[Archived] Forest

[Riverside67]

What amazes me is that Bowyer is continually surprised at how is players fail him. But then he deludes himself that want to play for him as a mate and not a boss.

Anyone who has observed the last two years understands the midfield is out of its depth. It has been outplayed at home virtaully all season and

was again yesterday. GB still plays the same offenders over and over again and amazingly he gets the same results.

Central defence was dire but there were some mitigating circustances yesterday as Spurr was a make do option so not blaming him.

The team cracked as soon as it was put under any kind of real pressure as per usual. Same players same outcome........surprise surprise

The two goalscorers have been Bowyers get out of jail card this season.

They have papered over the cracks of fundamantal failings in othe areas of the team.

I cannot see in our make or break season next year that Bowyer will have found a way of sorting those issues out. Once the parachute payments end next year the outlook seems very grim to me.

Venky's really have been the dingles answers to all their prayers. They appear to me to be on the verge of deliveirng what John Bond and Bob Lord did all those years ago.....................only this time we could disappear.

[den]

Rhodes can't play? Dear me.

Is that it?

Use your own eyes and read Parsons match reports week after week.

He can put the ball away but he can't play.

[LewisF]

Varney leaving at the end of the season. Out of contract.

One bit of good news then!

[Amo]

Is that it?

Use your own eyes and read Parsons match reports week after week.

He can put the ball away but he can't play.

"Can't play" is a strongly worded way of saying Rhodes' overall game is lacking.

For me, though, that phrase conjures up images of Brown, and not Jordan. A big lug who's only good at putting himself in the way of the ball. Rhodes' technique in the 18 yard box is second to none.

[thenodrog]

.

[Blue blood]

One interesting comment from Bowyer on Radio Rovers yesterday was he acknowledged the team weren't coping with the Forest tactics in the first half. He said that he had expected the players to be able to address the issue themselves on the pitch but they didn't so It had to be explained to them at half time!

So either the team are thick - or adapting tactics in practice is negligible. Either way it is a shocking indictment of the current set up.

It seems Gaz is going into blame the players mode. Pally-pally only lasts till he really starts to feel the pressure. Mind you it's good he's not pretending everything is fine - so that's an improvement. Not sure how the players will cope with the gear shift mind.

As it is it doesn't bode well in his comments as after he'd explained it to them we still looked to be struggling with Forrest's tactics. Seems like it's not only the players who are tactically inept but also Bowyer.

[Amo]

It seems Gaz is going into blame the players mode. Pally-pally only lasts till he really starts to feel the pressure. Mind you it's good he's not pretending everything is fine - so that's an improvement. Not sure how the players will cope with the gear shift mind.

As it is it doesn't bode well in his comments as after he'd explained it to them we still looked to be struggling with Forrest's tactics. Seems like it's not only the players who are tactically inept but also Bowyer.

Interesting, isn't it? In the past he's been rightfully accused of being too soft with the players, but according to Bowyer's proponents no self-respecting manager comes out and publicly criticizes his players.

All of a sudden he's changed tack and is hanging them out to dry. Has this anything to do with his upcoming progress report to Pune or is that mere coincidence?

[thenodrog]

What amazes me is that Bowyer is continually surprised at how is players fail him. But then he deludes himself that want to play for him as a mate and not a boss.

Anyone who has observed the last two years understands the midfield is out of its depth. It has been outplayed at home virtaully all season and

was again yesterday. GB still plays the same offenders over and over again and amazingly he gets the same results.

tbh our midfield 4 should be a midfield 5, and especially yesterday when we needed to protect a defensively weak back 4.

So............. There have been mutterings from certain informed sources that the team is picked in Pune. I disputed this at the time but I'm coming around to believing that there may in fact be one player who is chosen by Pune. Nothing else fits. Our best performances in the FA Cup virtually all against better opposition have all been without JR yet virtually every league game he is immediately back in place at CF. My 'conspiratory theory' is rather backed up by having such a dismal record against the better clubs in this division. The clubs that have passed and moved and played their way through our wide open midfield. Maybe if we'd set up against them as we set up v Swansea, Stoke, L'pool we would have seen an improvement in our results.

[chris_h]

Interesting, isn't it? In the past he's been rightfully accused of being too soft with the players, but according to Bowyer's proponents no self-respecting manager comes out and publicly criticizes his players.

All of a sudden he's changed tack and is hanging them out to dry. Has this anything to do with his upcoming progress report to Pune or is that mere coincidence?

If he was rightly criticised for being too soft on the players it doesn't seem to make sense that he is now being criticised for being harsh with them.

I find myself defending Bowyer even though ideally I'd want him to be replaced. This is largely because, despite there being valid reasons to get on his back, folk still choose to criticise him unfairly.

[thenodrog]

"Can't play" is a strongly worded way of saying Rhodes' overall game is lacking.

For me, though, that phrase conjures up images of Brown, and not Jordan. A big lug who's only good at putting himself in the way of the ball. Rhodes' technique in the 18 yard box is second to none.

Well it's currently second to Rudy's.

