[Archived] Blackpool vs. Blackburn Rovers- Saturday 26/10/13 3pm.

[Proudtobeblue&white]

If Rhodes reads half the postings on here he'll be off at the earliest opportunity,strikers so I thought were on the pitch to score goals not run around like headless chickens but apparently scoring 10 goals after 13 league games is not good enough Jimmy Greaves and Simon Garner would laugh their heads of at some of the suggestions posted on here about Jordan Rhodes and don't tell me the game has changed the in nearly 60 years of watching this game the idea is still the same to score more goals than the opposition to win.

I like Jordan R, please stay, not his fault he knows where the goal is.....knobbys just couldn't afford him and someone to compliment him, as they got us relegated by being stupid!

[Gav]

That is simply untrue Gav.

In a 4-2-3-1 a striker must be able to do more than score. He must at the very least be able to receive the ball into feet and play it into the oncoming '3'. Otherwise those three are never able to turn and face the opposition goal.

If said striker is unable to play this role then he must be able to run the channels, stretch the opposition defence and provide an option to alleviate any pressure and give the team the opportunity to get forward.

Unfortunately Rhodes is poor at both. Probably the reason that he will never play at the top level - or certainly not for very long. If you can name me a striker in the world now who is considered only a marksman like Rhodes is, and plays regularly at the top level then please let me know. If not I will maintain the belief that if Rhodes ever wants to fulfill his potential, he must improve his obvious flaws. Sounds harsh but tough.

Look how Sturridge has had to adapt. He now runs the flanks. Both Suarez goals brilliantly set up by him offering an outlet against Sunderland. (clip below)

Torres against City. Fantastic work to set up Schurrle for their first goal.

Any other examples welcome of course.

To quote you Gav, your statement was 'Bunkum'.

Oh and regarding Rhodes being half as good as Lineker - he won't be

Absolute Bunkum Jimmy.

You can quote as many examples for and against both our theories but the simple facts of the matter are Rhodes is employed to score goals and no amount of tittle tattle can detract from that fact.

Andy Cole didn't run the channels, Lineker didn't run the channels, Fowler didn't run the channels all examples that blow your theory out of the water.

I wish he had the all round game, but he doesn't so we'll just have to live with him scoring 30 goals a season....

[Jimmy612]

This could turn petty but isn't there a difference between a striker and a forward?

What formation are you playing Stuart? Because in ours, no there isn't

[Salgado Is A Hero]

I get what Jimmy612 is saying.

Mario Gomez gets you 40 goals a season and he just went to Fiorentina.

[Stuart]

What formation are you playing Stuart? Because in ours, no there isn't

A striker is required to strike the ball , and scores goals (think Rhodes). A forward makes a nuisance of himself and brings other (including the main striker) into play (think Roberts).

Too many people seem to be thinking Shearer, and even he had forwards alongside him all of his career.

[Jimmy612]

Absolute Bunkum Jimmy.

You can quote as many examples for and against both our theories but the simple facts of the matter are Rhodes is employed to score goals and no amount of tittle tattle can detract from that fact.

Andy Cole didn't run the channels, Lineker didn't run the channels, Fowler didn't run the channels all examples that blow your theory out of the water.

I wish he had the all round game, but he doesn't so we'll just have to live with him scoring 30 goals a season....

And which one of those played in a 4-5-1 as the lone striker Gav?

As for Cole. The one that I saw most of (at rovers) was fantastic at linking play, feeding the ball out wide, taking a touch and finding the midfielder. Fowler too, a great touch and great awareness of where his team mates were. Laying the ball off and finding feet, allowing his midfielders to turn and face the play.

Unfortunately Rhodes hasn't got a cat in hells chance of being as good as those two so he'll have to develop his game outside of the box before anyone thinks about taking him to the prem. anyway I suppose we'll see in the future just how good he is.

As I've posted before, we're lucky to have a natural goal scorer in this side. That doesn't mean we can't discuss his obvious shortcomings. And before anyone says 'why do people always point the finger at Rhodes' it's fairly obvious. Because he cost us £8m and is considered in many circles on this message board to be Premier League quality. Something that you cannot say for anyone else in our squad.

[den]

Andy Cole didn't run the channels, Lineker didn't run the channels, Fowler didn't run the channels all examples that blow your theory out of the water..

You're avin a giraffe Gav - right?

Comparing the all round games of those three with Rhodes!

Bunkum.

[Jimmy612]

A striker is required to strike the ball , and scores goals (think Rhodes). A forward makes a nuisance of himself and brings other (including the main striker) into play (think Roberts).

