[Archived] Morten Gamst Pedersen

[Mike E]

Yeah, Amarillo, you don't get a full picture of a players abilities on a TV screen. Conversely, it works both ways as well. I remember when Peds was linked to Spurs a few years ago. Spurs fans were purring about his abilities, obviously from watching the games on TV, at the time when he used to score screamers fairly regularly. We all knew that what they saw wasn't the real Pedersen, he was never as good as they thought. Plenty of fans from other clubs were of the same view about him as well, at that time, just from watching highlights from televised games.

As a Rovers fan, however, he's likely to watch 90min coverage of games in some capacity and look for the abilities of those on his team.

Neutrals tend to just watch highlights. Even in the event they watch 90mins, very few fans know much about clubs' players as they only watch the odd match featuring any given team.

Same principle as me knowing a fair bit about PL teams and naff all about FL72.

[Amo]

I think you do need ringside seats to see what a player contributes to a full match. There is plenty of action and hard work off the ball which the cameras (or your magical internet thing) doesn't show.

With the level of technology these days, "armchair" supporters such as moi aren't missing out on much. Obviously there are nuances of the game that you can't experience, but that works both ways. There's pros and cons to both mediums.

Btw, Amo'o, you use that "ad hominems" phrase a lot when this issues come up. Why do you perceive it to be a personal attack to point out that you don't attend matches?

Because there are many who purport the same argument about Pedersen who have watched him live, week in, week out, and people don't try to discredit their opinion. Or is it only when I disagree with popular opinion that it becomes an issue? You wouldn't take exception with me for saying Darren Peacock was one of the worst centre-backs to don the shirt, even though I didn't see his horror defending in person... would you?

[Fife Rover]

Yeh but after the hughes era we did not play with wongers for him to run onto crosses frm the roght which was what he was good at

Mmmm! That's definitely one of the more "interesting" posts on this thread so far.

[cn174]

about FL72.

You've been well and truly sucked in by Sky's new crap marketing though..... FL72 blergh!

[Mike E]

You've been well and truly sucked in by Sky's new crap marketing though..... FL72 blergh!

Just easier to type on a phone than 'the 72 Football League teams', that's all.

[Stuart]

I was watching an ad on Sky yesterday and it was a mixture of footballers and Sky sports presenters. I could help but feel like the are trying to become a fundamental part of the sport.

How long before Sky Sports are running the league I wonder?

[jim mk2]

Sky has been dictating the agenda in football for years. How come you've only just noticed ?

[Stuart]

Of course I'm aware of their influence. No, I meant actually running the league. Formally, officially.

[McClarky]

Officially or not they are running the league

[thenodrog]

When Venky's took over, I honestly thought Sam deserved a chance with some financial backing. There was no rejoicing in our house, when he was sacked.It didn't feel right to me.

Now to the heart of your question. Would I prefer to be watching the hoofball and to have been denied the hard knocks experience of Venky's. Kean, Anderson, Agnew, Singh? ..Er ..I think so..

Your doubtful answer is hardly in line with your board name Leonard.

Very honest to admit you goofed in your opposition to Big sam replacing Sparky. btw you haven't said yet whether you welcomed Ince or were as appalled as I was when his appointment was announced. I must say Ince did exceed my expectations cos I said from the start that he wouldn't still be here to put his office clock back! Truth is that it was only JW's refusal to admit that he'd keaned up big style that he was.

However.... Would it necessarily have been hoofball if Allardyce had been backed solidly by the Venkys financial muscle? It doesn't appear to currently be at WHU where he has had a bob or two to spend (Joe Cole is hardly a hoofball signing is he?) and it wasn't at Bolton when he was able to sign the likes of Okocha, Djorkaef, EHD, Anelka and Campo.

Allardyces pragmatism and adaptability in the face of very limited funding has actually been his undoing. Few managers imo would have been able to adapt so successfully to wildly changing ground rules. It would have sunk them without a trace. Tell you what Leonard.... if you fancy a flutter I'd urge you to put a bob or two on Big Sam replacing Woy when the time comes. He seeems to be setting his stall out very well.

You don't need ringside seats to see that Pedersen was not the same player as before.

And what ad hominems do you have for the regulars who feel the same?

Indeed not. BUT what the likes of you do not see is the bigger picture and the work of players OFF the ball.

