it.

[DavidMailsTightPerm]

Last night Showed again how daft it was to let diouf go with only emerton as an alternative.

And Hoilett ?

For me Diouf had run out of steam - whether he was effected more than most by Sam's sacking who knows - but he was nowhere near as effective when we let him go as he was early season.

I can see your argument, but in reality that didn't happen, as City moved the ball from flank to flank pulling Emerton and Olsen out wide to support the full backs. This left huge spaces in central areas leaving Jones to defend, with the sometime help of Dunn. How City did not bury us in the first 25 minutes is just a case of good luck on our part.

At any point will anyone congratulate Kean on seeing where the problem was and effectively changing the team pattern to correct it ? True he should have recognised how City would set up from the start - but he has had so much stick for his tactics - maybe he deserves some praise for getting it right.

Tom Finn himself has said that the majority of Darwen Enders don't bother going to the games that aren't included in their STs.

Could it possibly be that the cheap ST prices attract fans that couldn't normally afford to go ? Even at the reduced prices they find it difficult to afford the extra ?

For me - I attended Liverpool, but chose to watch the match on telly last night so I could afford to go to the United match. I will have spent just short of a BE ST - but attended one match less.

[booth]

At any point will anyone congratulate Kean on seeing where the problem was and

effectively changing the team pattern to correct it ? True he should have recognised how City would set up from the start - but he has had so much stick for his tactics - maybe he deserves some praise for getting it right.

Yes well done Steve Kean for recognising what everyone else on Ewood Park noticed within the first 5 minutes. Congratulations for cleaning up your own cock up.

In the same sentiment, you're an absolute tool end for replacing Dunn with Rochina. And you're a bigger one for replacing the better of our two front men.

But well done all the same. Big pat on the back. And well done for the rest of our forthcoming defeats in the future. Thanks Steve, you're the best.

[Tom]

And Hoilett ?

For me Diouf had run out of steam - whether he was effected more than most by Sam's sacking who knows - but he was nowhere near as effective when we let him go as he was early season.

What I meant was Emerton is the only alternative to Hoilett, now Junior is out it's not good enough having just Emo for the right wing.

[tony gale's mic]

At any point will anyone congratulate Kean on seeing where the problem was and effectively changing the team pattern to correct it ? True he should have recognised how City would set up from the start - but he has had so much stick for his tactics - maybe he deserves some praise for getting it right.

Yes. Let's praise our supreme overlord for costing us a point by replacing a midfielder with an inexperienced striker, against a midfield consisting of Barry and De Jong for the last twenty minutes against a team that were looking to break us down.

Give me strength.

[Amo]

And had Kean kept the same line-up and City still scored, people would bemoan his lack of ambition for not using one of our exciting young attackers. There's a fine line between defeat and victory.

[tony gale's mic]

And had Kean kept the same line-up and City still scored, people would bemoan his lack of ambition for not using one of our exciting young attackers. There's a fine line between defeat and victory.

No, noone would've bemoaned Kean not bringing on our exciting but hugely inexperienced young STRIKERS in MIDFIELD. That's the whole point.

If Kean had kept four midfielders in there, but taken off one of the strikers for Rocinha then no one wouldve been complaining too much and chances are we would've had a point to show for it - although it's hard to say for sure since City would've pressed a lot more in the closing minutes than they did in the end.

[Gav]

At any point will anyone congratulate Kean on seeing where the problem was and effectively changing the team pattern to correct it ? True he should have recognised how City would set up from the start - but he has had so much stick for his tactics - maybe he deserves some praise for getting it right.

I think Kean got things bang on last night, and I’ve said so earlier in the thread, got hammered for it but there you go.

David Silver was world class for the first 20 minutes and we couldn’t live with him, after that we didn’t really change formation for me, and dominated for large parts of the game.

That’s how I saw it DMTP.

[booth]

Bloody hell, why will some people not admit that he screwed up? If it was his first botch up I could understand it, but look at the league table! Look at the stats since he took over.

Sinking in yet?

[tony gale's mic]

I think Kean got things bang on last night, and I’ve said so earlier in the thread, got hammered for it but there you go.

David Silver was world class for the first 20 minutes and we couldn’t live with him, after that we didn’t really change formation for me, and dominated for large parts of the game.

That’s how I saw it DMTP.

I think you got hammered when you suggested that bringing on a striker who's played half a Premier League game in his career for an experienced central midfielder was "like for like", and that doing so against a City side with a strong midfield who were looking to break us down was in any way justifiable.

Especially when that's what led to City scoring.

[Amo]

No, noone would've bemoaned Kean not bringing on our exciting but hugely inexperienced young STRIKERS in MIDFIELD. That's the whole point.

