[Archived] Rovers v some other team: 14th September 2013

[Salgado Is A Hero]

Interesting reading the comment about whether or not Ings had to go down. I thought that myself. I'd need to see it again but he should have tried to stay on his feet a bit more I think. If it's in the first half then yea, play against 10 men but not in injury time.

[Baz]

Interesting reading the comment about whether or not Ings had to go down. I thought that myself. I'd need to see it again but he should have tried to stay on his feet a bit more I think. If it's in the first half then yea, play against 10 men but not in injury time.

He was rugby tackled to be fair. He said after the game he tried to stay on his feet.

[RevidgeBlue]

Hahaha they're trying to change the rules now! They want to trade it for a penalty?haha they're really are idiots

The way it fell, into injury time, going down to ten men is no punishment at all to us really.

Oh dear what a shame never mind! Bound to happen to us at some point as well eventually though.

[matt83]

I think Williamson had made the decision that Ings was going down and did enough to take him down. Had he tried harder to stay on his feet I got the impression Williamson would have done more to take him down.

Considering nothing came of it its a pretty good contribution for 1 minute on the pitch.

[Tom]

The way it fell, into injury time, going down to ten men is no punishment at all to us really.

Oh dear what a shame never mind! Bound to happen to us at some point as well eventually though.

And in fairness the only one on the receiving end of bad officiating today was us

Rhodes was clearly onside and clean through

[Hasta]

Williamson stopped Ings going clean on goal. The ref stopped Rhodes going clean on goal. One gets punished. One doesn't. Which team is more hard done to?

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

He was rugby tackled to be fair. He said after the game he tried to stay on his feet.

If he tackled like that for my rugby team he wouldn't last long.

[DavidMailsTightPerm]

He was rugby tackled to be fair. He said after the game he tried to stay on his feet.

In a game of touch rugby maybe - it is programmed into players (not just Burnley) to go down too easily. It is always difficult to say 100% - but I think he could have stayed on his feet - and possibly gone on to score. Either way - means nothing - we drew.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

In a game of touch rugby maybe - it is programmed into players (not just Burnley) to go down too easily. It is always difficult to say 100% - but I think he could have stayed on his feet - and possibly gone on to score. Either way - means nothing - we drew.

I thought he went down easily. It was still a sending off but in my view he'd no intentions of taking the ball any further.

[RevidgeBlue]

Hahaha they're trying to change the rules now! They want to trade it for a penalty?haha they're really are idiots

Edit: oops

[Majiball]

Someone up there definitely likes us!!

[RevidgeBlue]

And in fairness the only one on the receiving end of bad officiating today was us

Rhodes was clearly onside and clean through

Absolutely.

There was barely any point us taking a free kick or corner most of the time either. The ref had obviously made up his mind to blow for a foul before the ball was even played in.

[Wing Wizard Windy Miller]

Just finished watching the game (had a self imposed media black out) till got in. More than happy with the result and on the second half performance I fancy us to beat them at Ewood.

The lack of a loan signing by the club is a shambles though. To go into a game with no striker on the bench is ridiculous. We've been told one is on the way for about 5 weeks now. Hopefully, one or two come through the door in time for Leicester.

Slated the signing of Lee Williamson when he came last year but hats off to the lad, he's earned his contract for that foul today.

[Roverthechimp]

Surprised at the negativity on here - thought Burnley looked solid and strong but we showed them how to play football in spells. A good goal by them but we also had chances to get shots away from outside the box but spent too long "dithering" - likewise a whole bunch of corners without 1 of them really falling to a rovers player. Comical equaliser but a fair (and deserved) away point but we naturally miss rochina and/or dunn.

Of course i agree that we do tend to get suckered into being a little deep at times but credit to the opposition for their tactics.

[thenodrog]

We've been conceding goals with free shots from outside the penalty area for too long.

LD Rover thinks it's OK.

[arbitro]

A fully deserved point in my opinion. For their better possession in the first half they didn't create much, their best chance being when Kean kicked the ball against Vokes. We were the better side in the second half again without creating too much. The referee was poor and what on earth he kept seeing when he gave several free-kicks against us in the penalty area God only knows. His decision to stop play when Rhodes was through on goal beggars belief.

