[Archived] Jordan Rhodes

[eire3382]

I also find it amazing that a few on here and a lot on Twitter constantly say that they don’t rate Jordan Rhodes. I can’t fathom that. While his all round game could be better, for me the primary function of a striker is to score goals. Rhodes has done that consistently over the last 3 years, if you create chances for him then he will more often than not put them away. In football goalscorers are like gold dust.

I think he can make the jump to the Premier League, he would be playing with better quality players and should in theory receive better quality service. While it is true he would be up against better quality defenders, his game is all about movement and getting into dangerous areas, he would be able to do that in the PL.

His allround game does need a bit of work but it has come on over the last 12 months. He is not an Alan Shearer type striker who was fantastic in almost all facets of his game, he is more of an Ian Rush striker who made a living out of being a very regular goalscorer.

100% agree with all the above, he is a striker who needs a good supply and the group of young players GB is putting together seem capable of creating for him. If he was the finished article he wouldn't be at rovers and thats a simple fact.

[RevidgeBlue]

I also find it amazing that a few on here and a lot on Twitter constantly say that they don’t rate Jordan Rhodes. I can’t fathom that. While his all round game could be better, for me the primary function of a striker is to score goals. Rhodes has done that consistently over the last 3 years, if you create chances for him then he will more often than not put them away. In football goalscorers are like gold dust.

I think he can make the jump to the Premier League, he would be playing with better quality players and should in theory receive better quality service. While it is true he would be up against better quality defenders, his game is all about movement and getting into dangerous areas, he would be able to do that in the PL.

His allround game does need a bit of work but it has come on over the last 12 months. He is not an Alan Shearer type striker who was fantastic in almost all facets of his game, he is more of an Ian Rush striker who made a living out of being a very regular goalscorer.

I agree Kamy. When news broke of Arsenals move for Demba Ba breaking down, if it had been anyone but Wenger who seems to have an aversion to signing British players I'd have been worried.

Rhodes' critics will scoff but I think he'd be absolutely ideal for Arsenal. Usually when you're watching them tippy tappying the ball around the box and trying to pass the ball in from a yard you're tearing your hair out thinking "shoot!".

Quite often they just need someone to swing a boot at it and stick the ball in the onion bag. Rhodes would fit the bill ideally imo.

[M-K]

I think he can make the jump to the Premier League

Maybe he can, but no Premier League managers seem that certain.

If he was in the Jon Stead price range then somebody would surely have had a go, just not at the kind of money required to pay off the debt to Huddersfield. It's not like he's some teenage wonderkid that the entire world is watching.

[Dan]

I agree Kamy. When news broke of Arsenals move for Demba Ba breaking down, if it had been anyone but Wenger who seems to have an aversion to signing British players I'd have been worried.

Rhodes' critics will scoff but I think he'd be absolutely ideal for Arsenal. Usually when you're watching them tippy tappying the ball around the box and trying to pass the ball in from a yard you're tearing your hair out thinking "shoot!".

Quite often they just need someone to swing a boot at it and stick the ball in the onion bag. Rhodes would fit the bill ideally imo.

Maybe Wenger is a little wary after signing the 'fox in the box' for a fairly hefty fee all those years ago?

[JBiz]

Right any more of this off topic stuff will be removed from here on in

If you don't like that I don't really care I'm just bored of it all

That Jordan Rhodes is a good player eh?

I'm happy to discuss Jordan - The post you deleted was based on a discussion about JR11 and the simple fact that one other posters opinions and beliefs are so hinged on winding people up, it is untrue. If you don't agree with me - thats fine, as this is a message-board where opinions clash - but my opinion of you is greatly suffering if you see fit to delete posts which are relevant to past discussion based on the player in question. End of the day, it is not your job to moderate those you don't agree with.

If you can simply say that he has the right to express his opinions in any way he chooses, why are you deleting other posts? I have made no bones about the fact that I believe him to be a danger to himself (based on what I read) and this should be noticed by all who have humanistic approaches to life. If he doesn't suffer from any of the pre-mentioned problems - then he is either a Troll or a WUM.