We all know Brown is no masterstriker for sure but take out the penalty box stuff (albeit an important aspect) and JR isn't fit to lace Browns boots in team ethic, work rate and contribution. I've asked this till I'm blue in the face but WHY IS THIS? I want Rhodes to improve his all round game and this is the sort of stuff that doesn't require special skills to improve on.... it just needs a good work ethic, heart and desire.

I find myself defending Bowyer even though ideally I'd want him to be replaced. This is largely because, despite there being valid reasons to get on his back, folk still choose to criticise him unfairly.

And nastily tbh. Too many comments are personal, offensive and way ott. Some people have neither manners nor decorum.

[Amo]

If he was rightly criticised for being to soft on the players it doesn't seem to make sense that he is now being criticised for being hash with them.

It does if he's only doing it to keep himself in a job.

[chris_h]

It does if he's only doing it to keep himself in a job.

Most people don't want to get the sack but, leaving that aside, if Bowyer has become exasperated with the Good Cop role he's entitled to try being the Bad Cop. It's a legitimate change of tack, it seems very cynical to simply dismiss a change of approach as nothing more than a ploy to pander to the bosses.

[den]

"Can't play" is a strongly worded way of saying Rhodes' overall game is lacking.

of course it. TBH, I expected more of a reaction than there has been so far.

Anyway, there is a division of opinion. Some folk believe that as long as a player scores a goal every other game, what he doesn't do,, doesn't matter. They're wrong of course. Personally, I would have used that kind of money to try to bring in four players who could contribute fully over 90 minutes every game. That would without doubt, have made us a much better team.

[mustard]

Think people are being a tad harsh on Rhodes. I thought he dealt with some of the balls into him quite nicely, flicking the ball outwide etc. No arguments about Gestede's cracking performance, but people failed to mention how the ball was hoofed for him to flick to no one countless times, hell the centre back won it most of the time. It showed that the strikers prefer it when they get the ball into feet, can lay it off and be on the receiving end of whipped crosses. I do think Rhodes looked quite anonymous as the ball often bypassed him though. And I can't help but emphasise how he and other players look slower and slower. I think they need to get them out the weights room and do a bit more agility/pace work. I think it's obvious we play purely to Gestede's strengths but when those balls came into Rudy, I think it was useful having Rhodes in there being marked out the game. Gave Rudy the space and freedom to head home three sitters.

As for the overall performance. Besides the goals I don't remember us doing too much else and didn't think the game was all that exciting for a 3-3. Perhaps due to the fact I know there's nothing to play for? Maybe it quashed any excitement I might normally feel. The odd ok chance, whilst Eastwood had to make a few cracking saves. Kudos to him, especially as I'm sure he stopped one with his cojones. Defensively we are truly pants, which comes from a terrible lack of organisation and gameplan. Bowyer can go on about us needing to be more ruthless bla bla but when the set up of the team is so easy to break down goals are always going to be conceded.

[chaddyrovers]

Interesting, isn't it? In the past he's been rightfully accused of being too soft with the players, but according to Bowyer's proponents no self-respecting manager comes out and publicly criticizes his players.

so some members on here moan and whinge about Bowyer's post match comments and not criticising the players.

so now that Bowyer is criticising the players and people are whinging now

tbh our midfield 4 should be a midfield 5, and especially yesterday when we needed to protect a defensively weak back 4.

So............. There have been mutterings that the team is picked in Pune. I disputed this at the time but I'm coming around to believing that there may in fact be one player who is chosen by Pune. Nothing else fits. Our best performances in the FA Cup virtually all against better opposition have all been without JR yet virtually every league game he is immediately back in place at CF. My 'conspiratory theory' is rather backed up by having such a dismal record against the better clubs in this division. The clubs that have passed and moved and played their way through our wide open midfield. Maybe if we'd set up against them as we set up v Swansea, Stoke, L'pool we would have seen an improvement in our results.

I agree with you about 5 man midfield. yesterday showed that we need to play 4-2-3-1/4-5-1 formation in most games cos we get out numbered in midfield when playing 4-4-2. also we need pace in the team.

That's why I've said last week that we need a pacey striker to play along side Gestede like King.

[Amo]

Most people don't want to get the sack but, leaving that aside, if Bowyer has become exasperated with the Good Cop role he's entitled to try being the Bad Cop. It's a legitimate change of tack, it seems very cynical to simply dismiss a change of approach as nothing more than a ploy to pander to the bosses.

Why not? It strikes me as a little more than coincidental that Bowyer has been coming out in the press recently with a string of 'reasons' for our slump (fixture pile-up, FFP, lack of leadership) when he'll soon be due to fly out to Pune for an end of season review.

[Blue blood]

If he was rightly criticised for being to soft on the players it doesn't seem to make sense that he is now being criticised for being hash with them.

I find myself defending Bowyer even though ideally I'd want him to be replaced. This is largely because, despite there being valid reasons to get on his back, folk still choose to criticise him unfairly.

Like I said Chris, I think it's an improvement that he's being a bit more honest about things. Not a criticism in that respect.