We saw the usual Neanderthals while we were coming in and going out and the majority of them had more fingers than teeth. I just saw that two 25 year old women from Blackburn were arrested as they left the ground for attempting to steal seats.

As an aside I thought asbestos had been banned and should be replaced. For nigh on three hours today a few thousand Rovers fans were almost surrounded by it.

[LDRover]

Funny that. I'm sure my point was that neither of the defensive midfielders bothered to close the shot down.

[darrenrover]

A fully deserved point in my opinion. For their better possession in the first half they didn't create much, their best chance being when Kean kicked the ball against Vokes. We were the better side in the second half again without creating too much. The referee was poor and what on earth he kept seeing when he gave several free-kicks against us in the penalty area God only knows. His decision to stop play when Rhodes was through on goal beggars belief.

We saw the usual Neanderthals while we were coming in and going out and the majority of them had more fingers than teeth. I just saw that two 25 year old women from Blackburn were arrested as they left the ground for attempting to steal seats.

As an aside I thought asbestos had been banned and should be replaced. For nigh on three hours today a few thousand Rovers fans were almost surrounded by it.

Very much as I saw it. We got the least that we went for, a point will do.

35 years and counting, allegedly Zack's having a one nighter with Lisa Riley on the strength of a point.

COYB!!

[DavidMailsTightPerm]

Surprised at the negativity on here - thought Burnley looked solid and strong but we showed them how to play football in spells. A good goal by them but we also had chances to get shots away from outside the box but spent too long "dithering" - likewise a whole bunch of corners without 1 of them really falling to a rovers player. Comical equaliser but a fair (and deserved) away point but we naturally miss rochina and/or dunn.

Of course i agree that we do tend to get suckered into being a little deep at times but credit to the opposition for their tactics.

A couple of things - wasn't just a good goal - that was a goal of the season contender and out of context with much of the match. All those corners (decent delivery most of the time) and nothing to show for it - maybe this is why GB is after Wilbraham ?

[West Yorks Rover]

Nine arrests at the match.

Which included two 25 year old women from Blackburn, for trying to steal seats from the stadium.

I wonder whether they were the normal seats or toilet seats ?

[thenodrog]

Wrong.

His job is to cut out the supply, if he drops with the runner the player with the ball moves forward in the space inviting more pressure.

The basic area that you're missing is that neither of our two central defensive midfielders were anywhere near to closing the shot down. 25 yards out as well. No fault of Cairney's there for me.

I've not seen this again but was the guilty player definitely Cairney or was it Evans? Whoever it was has no defence cos he went to sleep. He was the nearest man and any teammate would assume that he would drop to pick up Stanislav and find another man to mark. You should know enough about football to know that. Football isn't run by a commitee you know.

[arbitro]

I've not seen this again but was the guilty player definitely Cairney or was it Evans? Whoever it was has no defence cos he went to sleep. He was the nearest man and any teammate would assume that he would drop to pick up Stanislav and find another man to mark. You should know enough about football to know that. Football isn't run by a commitee you know.

But a well executed one-two with pace is difficult to defend (most people who have played the game say this). I would rather give credit to Ings and Stanislaus for their movement than be over critical of Cairney.

[thenodrog]

I look forward to DJ and later Rochina coming back to support Rhodes. If we can get a big, physical forward in on loan who is good in the air to support him up front and do some of the donkey-work that would be great - free him up to tuck away the scraps. I jokingly thought we should try and get our young lad back from Bury and offer them Best on loan in exchange

Personally I think that would take away the balance that fast raiding flanks and a schemer behind Rhodes have created. We might need a big physical CF for some matches (e.g. Millwall last season) but that would be instead of Rhodes not alongside him.

[LDRover]

My only argument was that it's not the attacking midfielder's job to follow runners and close shots down when there's already 9 men between him and the goal.

[bob fleming]

Yes, he wasn't closed down, it was a good ping, but I have to blame our keeper. Poor.