If Kean had kept four midfielders in there, but taken off one of the strikers for Rocinha then no one wouldve been complaining too much and chances are we would've had a point to show for it - although it's hard to say for sure since City would've pressed a lot more in the closing minutes than they did in the end.

Replacing Dunn with Rochina was like-for-like, albeit one with younger, fresher legs.

Dunn has been playing the last few seasons as a second-striker, since he doesn't have the stamina to play CM, and his defensive work is hardly legendary. It really wasn't that big of a gamble.

[Gav]

I think you got hammered when you suggested that bringing on a striker who's played half a Premier League game in his career for an experienced central midfielder was "like for like", and that doing so against a City side with a strong midfield who were looking to break us down was in any way justifiable.

Especially when that's what led to City scoring.

Well TGM I still maintain Rochina was a straight swap for Dunny, who has played in an attacking midfield role more times than I care to remember. I think the substitution was the correct one, the young lad has the ability to win matches, Pedersen sadly hasn’t had that for some time.

So he gave the ball away and that led to Citys goal, if that would have been correctly ruled out for offside, and Roberts had been given a penalty, we'd have been happy campers - 'if buts and maybes'

Replacing Dunn with Rochina was like-for-like, albeit one with younger, fresher legs.

Dunn has been playing the last few seasons as a second-striker, since he doesn't have the stamina to play CM, and his defensive work is hardly legendary. It really wasn't that big of a gamble.

I couldn't agree more.

[tony gale's mic]

Replacing Dunn with Rochina was like-for-like, albeit one with younger, fresher legs.

Dunn has been playing the last few seasons as a second-striker, since he doesn't have the stamina to play CM, and his defensive work is hardly legendary. It really wasn't that big of a gamble.

Christ. Dunn wasn't playing as a second striker last night though, was he?! That's the only relevant thing to consider. Phil Jones spent much of the time before his injury playing as a midfielder, but if Kean had brought a midfielder on for him it wouldn't be like for like.

Dunn was playing very much in a central midfield role last night since we were playing 4-4-2. Dunn has been playing the advanced role when we've been playing 4-5-1 (like last season when he was in great form and scoring plenty of goals) but last night against a strong City midfield he was deeper than when we're playing 4-5-1 and along with Jermaine Jones did a good job in stopping City getting forward and distributing the ball well. He's also got the experience to deal with situations like the one which Rocinha faced last night. He doesn't have the stamina to play CM for 90 minutes which is why he needed to come off when he did, but there was numerous ways in which we could've had people stepping into the breach without going out of position.

At that stage of the game CM was absolutely our most crucial position since City were looking to break us down, yet Kean put Rocinha in there. Rocinha possesses hardly any of the attributes of a good central midfielder apart from the attacking attributes - things which weren't a priority at that stage. Hell if Kean had stuck him on a wing I could've understood.

But bringing on a striker for someone who had been playing CM THAT GAME is not like for like. That's a fact.

[den]

I'll say it once again we played 4-1-2-1-2 for the entire game (well up until the last 5 minutes when Mame Diouf) came on, we never at any point resorted to playing one upfront. Roberts and Benjani were clearly told to play high up the pitch at all times and never dropped back into midfield as you suggested,

I'll have to disagree grizfoot. After the first 20 mins, Benjani, or Roberts would drop back when we lost posession. Prior to that, they were both playing side by side up front. I didn't ever say we went one up front.

Kean said himself after the game that he made changes after the first 20 minutes. Now obviously none of us know what his orders were, but I remember saying to Baz during that first twenty minutes that both Benjani and Roberts were standing the wrong side of the ball, watching City pass it around at will. That definitely altered when one of them started to pick up an opponent whenever we lost posession. That's how I saw it grizfoot. Some people say that Dunn and jones turned it around by improving their game. Improving it well enough to outplay 5 City midfielders? I don't think so. We got more bodies in there.

[tony gale's mic]

Well TGM I still maintain Rochina was a straight swap for Dunny, who has played in an attacking midfield role more times than I care to remember. I think the substitution was the correct one, the young lad has the ability to win matches, Pedersen sadly hasn’t had that for some time.

So he gave the ball away and that led to Citys goal, if that would have been correctly ruled out for offside, and Roberts had been given a penalty, we'd have been happy campers - 'if buts and maybes'

Was Dunny playing as an attacking midfielder/second striker last night?

If you took off Phil Jones and replaced him with a midfielder, would that have been justified just because Jones has played in midfield before?

Should you look to shore up your midfield and keep it solid, or should you be putting players out of position in centre midfield when you're entering the last 20 minutes 0-0 against a vastly superior side looking to break you down?

