[Archived] Jordan Rhodes

[Stuart]

Rhodes isn't lamented Stuart. How much 'lamenting' have you experienced since his decent performance on Saturday, compared to those that consistently lament Lowe after a good/bad or mediocre performance? A typical over-reaction from one of the senior members of the JRWOW club.

Ah, so we are simply talking about him on a match-by-match basis then. That's just fickle, Jimmy. If we are criticising players surely that shouldn't only be dished based on current form? When you look at what the two players are capable of it's amazing that Rhodes comes on for so much stick, whereas Lowe only does mediocre, THAT'S his biggest problem.

As for senior members blah-blah. You should note that it's not me that keeps bringing the topic up. If you actually read my posts on the topic, you would see me mentioning 'priorities'.

The trouble with fickle fans like you is that you won't be happy til Rhodes is gone, then you still won't be happy, and you'll wish we had him back.

Personally I dont know how some of you longer standing members can keep discussing lowe and rhodes. I've not really posted that long and discussions re the two of them already hurts my head

Further still, I've not seen 1 person change their opinion even after a gazillion posts debating both players to death.

Sorry FFS. Sometimes - quite often in fact - debates aren't neatly wrapped up like a Columbo movie. Personally I think it's a big issue that seems to polarise opinion. Funny thing is though, I've not ONCE heard any fellow fans walking out of the ground saying 'what a great player that Lowe is'. It's a BRFCS-ism.

[FGS5635]

My comment wasnt a dig at you, just a general observation of the whole lowe and rhodes debates on this site.

Not sure we have any 'great' players anymore. Im a fan of rovers, not lowe or rhodes. Both have good games, both have bad games.

They both have a job to do and for the most part both do it quite well at this level. Both can improve though and thats all I look for and if that doesnt happen then I'd question why.

[Jimmy612]

Ah, so we are simply talking about him on a match-by-match basis then. That's just fickle, Jimmy. If we are criticising players surely that shouldn't only be dished based on current form? When you look at what the two players are capable of it's amazing that Rhodes comes on for so much stick, whereas Lowe only does mediocre, THAT'S his biggest problem.

As for senior members blah-blah. You should note that it's not me that keeps bringing the topic up. If you actually read my posts on the topic, you would see me mentioning 'priorities'.

The trouble with fickle fans like you is that you won't be happy til Rhodes is gone, then you still won't be happy, and you'll wish we had him back.

Sorry FFS. Sometimes - quite often in fact - debates aren't neatly wrapped up like a Columbo movie. Personally I think it's a big issue that seems to polarise opinion. Funny thing is though, I've not ONCE heard any fellow fans walking out of the ground saying 'what a great player that Lowe is'. It's a BRFCS-ism.

Well, now this is interesting. Generally most of those who have some criticism of Rhodes would say that his all round play is generally quite poor i.e. back to goal, touch, ability to play as a front man. By all accounts on Saturday he did these aspects well and scored a very good goal. Why would anyone jump on here to criticise a player that has played well... Unless of course they had some kind of personal vendetta against them.... now then which section of the Rovers faithful would you associate with that behaviour?

However, when Rhodes is playing poorly and in particular not scoring (ala Oct/Nov), then naturally people will criticise his performances - is this not normal? Especially when he is considered a Demigod by much of the fan base and cost us a record transfer fee. Remind me, what did Jason Lowe cost us? Naturally your most expensive and most talented player will get stick if the fan base feel he isn't pulling his weight. Especially when, as you say yourself, one has far more potential than the other.

With regard to me not being happy until Rhodes is gone, in the summer I wrote an article for a friend as he wanted a 'two way view' e.g. should we sell Rhodes or not. The following extract explains my thoughts relatively well;

''I don’t think there is a single Blackburn Rovers fan out there who would sacrifice Rhodes without the promise that the money would be properly re-invested. Not one of us would say ‘we can afford to lose him because we have better options in the squad.’ What some of us would say however, is that sometimes you have to sacrifice a player for the benefit of the squad.'

Could we sell Rhodes for the £8m that we paid for him? Would Gary Bowyer be granted permission to spend the money? Are Huddersfield Town owed £5.5million, and would they be entitled to it immediately, leaving us with little or no money for squad improvement? Does Bowyer have adequate replacements lined up? Do we even trust him to spend such wealth sensibly? If the answer to any of those questions is no, then Jordan Rhodes should remain a Blackburn Rovers player. If however, Bowyer was allowed the opportunity to re-invest that money and make 3 or 4 good quality signings, would it be possible to improve the Blackburn squad? I 100% believe that it would.''