Simply - You cannot be a successful moderator if you cannot spot a troll. I'll put this into a hypothetical sense to help (I'll also use Jordan Rhodes and Huddersfield to keep it within remit);

A poster from the Hudds board has been banging on about Rhodes leaving for 6 months before he left to go to Rovers. This is a sensitive subject, being the best player in the team and the goalscorer - (the one that you cheer for mostly). During this time, the poster has implicitly suggested that the inner workings of the club are making it impossible to stay - mainly based on finance. The poster has no evidence, just whispers which he constantly reports as true facts. The day that Jordan leaves is getting nearer and the poster has changed from club to club with his suggestions of where he will end up. The "facts" at this stage are simply whispers and interpretations (i.e. 2+2=50). In response to questions by fellow posters, he simply skirts any which are unanswerable - favouring the interpretations of whispers. This makes discussion pointless, i.e. - if you said the sky was pink, but refused to look out the window. Finally Hudds sell their star man to Rovers (the original posters third choice and bet) and the message board is filled with "hate to say I told you so"

As you can see (if you can be assed reading this far before deleting the post) there is a subtle difference in the ending of my hypothetical story. The original point was made - if you cannot spot a troll, you should not me moderating - and as a member/reader of this board for sometime - I know this is not the first time that this poster (who I am suggesting is a either a troll or has problems) has made brash suggestions based on whispers. Always sweeping statements intended to cause an element of trepidation like :"the club will have new owners by 7th of august"

Kammy - I also apologise if you took my sensibilities personally - but you have to admit at times you have made posts that are guesses or whispers, interpreted by your knowledge and contacts. At least your posts have only one agenda - and that is to give fans snippets of what is going at the club. My issue is, people will read this and take it as fact. They post it on twitter and it gets repeated. Mark who tweets, he is also a friend of mine since childhood, yet his representation of facts on twitter drives everybody mental. Especially when it is such a sore and touchy subject such as your club is in financial chaos or your most expensive signing and best finisher in the club is leaving in a firesale.

Discussion is one thing - scandalmongering is another.

[RevidgeBlue]

Maybe he can, but no Premier League managers seem that certain.

If he was in the Jon Stead price range then somebody would surely have had a go, just not at the kind of money required to pay off the debt to Huddersfield. It's not like he's some teenage wonderkid that the entire world is watching.

Paul Hawksbee of Hawksbee and Jacobs made the same point on Talksport today. For the sort of money we would likely be demanding off a Premiership Club (12 -15m ) no - one has so far been prepared to gamble on him.

(Luckily for us)

[rhodie]

I'll give you several good reasons for this. The rao family, Singh, A certain agent, a useless pretence for a manager, 2 other failed appointments, Paul Agnew, Derek Shaw. Is it any wonder that over the last few years we have become so accustomed to "if they can muck it up they will" and downright lies, that, even knowing that Bowyer is more honest than many, we find it hard to know where clubspeak finishes and the truth starts? We want to be able to trust what comes out of the club but we've all become even bigger cynics than ever nowadays

I agree wholeheartedly Gumboots, I know, we as a club have experienced a lot of idiocy over the last couple of years but it still shouldn`t stop us using common sense.

The formatting on that post makes me read it like some kind of disastrous beat poetry.

lol , all I did was double space it.

[Tom]

I'm happy to discuss Jordan - The post you deleted was based on a discussion about JR11 and the simple fact that one other posters opinions and beliefs are so hinged on winding people up, it is untrue. If you don't agree with me - thats fine, as this is a message-board where opinions clash - but my opinion of you is greatly suffering if you see fit to delete posts which are relevant to past discussion based on the player in question. End of the day, it is not your job to moderate those you don't agree with.

If you can simply say that he has the right to express his opinions in any way he chooses, why are you deleting other posts? I have made no bones about the fact that I believe him to be a danger to himself (based on what I read) and this should be noticed by all who have humanistic approaches to life. If he doesn't suffer from any of the pre-mentioned problems - then he is either a Troll or a WUM.