I'm a tad worried about the timing of this though. I mean it's not like good cop has only stopped working - it's not worked for well on a season, and combined with the many interviews that are clearly propaganda it's a little suspicious that now he changes tack. Maybe that's being too cynical but it's brought on by a lot of negative interviews etc about how things are never GB's fault.

[chris_h]

Well, there are some on here who would have us believe that Bowyer is bomb proof.

That being the case there is no requirement for him to play to the Pune gallery.

[mustard]

tbh our midfield 4 should be a midfield 5, and especially yesterday when we needed to protect a defensively weak back 4.

So............. There have been mutterings from certain informed sources that the team is picked in Pune. I disputed this at the time but I'm coming around to believing that there may in fact be one player who is chosen by Pune. Nothing else fits. Our best performances in the FA Cup virtually all against better opposition have all been without JR yet virtually every league game he is immediately back in place at CF. My 'conspiratory theory' is rather backed up by having such a dismal record against the better clubs in this division. The clubs that have passed and moved and played their way through our wide open midfield. Maybe if we'd set up against them as we set up v Swansea, Stoke, L'pool we would have seen an improvement in our results.

The cup games were better performances, but I don't think solely due to 4-5-1, more due to the fact we got a man sent off twice early on and the players were giving their all in these fixtures, as they tend to in one off games vs better opposition (Reading taking Arsenal to ET). We've played 4-5-1 a number of times this season and it hasn't worked on the whole, mainly due to our midfield fairies in the likes of Evans. I don't think the team is being picked in Pune. I think Bowyer just doesn't really know what he's doing.

[thenodrog]

Interesting, isn't it? In the past he's been rightfully accused of being too soft with the players, but according to Bowyer's proponents no self-respecting manager comes out and publicly criticizes his players.

All of a sudden he's changed tack and is hanging them out to dry. Has this anything to do with his upcoming progress report to Pune or is that mere coincidence?

No problem with criticising them as a collective every so often. Quite acceptable. What should never happen is to blame individuals. Which is he guilty of?

[thenodrog]

so some members on here moan and whinge about Bowyer's post match comments and not criticising the players.

so now that Bowyer is criticising the players and people are whinging now

I agree with you about 5 man midfield. yesterday showed that we need to play 4-2-3-1/4-5-1 formation in most games cos we get out numbered in midfield when playing 4-4-2. also we need pace in the team.

That's why I've said last week that we need a pacey striker to play along side Gestede like King.

I agree about the criticisms. GB is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't on here.

Pacy striker? Thats still going 4-4-2 and would necessitate a strong defensively biased midfield. A quality 'inside forward' / attacking midfielder to play in the hole with the ability to chase flick ons as well as to have a good shot from distance in his skill set would facilitate 4-5-1.

[RevidgeBlue]

tbh our midfield 4 should be a midfield 5, and especially yesterday when we needed to protect a defensively weak back 4.

So............. There have been mutterings from certain informed sources that the team is picked in Pune. I disputed this at the time but I'm coming around to believing that there may in fact be one player who is chosen by Pune. Nothing else fits. Our best performances in the FA Cup virtually all against better opposition have all been without JR yet virtually every league game he is immediately back in place at CF. My 'conspiratory theory' is rather backed up by having such a dismal record against the better clubs in this division. The clubs that have passed and moved and played their way through our wide open midfield. Maybe if we'd set up against them as we set up v Swansea, Stoke, L'pool we would have seen an improvement in our results.

I think that's nonsense Gordon, we never really line up with a genuine 4 man midfield anyway, more often than not we line up with 2 central midfielders and either two wide players who most weeks are about as much use as a chocolate fireguard, especially Marshall in recent weeks, or Cairney out wide who looks completely ineffective and out of position there.

[chaddyrovers]

I agree about the criticisms. GB is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't on here.

Pacy striker? Thats still going 4-4-2 and would necessitate a strong defensively biased midfield. A quality 'inside forward' / attacking midfielder to play in the hole with the ability to chase flick ons as well as to have a good shot from distance in his skill set would facilitate 4-5-1.

agree on the first point.

I would play a 4 man midfield if we had a pacey striker like King with a Gestede type. it would push their defence much deeper and give us more space in midfield to pass the ball.

otherwise, I would play 4-2-3-1 formation with a target man type striker

I think that's nonsense Gordon, we never really line up with a genuine 4 man midfield anyway, more often than not we line up with 2 central midfielders and either two wide players

isn't that a 4 man midfield then? 2 centre midfielders with 2 wingers?

[thenodrog]

I think that's nonsense Gordon, we never really line up with a genuine 4 man midfield anyway, more often than not we line up with 2 central midfielders and either two wide players who most weeks are about as much use as a chocolate fireguard, especially Marshall in recent weeks, or Cairney out wide who looks completely ineffective and out of position there.

Our wide men are invariably on the wrong wing to deliver telling balls in for Gestede though. (Look what happens when they do.) I think it may be a tactic to beef up our midfield defensively in order to accomodate 4-4-2 which is in place to accomodate you know who..

[RevidgeBlue]

isn't that a 4 man midfield then? 2 centre midfielders with 2 wingers?

Isn't that a 4-2-4 as opposed to a 4-4-2?