[Archived] Sat 6Th Rhodes Vs Rovers

[Dean]

Den. With respect just because you have decided something doesn't mean that you get to direct discussion about it.

Instead of trying to shout down every post I make, stick me on ignore, there's a good chap.

'My man' never got a chance to play alongside our new players responsible for those much improved performances. Like I said, ironic then that our manager is concerned that we aren't finishing the chances we are now making.

He never got a chance because we couldn't afford them whilst he was on the books. If we had Rhodes we wouldn't have Gomez and Watt.

[Stuart]

In two games without Rhodes we have scored four goals.Let's not forget boro had only conceded 14 goals before today.

Wise words.

Just a shame that they make den's words, Morecambe.

we beat Oxford - PL here we come.

Point is we probably wouldn't have had those new players in the team without selling Rhodes. A case of 'the chicken and the egg'?

Which way it goes eventually remains to be seen but what is clear is with Rhodes in the team we'd hardly covered ourselves with glory this season but now with him gone, all of a sudden, we've put in our two best team performances.

He never got a chance because we couldn't afford them whilst he was on the books. If we had Rhodes we wouldn't have Gomez and Watt.

Round and round we go!

If we've ALREADY spent the £9m Rhodes money then we are really are doomed.

[islander200]

Wise words.

Just a shame that they make den's words, Morecambe.

we beat Oxford - PL here we come.

And we where going to the premier league with Rhodes in the side?All the evidence suggests otherwise.Get Over it Rhodes is gone

[mustard]

And we where going to the premier league with Rhodes in the side?All the evidence suggests otherwise.Get Over it Rhodes is gone

If you are going to tell Stuart to get over it, can you also tell those who are celebrating Rhodes's sale to give up the 'I told you so' baloney that's already surfaced after two games. Rhodes is gone and we ALL need to move on from it, but a select few ramming it down our throats how bad a player JR is and how good it is he's gone is already getting tiring. Considering we've only beaten a L2 side and got ourselves a good draw, it's a little premature.

[K-Hod]

Have to agree with Mustard. Can we draw a line under the Rhodes thing? It's getting tedious.

[Dean]

Round and round we go!

If we've ALREADY spent the £9m Rhodes money then we are really are doomed.

Where did I say we spent all of it? I didn't say it because I don't think we have. But fact that we had Gomez waiting around until the Rhodes deal went through shows you that we couldn't afford him without moving Rhodes first.

[danger19_80]

If we've ALREADY spent the £9m Rhodes money then we are really are doomed.

We've clearly not done that yet the money we have splashed appears, on evidence to date, to be well spent. Imagine if PL, as expected, does get the opportunity to drop the rest of the £9m on new players in the summer?

[Stuart]

And we where going to the premier league with Rhodes in the side?All the evidence suggests otherwise.Get Over it Rhodes is gone

You really are struggling with this one, aren't you.

Rhodes needed attacking players to support his game and get the best out of him for the good of the team.

We bring in said players - mainly on loan. (At a cost of £9m for six months work apparently)

We score 3 goals against Oxford.

We sell Rhodes.

Lambert bemoans us missing chances to score four goals in the first half today.

Akpan misses a sitter to win it late on.

Everyone has to pretend that all is well, nay, we have actually proof that we have completely turned over a new leaf.

It's all well and good to say get over it, we all will eventually. But I'm not having it that we are better without him, based on the evidence of two games (one against L2 opposition) when Rhodes had zero games with those new players to be able to compare.

[patrickvalery]

If you are going to tell Stuart to get over it, can you also tell those who are celebrating Rhodes's sale to give up the 'I told you so' baloney that's already surfaced after two games. Rhodes is gone and we ALL need to move on from it, but a select few ramming it down our throats how bad a player JR is and how good it is he's gone is already getting tiring. Considering we've only beaten a L2 side and got ourselves a good draw, it's a little premature.

Doesn't work like that mustard. The majority always wins on here. Ask anyone who supported Bowyer.

Anyway, cracking result today. And even better to see Lambert trying to raise the bar higher still by saying he wasn't happy we didn't win it. A rare happy Saturday. Hurrah.

[rovers11]

Gómez and Watt sounded a cut above the rest today. Class players. Ward, Hanley and Lenihan sounded good too. What was Graham like? On the radio it sounded like he was a bit isolated but linked play ok and allowed Gómez and Watt to get hold of the ball.

Not convinced about Akpan,Evans, Spurr or Marshall at right back. Interesting that Conway was on the bench today. Think Lambert wants to play with pace and skill, Conway can sometimes slow down attacks.

[islander200]

If you are going to tell Stuart to get over it, can you also tell those who are celebrating Rhodes's sale to give up the 'I told you so' baloney that's already surfaced after two games. Rhodes is gone and we ALL need to move on from it, but a select few ramming it down our throats how bad a player JR is and how good it is he's gone is already getting tiring. Considering we've only beaten a L2 side and got ourselves a good draw, it's a little premature.