Simply - You cannot be a successful moderator if you cannot spot a troll. I'll put this into a hypothetical sense to help (I'll also use Jordan Rhodes and Huddersfield to keep it within remit);

A poster from the Hudds board has been banging on about Rhodes leaving for 6 months before he left to go to Rovers. This is a sensitive subject, being the best player in the team and the goalscorer - (the one that you cheer for mostly). During this time, the poster has implicitly suggested that the inner workings of the club are making it impossible to stay - mainly based on finance. The poster has no evidence, just whispers which he constantly reports as true facts. The day that Jordan leaves is getting nearer and the poster has changed from club to club with his suggestions of where he will end up. The "facts" at this stage are simply whispers and interpretations (i.e. 2+2=50). In response to questions by fellow posters, he simply skirts any which are unanswerable - favouring the interpretations of whispers. This makes discussion pointless, i.e. - if you said the sky was pink, but refused to look out the window. Finally Hudds sell their star man to Rovers (the original posters third choice and bet) and the message board is filled with "hate to say I told you so"

As you can see (if you can be assed reading this far before deleting the post) there is a subtle difference in the ending of my hypothetical story. The original point was made - if you cannot spot a troll, you should not me moderating - and as a member/reader of this board for sometime - I know this is not the first time that this poster (who I am suggesting is a either a troll or has problems) has made brash suggestions based on whispers. Always sweeping statements intended to cause an element of trepidation like :"the club will have new owners by 7th of august"

Kammy - I also apologise if you took my sensibilities personally - but you have to admit at times you have made posts that are guesses or whispers, interpreted by your knowledge and contacts. At least your posts have only one agenda - and that is to give fans snippets of what is going at the club. My issue is, people will read this and take it as fact. They post it on twitter and it gets repeated. Mark who tweets, he is also a friend of mine since childhood, yet his representation of facts on twitter drives everybody mental. Especially when it is such a sore and touchy subject such as your club is in financial chaos or your most expensive signing and best finisher in the club is leaving in a firesale.

Discussion is one thing - scandalmongering is another.

The post I removed had no relevance to anything that needed to be discussed and I couldn't be less concerned about folks perceptions on my skill as a moderator

I've hidden plenty of Mercermans posts when I deem them not to be relevant, in this instance his view wasn't a popular one but it was on the subject matter, if folk don't care for him you are welcome to ignore him. I think the problem is he like Philip before him is clearly an intelligent bloke and they both speak their opinion (key word) with an air of authority so people seek to pick holes when it doesn't come to pass.

[gumboots]

Actually Tom it wasn't his posting of his opinion that bothered people - loads of folk pick up bits from people who really do know at least a fragment of what's going on. It was the way in which he insulted any who suggested he might be wrong and seemed to revel in the possibility of Rhodes leaving for a rival whilst all the time saying that he didn't want it to happen. that's what people really didn't like - his whole patronising of anyone who dared question him. I don't doubt he'd heard rumours. I don't doubt he believed they had an element of truth in them. I don't doubt that we could probably have done with selling Rhodes from a short term financial point of view. I just hated the way he sounded so supercilious and condescending to anyone who disagreed. And Jordan Rhodes is a cracking goalscorer and now I'm back from globetrotting, I can't wait to see him play his part in Bowyer's new young team.

[den]

I also find it amazing that a few on here and a lot on Twitter constantly say that they dont rate Jordan Rhodes. I cant fathom that. While his all round game could be better, for me the primary function of a striker is to score goals. Rhodes has done that consistently over the last 3 years, if you create chances for him then he will more often than not put them away. In football goalscorers are like gold dust.I think he can make the jump to the Premier League, he would be playing with better quality players and should in theory receive better quality service. While it is true he would be up against better quality defenders, his game is all about movement and getting into dangerous areas, he would be able to do that in the PL.

Not true Kamy. There are dozens of goalscorers in the lower leagues who wouldn't get a kick in the PL. Lots of fans on here thought that Gallagher and Derbyshire just to name 2 , at 23 years of age would improve their game, but they didn't.