And if that goal had been chalked off and Rovers scored it, there would've been absolute uproar on this board. Whether Ballotelli was interfering with play is in some ways a matter for opinion. But had Ballotelli not been standing in that position, Robbo still wouldn't have saved it. Dzeko was 8 yards out and hammered it into the corner. Robbo had no chance.

[Gav]

TGM, we've been here before, many times, and I think eventually we decided, I was right and you have much to learn

Lets leave it at that.

[Amo]

Christ. Dunn wasn't playing as a second striker last night though, was he?! That's the only relevant thing to consider. Phil Jones spent much of the time before his injury playing as a midfielder, but if Kean had brought a midfielder on for him it wouldn't be like for like.

Dunn was playing very much in a central midfield role last night since we were playing 4-4-2. Dunn has been playing the advanced role when we've been playing 4-5-1 (like last season when he was in great form and scoring plenty of goals) but last night against a strong City midfield he was deeper than when we're playing 4-5-1 and along with Jermaine Jones did a good job in stopping City getting forward and distributing the ball well. He's also got the experience to deal with situations like the one which Rocinha faced last night. He doesn't have the stamina to play CM for 90 minutes which is why he needed to come off when he did, but there was numerous ways in which we could've had people stepping into the breach without going out of position.

At that stage of the game CM was absolutely our most crucial position since City were looking to break us down, yet Kean put Rocinha in there. Rocinha possesses hardly any of the attributes of a good central midfielder apart from the attacking attributes - things which weren't a priority at that stage. Hell if Kean had stuck him on a wing I could've understood.

But bringing on a striker for someone who had been playing CM THAT GAME is not like for like. That's a fact.

Dunn was playing deeper that night, but the fact remains he was still out of position. He's predominantly an attacking midfielder/second striker. So how exactly is it a foolish gamble to replace one out of position player with another, especially when both players have similar attributes? Albeit Rochina is faster and more athletic?

[tony gale's mic]

TGM, we've been here before, many times, and I think eventually we decided, I was right and you have much to learn

Lets leave it at that.

There were just three questions, Gav. Just a simple yes or no would've done, apart from the last one where you could've bolded the bit which you agreed with. I don't actually recall debating bringing Rocinha on for Dunn with you before either.

I can understand why you're not so keen on arguing things out with me though...

[Gav]

There were just three questions, Gav. Just a simple yes or no would've done, apart from the last one where you could've bolded the bit which you agreed with. I don't actually recall debating bringing Rocinha on for Dunn with you before either.

I can understand why you're not so keen on arguing things out with me though...

You're right TGM

[tony gale's mic]

Dunn was playing deeper that night, but the fact remains he was still out of position. He's predominantly an attacking midfielder/second striker. So how exactly is it a foolish gamble to replace one out of position player with another, especially when both players have similar attributes? Albeit Rochina is faster and more athletic?

Christ, I can't believe you're even arguing this.

Dunn wasn't out of position. I don't know what kind of "facts" you operate on. Dunny is predominantly these days a central midfielder, back in the day when he had more pace and more legs he was more of an attacking midfielder.

He can operate as a central midfielder or as an attacking midfielder though. When we play 4-4-2 and Dunn is in the side, he usually plays the role he did yesterday, although against weaker teams he's been known to play a bit further forward. When we play 4-5-1, he often plays in a more advanced role, although against stronger teams he often drops back a bit more and shores up the midfield.

Dunn's got plenty of experience at playing the CM role for Blackburn in the Premier League and has usually done a solid job and knows what he's doing, though he's had his bad days too.

The Rovers site, probably the best objective and accurate source on the subject, lists Dunn as a MIDFIELDER, and Rocinha as a STRIKER.

So it wasn't like for like at all. I didn't disagree with Dunn coming off, but there were at least three other ways I can think of by which we could've done that without exposing a striker in centre midfield against De Jong and Barry. Especially one who'd had about an hour of Premier League game time in his career, and who wasn't used to the physicality of the league - something which cost him particularly dear against De Jong.

[Amo]

Christ, I can't believe you're even arguing this.

Then don't - and do us both a favour.

Even the last manager knew that Dunn's days as a CM were over, which is why the 4-5-1 formation was largely to accomodate Dunn's effectiveness NOT as a centre-midfielder but as an attacking midfielder/second-striker. It's been vocalized on these forums time and time again how Dunn is found out in CM because he hasn't the legs to play there anymore on a regular basis. That's why he played behind the striker, so the runners could do the leg-work for him.

And the official site lists Hoilett as a striker, but he plays out-wide. So what's your point?