Too many people seem to be thinking Shearer, and even he had forwards alongside him all of his career.

I'll ask again Stuart. What formation are you playing? It looks like you want a forward and a striker on the pitch. This would suggest a 4-4-2 formation. Something that our manager, and in fact most managers in the world are unwilling to do nowadays.

I've explained time and again that nowadays a striker is required to do some degree of dirty work up top on his own. This is of course an obvious flaw in Rhodes game and could be perceived as something that he could improve upon. He can do the difficult bit of the game with his eyes closed. Is it so unfair to comment that the other side of his game will stop him becoming a good PL player?

[Gav]

You're avin a giraffe Gav - right?

Comparing the all round games of those three with Rhodes!

Bunkum.

Ok then den lets compare him with Garner, both playing in average sides with a complete lack of quality around them. Andy Ritchie is another example of similar Ilk, yes footballs moved and so have formations, but if you score 30 a season you're worth accommodating.

[Stuart]

I'll ask again Stuart. What formation are you playing? It looks like you want a forward and a striker on the pitch. This would suggest a 4-4-2 formation. Something that our manager, and in fact most managers in the world are unwilling to do nowadays.

I've explained time and again that nowadays a striker is required to do some degree of dirty work up top on his own. This is of course an obvious flaw in Rhodes game and could be perceived as something that he could improve upon. He can do the difficult bit of the game with his eyes closed. Is it so unfair to comment that the other side of his game will stop him becoming a good PL player?

Sorry I thought you were being sarcastic.

Personally I think he would score just fine in any formation, provided he gets the service.

I agree he would thrive in a 4-4-2 but there seems to be this pretentious belief that it is an extinct formation yet it doesn't seem to be doing Burnley any harm, with Ings and Volkes.

Play the formation that provides Rhodes with chances and he will oblige with the rest.

One thing is for sure we will miss him when he is gone.

[Gav]

Sorry I thought you were being sarcastic.

Personally I think he would score just fine in any formation, provided he gets the service.

I agree he would thrive in a 4-4-2 but there seems to be this pretentious belief that it is an extinct formation yet it doesn't seem to be doing Burnley any harm, with Ings and Volkes.

Play the formation that provides Rhodes with chances and he will oblige with the rest.

One thing is for sure we will miss him when he is gone.

Amen to that.

[den]

Ok then den lets compare him with Garner, both playing in average sides with a complete lack of quality around them. Andy Ritchie is another example of similar Ilk, yes footballs moved and so have formations, but if you score 30 a season you're worth accommodating.

There's a big danger of losing perspective in all this Gav. I'll try to break down the different viewpoints on this, correct me if I'm wrong.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that Rhodes shouldn't be first choice starter. That would be crazy.

I don't think many fans consider his abilities as a link man to be anything but "ordinary" or " pretty poor".

Some fans think the link up skills for a lone front man are very important.

Some fans think that link up skills aren't important and as long as he scores goals, that's pretty much all that matters.

How's that?

My viewpoint is that if a lone front player has nothing else to his game other than score goals, then the team will suffer. That isn't just my view, it's the view of any manager with ambitions for his team. Strachan said exactly that. The fact he isn't in the PL now is because his lack of ability as a link man would mean he wouldn't cut the cloth and the team would suffer because of it.

The view that players like Lineker, Fowler and Cole were nothing but poachers can't possibly be right can it? Because if it were right, then Rhodes could play at the top level and win English footballs top prize, just as those three did. What's stopping that happening - I know and virtually everyone else knows what's stopping him. For some reason though, it mustn't be said that Rovers could have spent that £8m better, and might have been a better "team". For some, as long as he scores a goal, 90 minutes of chasing games, losing possession and the defence being under continual pressure is everyone else's fault. Well it matters to good managers. Their focus is aimed at having eleven players "all" contributing to the system. Anything less isn't acceptable. That's the only way to win trophies.

We all know that though. So why the disparity among us on here?

[Jimmy612]

There's a big danger of losing perspective in all this Gav. I'll try to break down the different viewpoints on this, correct me if I'm wrong.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that Rhodes shouldn't be first choice starter. That would be crazy.

I don't think many fans consider his abilities as a link man to be anything but "ordinary" or " pretty poor".

Some fans think the link up skills for a lone front man are very important.

Some fans think that link up skills aren't important and as long as he scores goals, that's pretty much all that matters.

How's that?

My viewpoint is that if a lone front player has nothing else to his game other than score goals, then the team will suffer. That isn't just my view, it's the view of any manager with ambitions for his team. Strachan said exactly that. The fact he isn't in the PL now is because his lack of ability as a link man would mean he wouldn't cut the cloth and the team would suffer because of it.