[John]

Francies Jeffers, fox in the box, probably brings back bad memories for Arsenal fans.

[gumboots]

They weren't as prolific as Rhodes though. He's done it for a couple of years now - not just one season wonders

[JBiz]

The post I removed had no relevance to anything that needed to be discussed and I couldn't be less concerned about folks perceptions on my skill as a moderator

I've hidden plenty of Mercermans posts when I deem them not to be relevant, in this instance his view wasn't a popular one but it was on the subject matter, if folk don't care for him you are welcome to ignore him. I think the problem is he like Philip before him is clearly an intelligent bloke and they both speak their opinion (key word) with an air of authority so people seek to pick holes when it doesn't come to pass.

You miss my point.

Phillipl cannot be compared, because the way phillipl posted showed genuine concern for the club - it showed in the passion he put into his opinions and posts. Yes - many negative tinged and he bought (massively) into a lot of the conspiracies around at that time. The difference is, you will never find a post written by Phillipl, which was so obviously and purely intended to cause "aggro"

Lastly - and I will not discuss this any further. (simply ignoring is pointless due the quote system)

If you need me to cite and find 20 of MM's posts and point out to you the difference in intention - I will. It is (to me at least) so obvious that his intention and agenda was not based on letting people know what he heard, it was an agenda driven by the enjoyment and attention of winding people up.

[Tom]

Last post on it from me (for now)

If you have a problem with a post please use the report function, we are limited in numbers and can miss things when skimming a thread

[jim mk2]

I

His allround game does need a bit of work but it has come on over the last 12 months. He is not an Alan Shearer type striker who was fantastic in almost all facets of his game, he is more of an Ian Rush striker who made a living out of being a very regular goalscorer.

Disagree. Ian Rush was a good allround footballer who worked very hard for the team. When Liverpool did not have possession he was a very at "pressing", putting opposing defenders under severe pressure. I remember him making and scoring alot of goals for himself doing that. He was also extremely fast, and I don't think anyone would argue that Rhodes lacks pace. If Rhodes ends up half the player Ian Rush was, he will be doing very well.

The thing I find intruiging about yesterday is why Whelan pitched his alleged offer at only £6m. Does he have insider knowledge that Rovers are in financial trouble and was tempting the owners to sell in view of the fact we overpaid for Rhodes in the first place ?

[onlyonejackwalker]

Please to see JR back amongst the goals as I was a little concerned by his lacklustre pre and early season performances. Probably understandable with lots going on behind the scenes. Let's hope we can keep creating chances for him and keep him firing.

As to all the nonsense about the views of one poster. Suggest people give their head a rattle. MM has never come close to upsetting me, but then again why should he? I don't give a flick what he posts and all contributions on here should be taken with a pinch of salt anyway. It's a message board, not a court submission.

It was always highly unlikely that JR would leave, for a myriad of different reasons and many of us held that view. If thinking for yourself and holding your own view, how can someone else influence that anyway? Strange.

[Leonard Venkhater]

Please to see JR back amongst the goals as I was a little concerned by his lacklustre pre and early season performances. Probably understandable with lots going on behind the scenes. Let's hope we can keep creating chances for him and keep him firing.

As to all the nonsense about the views of one poster. Suggest people give their head a rattle. MM has never come close to upsetting me, but then again why should he? I don't give a flick what he posts and all contributions on here should be taken with a pinch of salt anyway. It's a message board, not a court submission.

It was always highly unlikely that JR would leave, for a myriad of different reasons and many of us held that view. If thinking for yourself and holding your own view, how can someone else influence that anyway? Strange.

Yes. A bit too much like a message board equivalent of Lord of the Flies for me....

[donnermeat]

Disagree. Ian Rush was a good allround footballer who worked very hard for the team. When Liverpool did not have possession he was a very at "pressing", putting opposing defenders under severe pressure.

Rhodes presses defenders (and the goalkeeper) the majority of the time Jim and has done since day one. Don't know whether Rush did it more as I was only young when he was in the latter stages of his career.

[DE.]