My father never watched Ali, Foreman, Frazier et al in the flesh and he knows more about that era of boxing than most. I've seen enough of Rovers over the last ten years or so, to see a marked decline in Pedersen's game.

Attack the argument, not the man.

the argument.....

Grief! What a daft argument. The camera is full on a boxer the entire bout. Could your Dad see what was going on if there were 10 rings all next to each other?#

Now the man....

if you don't go to ewood to watch the match live you are entitled to make a comment however your opinion becomes virtually worthless in my eyes.

[Exiled in Toronto]

The TV gives only a limited view of a game and usually follows the ball - for instance, you cannot see the work players do off the ball on the other side of pitch.

It's only by attending matches that you see in interactions between players too. Eg, it was only when I attended a Rovers match at Derby about 5 years ago when I had a pitchside seat that I realised you much dog's abuse Pedersen was getting from the Benni McCarthy.

You don't need to be so defensive about your non-attendance but need to recognise that you don't see everything watching on t' internet.

Having watched plenty of both its swings and roundabouts. Live you do indeed see the bigger picture of what goes on off the ball, but then you only see everything once, from 50 yards away, just when some fat bloke stands up in front of you to go for a pee at the crucial moment. Many a time I would instantly rewind in a tv game to see exactly what happened.

[thenodrog]

Having watched plenty of both its swings and roundabouts. Live you do indeed see the bigger picture of what goes on off the ball, but then you only see everything once, from 50 yards away, just when some fat bloke stands up in front of you to go for a pee at the crucial moment. Many a time I would instantly rewind in a tv game to see exactly what happened.

You have a point but we can all still do that once we get home.

[LDRover]

Come on drog, I don't recall you being any less forthright in your opinions from the comfort of the clubhouse during your sabbatical!!

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

I've got to agree you. You can only really evaluate a players performance by actually watching at the ground. What players do off the ball is a vital element in the game. You only see evidence of that on T.V. when it's relevant to an incident. Ideally you should be able to see it all the time.

[T.J.Newton]

although its true you do get a broader perspective of the game and how all players are performing from being in the stands, when it comes to in-game incidents though you obviously get a better view on the tv, the fans in the stands unanimously call out for a penalty or sending of at least 4-5 times a piece every game but when you watch it on tv you can usually see quite clearly the ref/linesman is right far more than he is wrong.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

although its true you do get a broader perspective of the game and how all players are performing from being in the stands, when it comes to in-game incidents though you obviously get a better view on the tv, the fans in the stands unanimously call out for a penalty or sending of at least 4-5 times a piece every game but when you watch it on tv you can usually see quite clearly the ref/linesman is right far more than he is wrong.

I'm really talking about watching a game to purely evaluate one players contribution. As you would if you were scouting a player. I honestly think in that situation you've got to be at the game.

[Salgado Is A Hero]

Being able to see a player live plays a big part no question. Particularly with defensive players due to their positioning etc.

But once again a major factor in defending Pedersen is his defensive work. Covering the full back, Whether that be Josh Morris or Marcus Olsson.

It's not like we have Roberto Carlos or Leighton Baines in the side and left back was a major position for us.

You can't honestly tell me that we couldn't get a player in for cheaper who could do defensive work and take the odd decent set piece.

It's not the time for sentimentality. Players of Pedersen's ilk wouldn't get us promoted. Maybe players of Judge/Taylor's ilk wouldn't as well. But it's worth a shot. Pedersen's not good enough anymore. He hasn't been for some time.

i don't care that he could have gone to Spurs. I don't care that he kisses the badge, waves at the crowd or has a good blog. Well I do but not enough to see him play. Because of all the misplaced passes, dwelling on the ball and not getting properly stuck in.

I don't care that I don't see him live anymore. Like Topman says, there's plenty who do who don't rate him. Although they're just scapegoating him aren't they???

[thenodrog]

Come on drog, I don't recall you being any less forthright in your opinions from the comfort of the clubhouse during your sabbatical!!

I most definitely was.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

Being able to see a player live plays a big part no question. Particularly with defensive players due to their positioning etc.

But once again a major factor in defending Pedersen is his defensive work. Covering the full back, Whether that be Josh Morris or Marcus Olsson.

It's not like we have Roberto Carlos or Leighton Baines in the side and left back was a major position for us.