The view that players like Lineker, Fowler and Cole were nothing but poachers can't possibly be right can it? Because if it were right, then Rhodes could play at the top level and win English footballs top prize, just as those three did. What's stopping that happening - I know and virtually everyone else knows what's stopping him. For some reason though, it mustn't be said that Rovers could have spent that £8m better, and might have been a better "team". For some, as long as he scores a goal, 90 minutes of chasing games, losing possession and the defence being under continual pressure is everyone else's fault. Well it matters to good managers. Their focus is aimed at having eleven players "all" contributing to the system. Anything less isn't acceptable. That's the only way to win trophies.

We all know that though. So why the disparity among us on here?

Great post Den.

Spot on from start to finish.

[thenodrog]

I wish all the other players did their jobs as effectively as Rhodes. His main function is to score goals. How I wish our keeper kept goal, our defenders defended and our midfield passed the ball as well as Rhodes scores goals. I imagine we would be in the top three if this were true.

If you want to use that as an analogy arbitro Rhodes is like a goalkeeper who is a world class shot stopper but can't handle crosses.

[K-Hod]

Rhodes' game is certainly limited, and could be better, no question.

Still, we'd be thomas tucked without his goals from the last season and a quarter.....

[Stuart]

If you want to use that as an analogy arbitro Rhodes is like a goalkeeper who is a world class shot stopper but can't handle crosses.

Probably more apt to talk about the hypothetical keeper's kicking.

As long as he keeps the ball out of the net though who cares?

[FGS5635]

Does anyone think that JR is at the peak of his career and his growth as a footballer has finished and what we see now is as good as he can be?

Surely nobody thinks that. So if that's the case whats wrong with saying he can improve?

[J*B]

Whatever you all say, Jordan Rhodes is the best striker kids just starting to go to Ewood will probably ever see playing for Rovers in their lifetime. Venkys have ruined the club that much. People attending games should cherish his goals - he'll move on at the end of the season, and we'll be stuck with Leon Best and DJ Campbell upfront. Fam.

[Stuart]

Whatever you all say, Jordan Rhodes is the best striker kids just starting to go to Ewood will probably ever see playing for Rovers in their lifetime.

Saddest thing I've ever read.

Really hope you are wrong!

[Parsonblue]

Whatever you all say, Jordan Rhodes is the best striker kids just starting to go to Ewood will probably ever see playing for Rovers in their lifetime. Venkys have ruined the club that much. People attending games should cherish his goals - he'll move on at the end of the season, and we'll be stuck with Leon Best and DJ Campbell upfront. Fam.

I think you'll find that there is always someone comes along, at whatever level you are playing at who entertains the fans. When the Pickering/McEvoy striking partnership ended we had a period of decline but even in the Third Division, Tony Field came along and proved a super goalscorer, we then had a season when Duncan McKenzie and Andy Crawford caused havoc amongst Third Division defences and, of course, Simon Garner came along and scored for fun during the 1980s. Then we had that wonderful season of Speedie. Shearer, of course, remains supreme in terms of goalscorers in the past 50 years, but there has always been someone who comes along and wins the affection of the fans.

[Ozz]

The tendency of some Rovers fans to ignore Rhodes` weaknesses and overstate his positives is another side effect of what`s happened to us. Having the leagues leading goalscorer is all we have left to take pride in, and to crow about to all the other clubs that have zoomed past us over the last few years.

[FGS5635]

The tendency of some Rovers fans to ignore Rhodes` weaknesses and overstate his positives is another side effect of what`s happened to us. Having the leagues leading goalscorer is all we have left to take pride in, and to crow about to all the other clubs that have zoomed past us over the last few years.

Sadly thats a pretty good point

[den]

Lineker never won a title medal. In his one season with Everton he scored 40 but they blew the double to Liverpool.

Ah, thought he had Meadows. I'll see how long that sticks in the memory bank. There's plenty of room in there nowadays.

[den]

Does anyone think that JR is at the peak of his career and his growth as a footballer has finished and what we see now is as good as he can be?

Surely nobody thinks that. So if that's the case whats wrong with saying he can improve?

He can always learn, but at 23, 24 in three months time he's not going to improve much, if at all.

[FGS5635]

I thought I got better as a player up until maybe 30 and thats playing in sunday leagues and 5 a side. I didnt have the time, resources that JR has to work on my game every week

JR may not improve from this day forward, but if he doesnt then imo that says alot about him and our coaching staff