Not true Kamy. There are dozens of goalscorers in the lower leagues who wouldn't get a kick in the PL. Lots of fans on here thought that Gallagher and Derbyshire just to name 2 , at 23 years of age would improve their game, but they didn't.

These are both ridiculous comparisons. Neither Derbyshire nor Gallagher showed the kind of potential Rhodes has at any point whilst they were with us and haven't done since.

[Parsonblue]

You miss my point.

Phillipl cannot be compared, because the way phillipl posted showed genuine concern for the club - it showed in the passion he put into his opinions and posts. Yes - many negative tinged and he bought (massively) into a lot of the conspiracies around at that time. The difference is, you will never find a post written by Phillipl, which was so obviously and purely intended to cause "aggro"

Lastly - and I will not discuss this any further. (simply ignoring is pointless due the quote system)

If you need me to cite and find 20 of MM's posts and point out to you the difference in intention - I will. It is (to me at least) so obvious that his intention and agenda was not based on letting people know what he heard, it was an agenda driven by the enjoyment and attention of winding people up.

MM only wound up those who allowed themselves to be wound up. Many others have enjoyed his contributions. A forum should allow all views and as long as they are polite and not offensive I really don't see a problem. However, some of the attacks on MM have been out of order - in my opinion of course. And a forum is all about different opinions. There are many different opinions about Rhodes ability outside of the penalty area and the fact that no other club made a serious bid for him would suggest that those clubs believe he is still developing. However, if he improves certain aspects of his game I have no doubt that come January or next summer we will have to fend off offers for him.

[RevidgeBlue]

The thing I find intruiging about yesterday is why Whelan pitched his alleged offer at only £6m. Does he have insider knowledge that Rovers are in financial trouble and was tempting the owners to sell in view of the fact we overpaid for Rhodes in the first place ?

Nice try. According to Whelan himself he didn't pitch any offer at all, derisory or otherwise.

[darrenrover]

Nice try. According to Whelan himself he didn't pitch any offer at all, derisory or otherwise.

I think Owen Coyle would probably say differently Rev.

[Jock]

Disagree. Ian Rush was a good allround footballer who worked very hard for the team. When Liverpool did not have possession he was a very at "pressing", putting opposing defenders under severe pressure. I remember him making and scoring alot of goals for himself doing that. He was also extremely fast, and I don't think anyone would argue that Rhodes lacks pace. If Rhodes ends up half the player Ian Rush was, he will be doing very well.

The thing I find intruiging about yesterday is why Whelan pitched his alleged offer at only £6m. Does he have insider knowledge that Rovers are in financial trouble and was tempting the owners to sell in view of the fact we overpaid for Rhodes in the first place ?

Cant have become a multi millionaire without trampling over a few. Ask his son-in-law what he's like, oh yeah you can't.

[Howler]

MM only wound up those who allowed themselves to be wound up. Many others have enjoyed his contributions. A forum should allow all views and as long as they are polite and not offensive I really don't see a problem. However, some of the attacks on MM have been out of order - in my opinion of course. And a forum is all about different opinions. There are many different opinions about Rhodes ability outside of the penalty area and the fact that no other club made a serious bid for him would suggest that those clubs believe he is still developing. However, if he improves certain aspects of his game I have no doubt that come January or next summer we will have to fend off offers for him.

Good post Parson. I always wonder why people feel the need to be abusive to other posters on here and can't just ignore those they disagree with or dislike, or at least respond in a constructive manner. The pack mentality shown by many on here has been pathetic and has gone far beyond banter, although I think MM can take it.

Anyway, glad Rhodes has stayed and he will be a great asset for us with his goals, especially as now it looks like he will enjoy decent service. Lets hope Dunn stays fit and King and Cairney can reproduce the form of the last couple of games.

[DE.]

MM only wound up those who allowed themselves to be wound up.

Been saying this for a while. Mercer's harmless, really. Take what he says with a pinch of salt and there's really no reason to get irritated. He may have repeated the same thing quite often but he never turbo posted, which has always been my biggest gripe with the more boring WUM's. Mercer might enjoy winding people up a bit, but I find him quite amusing.