You can't honestly tell me that we couldn't get a player in for cheaper who could do defensive work and take the odd decent set piece.

It's not the time for sentimentality. Players of Pedersen's ilk wouldn't get us promoted. Maybe players of Judge/Taylor's ilk wouldn't as well. But it's worth a shot. Pedersen's not good enough anymore. He hasn't been for some time.

i don't care that he could have gone to Spurs. I don't care that he kisses the badge, waves at the crowd or has a good blog. Well I do but not enough to see him play. Because of all the misplaced passes, dwelling on the ball and not getting properly stuck in.

I don't care that I don't see him live anymore. Like Topman says, there's plenty who do who don't rate him. Although they're just scapegoating him aren't they???

That's my view also. I want players who'll do the business for Rovers out on the field, not a fiancée for my daughter.

[chris_h]

I most definitely was.

A very good point from LDRover.

I don't recall a period when you've been any less forthright with your opinions other than when serving a ban.

[alexanders]

Strange that There Are no new news about Morten

[darrenrover]

Strange that There Are no new news about Morten

Agreed Alexanders, I was thinking the same myself.

I presume he hasn't gone yet?

Perhaps a rethink but more likely delayed by financials of one sort or another.

[roveranout]

It was mentioned on SSN last night that their sources understand that a deal is close.

[Amo]

Indeed not. BUT what the likes of you do not see is the bigger picture and the work of players OFF the ball.

Oh, I've seen plenty of Pedersen 'off the ball', mainly when he's conceded possession with a lazy lofted pass, or his

half-hearted attempts to win back possession. He did cover the full-back in a match, though. That must be the Giggs-esque part of his game when the cameras aren't rolling.

The camera is full on a boxer the entire bout. Could your Dad see what was going on if there were 10 rings all next to each other?#

Now the man....

Do you watch one player across the entire 90 mins? No, of course you don't. You're too busy following the flow of the match, and afterwards form a general opinion of that player's performance based on what you remembered. Maybe there are elements of a player's game that armchair fans miss, but by and large they are offset by what they DO see. The cameras don't miss that much.

if you don't go to ewood to watch the match live you are entitled to make a comment however your opinion becomes virtually worthless in my eyes.

Coming from you, I'll take that as a compliment.

Come on drog, I don't recall you being any less forthright in your opinions from the comfort of the clubhouse during your sabbatical!!

We can add 'hypocrisy' to the growing list of Drog's...ahem... qualities.

[Stuart]

Oh, I've seen plenty of Pedersen 'off the ball', mainly when he's conceded possession with a lazy lofted pass, or his

half-hearted attempts to win back possession. He did cover the full-back in a match, though. That must be the Giggs-esque part of his game when the cameras aren't rolling.

Do you watch one player across the entire 90 mins? No, of course you don't. You're too busy following the flow of the match, and afterwards form a general opinion of that player's performance based on what you remembered. Maybe there are elements of a player's game that armchair fans miss, but by and large they are offset by what they DO see. The cameras don't miss that much.

Coming from you, I'll take that as a compliment.

We can add 'hypocrisy' to the growing list of Drog's...ahem... qualities.

Speaking as someone who has been on both sides of the fence, I would NEVER try to suggest that I could talk about a match or a player's performance with the same level of knowledge as someone who was at the game - because I saw it on TV or on a website screen. I just wouldn't. You don't see the same game on TV as live at a match. I don't go to a lot of away games and I will usually accept what people who went tell me about it.

But even depending on where you sit, you get a different perspective of a game. Next time you go to a match, sit in the upper tier of the BBE (if you haven't already). You get a great appreciation of shape and the pace of the game and, in particular, the work that goes on off the ball. It's difficult to get that appreciation of, let alone belittle people's opinions about, a player based on what part of the pitch Sky TV decide is important to the armchair viewer (i.e. the ball or a bit of fisticuffs). But wherever you sit, you DO get a view of the whole pitch which provides a massively different perspective on things.

Incidentally, I would accept your opinion about, and bow to your knowledge of, Villareal over most people on this messageboard, but surely you wouldn't claim to be as up-to-speed as a Villareal fan who was at the match? So maybe there is a hierarchy here. Is it fair to compare opinions between a fan who watched the entire game on TV with someone who read the paper and saw a couple of pictures of a "tackle" and a "header", for instance?