Now, seeing as Bowyer wouldn't have been given the £8m, nor will he be in the future, then I wouldn't have sold Rhodes as it would have weakened our squad. Nor am I even sure that he would spend it sensibly. His summer was hit and miss. Therefore in our ludicrous situation I would keep Rhodes. That doesn't mean he is exempt from criticism or that I am not still seriously @#/? off that those morons running our club decided it was a good idea to splash £8m and £35kpw on him.

[Majiball]

We wouldn't be having this debate if Rhodes was English I'll wager.

[FGS5635]

We wouldn't be having this debate if Rhodes was English I'll wager.

Oooo him and rooney would be golden

[Majiball]

Oooo him and rooney would be golden

I wouldn't let Rooney play for the magnificent Scotland, we have enough of our own kean.

[Stuart]

Well, now this is interesting. Generally most of those who have some criticism of Rhodes would say that his all round play is generally quite poor i.e. back to goal, touch, ability to play as a front man. By all accounts on Saturday he did these aspects well and scored a very good goal. Why would anyone jump on here to criticise a player that has played well...

By all accounts? By all accounts? So you didn't even watch the match then, let alone see his performance? WTF are you even debating the point then? Because you saw his goal on TV and read a few posts?

He didn't do anything different than normal - apart from score after a bit of a dip in form. He scored a goal (including his own assist) and dropped deep for the ball like he does - leaving a gaping Rhodes-shaped-hole where the striker should be to receive it. It doesn't do it for me. He was much better when the ball was fed out wide and he could get into the box.

But thumbs up, and well done Lowe et al, because we won.

We wouldn't be having this debate if Rhodes was English I'll wager.

You're probably right.

[Amo]

Rhodes is about as Scottish as Mel Gibson.

[Rover_Shaun]

A team of 11 Lowes would lose to 11 dustbins

[FGS5635]

A team of 11 Lowes would lose to 11 dustbins

Thats rubbish

[Jimmy612]

By all accounts? By all accounts? So you didn't even watch the match then, let alone see his performance? WTF are you even debating the point then? Because you saw his goal on TV and read a few posts?

He didn't do anything different than normal - apart from score after a bit of a dip in form. He scored a goal (including his own assist) and dropped deep for the ball like he does - leaving a gaping Rhodes-shaped-hole where the striker should be to receive it. It doesn't do it for me. He was much better when the ball was fed out wide and he could get into the box.

But thumbs up, and well done Lowe et al, because we won.

You're probably right.

Ahhh apologies Stuart, I now live over 200 miles from Blackburn for work. I didn't know I had to attend every game to have an opinion, especially as I have traveled up quite frequently to watch them at Ewood and have also been to Wigan, Brighton and Blackpool away.

You'll also note that I haven't commented on Rhodes performance..... I said it was a terrific finish. I then pointed out that not one person had lamented Rhodes after an apparently good performance. This coversation has been about your delusion that Rovers fans lament Rhodes. I was merely pointing out that if he was playing poorly, as he has in many games this season (which I have attended), then people have a right to criticise without you attacking them or getting too emotional.

Now, if you can highlight in this conversation where I have commented on Rhodes' performance against Millwall myself then be my guest. As you have strangely pointed out, I said 'by all accounts', meaning judging by various people I have spoken to his general play was much better, thus, no criticism - Why would I make criticism anyway, I wasn't there.

So basically in a conversation that begun because of your 'over-defence' of Rhodes (where at no point I actually had expressed an opinion of his performance other than a super finish) you have managed to swing it round to blame me for not being there

And your sarcasm is cringeworthy, because I have never really defended Lowe too much - he does a decent job doing the ugly side of the game. Something I respect as it is isn't always recognised by large members of our fan base, and as I rightly pointed out, 11 Jordan Rhodes would win sod all. Your comment regarding paying to watch Rhodes was just strange as that simply isn't the case. We go because we love BRFC, not because Jordan Rhodes is playing.

A team of 11 Lowes would lose to 11 dustbins

I'd put a lot of money on them beating 11 Jordan Rhodes B&WA

[Rover_Shaun]

Erm lets see

Lowe

defending is shambolic (see ipswich away, ace assist for their 2nd), control/passing is league 2, couldn't tackle a cream cake which is terrible for a so called midfield engine whilst

attacking/finishing is park standard

Rhodes

defending is crap as he is a striker, control/passing is good, tackling is poor as he is a striker whilst attacking/finishing is excellent.

As you need to score Rhodes wins but I suppose you will say it all comes down to their keeping?

As far as my opinion of Rovers players I have seen in this league goes I'd put Rhodes behind Garner and Jansen but I'd also put Lowe behind the likes of Nicky Reid. Just an opinion and the diversity of such makes football interesting

[Bucksrover]

On Rhodes - as I have said before he is the best in the league at what he does - finishing chances. I think the 3 creative players behind him (like we had on Saturday) or up front as a 2 with Gestede, are potentially good ways of getting him those chances.

On Lowe - he was everywhere on Saturday (no reference to there being 11 of him) - he did the hassling and breaking up of opposition moves, which left Cairney to play the quarterback type creative role. A team of any player wouldn't do that well (Steven Gerrard aside.) My only concern is that when Williamson is fit Bowyer likes to have the 2 water carriers - Lowe and Williamson in central midfield.

[Majiball]

Rhodes is about as Scottish as Mel Gibson.

he is a very popular tourist attraction for Scotland.

I think the message is quite apt these days.

[Stuart]

Ahhh apologies Stuart, I now live over 200 miles from Blackburn for work. I didn't know I had to attend every game to have an opinion, especially as I have traveled up quite frequently to watch them at Ewood and have also been to Wigan, Brighton and Blackpool away.

Of course you have to have seen Rhodes' performance to have a valid opinion on Rhodes' performance.

@#/? me!

[Rover_Shaun]

He has seen him. Read it again

[Jimmy612]

Of course you have to have seen Rhodes' performance to have a valid opinion on Rhodes' performance.

Kean me!

You've ignored the rest of my post explaining that I haven't passed comment on Rhodes performance on Saturday, other than to comment on a great finish. When I have criticised him it has usually been after a game that I have seen live, when he has struggled with many important aspects of a forwards game.

My opinion throughout this whole conversation has been about your quite frankly alarming inability to see a single fault in a players game, and furthermore your emotional state as soon as someone mentions one of said flaws. This opinion is based solely on my being on this message board and witnessing your strange behaviour, not based on Rhodes performance on Saturday.

Thank god those that do like Lowe don't get quite so frothy when he's criticised. This place would be havoc.

[Blue blood]

On Rhodes - as I have said before he is the best in the league at what he does - finishing chances. I think the 3 creative players behind him (like we had on Saturday) or up front as a 2 with Gestede, are potentially good ways of getting him those chances.

On Lowe - he was everywhere on Saturday (no reference to there being 11 of him) - he did the hassling and breaking up of opposition moves, which left Cairney to play the quarterback type creative role. A team of any player wouldn't do that well (Steven Gerrard aside.) My only concern is that when Williamson is fit Bowyer likes to have the 2 water carriers - Lowe and Williamson in central midfield.

Agree with whole post but thought would highlight the concern as it's a worry for me as well. Am sure there are certain games where we may need 2 defensive mids, but don't think this is the norm in this division. This is highlighted by the games we've struggled to finish off - reading, charlton and huddersfield spring to mind.

I'd also argue that when on form a more effective way of being compact is having Cairney in the centre - as he allows us to keep the ball, so, so much better. And if the opposition don't have it they can't win. Taylor in front adds energy and more bustle and should be more than adequate for most games.

[RevidgeBlue]

Lowe had a poor game on Saturday imo, completely ineffectual and I doubt he touched the ball a dozen times.

(Waits for the fan Club of the latest golden boy to get "frothy" )

[onlyonejackwalker]

I bet you've all got a combined frothy age of about 817.....

[Mike E]

Lowe had a poor game on Saturday imo, completely ineffectual and I doubt he touched the ball a dozen times.

(Waits for the fan Club of the latest golden boy to get "frothy" )

He wasn't great but he certainly wasn't poor. Poor would be when (as a defensive-minded player) he is directly responsible for a goal or an 'on-a-plate' chance for the oppo. He didn't do that. Nor did he harass the opposition as well as he has in previous games.

I'd say Lowe has been poor in 2 games (Brighton and Ipswich), great in maybe 3 at a push (Barnsley, Bolton and possibly Boro, although it may be the goal tinting my vision). In every other game he's been steady. He's your typical 6 or 7 out of 10 man, which leads to unnecessary scapegoating when fans don't actually watch what he does for a spell of around 10mins. It happened to Pedersen when he stopped advancing up the pitch to cover Olsson's overlapping.

We really have an odd bunch of fans. By no means is Lowe anywhere near our best player. Nowhere near. But that doesn't mean he isn't important to the side. I personally wouldn't play him ahead of Williamson, but Bowyer seems to prefer him. So with that in mind, is Lowe giving me any reason to call for his head? Not really. He's doing about right for an athletic midfielder whose aim is to break up the play of the opposition imo.

Loved how a poster above declared him poor and highlighted one error in a game strewn with errors from EVERY player on the pitch as proof

[den]

11 Alan Shearers would win the World Cup.

[FGS5635]

I'd pay to watch 11 tugays win lose or draw

[Majiball]

I'd like to see 11 keith andrews just for the comedy value.

[Guest Norbert]

In claret and blue shirts surely.