I agree we all need to move on.We have just drawn away to the championship favourites and the week before beat Oxford away from home who knocked out a Swansea in the previous round.

Rhodes is gone,imo he had to leave for the betterment of the team.Rhodes wasn't in Lambert plans and Rhodes wanted to leave so I don't know why Stuart brings him up in every single post and he has done

[Stuart]

We've clearly not done that yet the money we have splashed appears, on evidence to date, to be well spent. Imagine if PL, as expected, does get the opportunity to drop the rest of the £9m on new players in the summer?

Here's hoping. Sacrificing a player for the kind of money to rebuild your team can be looked on as a necessary evil.

But you do actually have to then follow through. Right now we haven't done that and still have gaping holes. We used to have a right back issue and a bit of a left back one, now both need sorting. Gomez has covered the old Dunn role for 6 months but we still don't have a general to give them a rocket. Plus we also need to replace two strikers, maybe Graham will get a deal to replace Gestede, Watt has easily replaced Lawrence, and Jackson is a decent 3rd/4th striker but we now need to replace Rhodes. All that with about £10m. Let's hope Lambert gets the chance.

[BlueMonday]

I'm taking it as a positive that I'm disappointed at the draw. Sounds like we did enough to win this against promotion candidates.

Progress.

[islander200]

You really are struggling with this one, aren't you.

Rhodes needed attacking players to support his game and get the best out of him for the good of the team.

We bring in said players - mainly on loan. (At a cost of £9m for six months work apparently)

We score 3 goals against Oxford.

We sell Rhodes.

Lambert bemoans us missing chances to score four goals in the first half today.

Akpan misses a sitter to win it late on.

Everyone has to pretend that all is well, nay, we have actually proof that we have completely turned over a new leaf.

It's all well and good to say get over it, we all will eventually. But I'm not having it that we are better without him, based on the evidence of two games (one against L2 opposition) when Rhodes had zero games with those new players to be able to compare.

I'm not struggling at all pal,what you seem to struggle with is the fact Rhodes wanted out?In an ideal world we would have the new players and Rhodes,sadly we don't live in an ideal world.Rhode wanted to go and Lambert clearly wanted to move him on to build his own team

[Stuart]

I'm not struggling at all pal,what you seem to struggle with is the fact Rhodes wanted out?In an ideal world we would have the new players and Rhodes,sadly we don't live in an ideal world.Rhode wanted to go and Lambert clearly wanted to move him on to build his own team

Back to that. 6 and two-threes for me. Rhodes has wanted to leave before, hasn't gone but has then got his head down and scored goals. Lambert wanted Rhodes out and when it looked like it might not happen the following day he spat his dummy out.

[danger19_80]

Here's hoping. Sacrificing a player for the kind of money to rebuild your team can be looked on as a necessary evil.

But you do actually have to then follow through. Right now we haven't done that and still have gaping holes. We used to have a right back issue and a bit of a left back one, now both need sorting. Gomez has covered the old Dunn role for 6 months but we still don't have a general to give them a rocket. Plus we also need to replace two strikers, maybe Graham will get a deal to replace Gestede, Watt has easily replaced Lawrence, and Jackson is a decent 3rd/4th striker but we now need to replace Rhodes. All that with about £10m. Let's hope Lambert gets the chance.

I agree with all of that but there's only so much you can do in a January window. With the players he has been able to bring in - the evidence so far points to progress having been made. Slowly and surely we go but beat Fulham and MK Dons at home and i'd wager the relegation picture will look a lot healthier. Get through the season and it's then over to the 'powers that be' to allow Lambert to make the changes he and us all expect in the summer.

[oldjamfan1]

Back to that. 6 and two-threes for me. Rhodes has wanted to leave before, hasn't gone but has then got his head down and scored goals. Lambert wanted Rhodes out and when it looked like it might not happen the following day he spat his dummy out.

We have 18 games to go. While I accept that it isn't an exact science but rather a reasonable length of time over which to guage things, I am willing to wager that we score more goals, accrue more points, and are generally better to watch in our last 18 league games than we were in our first 18 of this season.

Surely that is all that really matters, rather than these silly and academic Rhodes debates?

[islander200]

Back to that. 6 and two-threes for me. Rhodes has wanted to leave before, hasn't gone but has then got his head down and scored goals. Lambert wanted Rhodes out and when it looked like it might not happen the following day he spat his dummy out.

I back the manager on this he didn't see Rhodes as part of his long term plans and Rhodes wanted to leave.We got decent money for him and will give us a chance to rebuild in the summer.Im not saying we are better off without Rhodes on the back of two games only time will tell.But I back the manager

[yoda]

Going off the highlights Akpan looked lazy.

Sell him for £9 million

[Jim Royle]

Wept

If ain't Rev, it's Stuart

What particular gripes is that they moaned and moaned about Bowyer and the need for a 'proper' manager.

When they get that, they then moan and moan about the 'proper' manager being a 'proper' manager and making those difficult but necessary decisions.

Isn't it ironic

[deryck guyler's spoon]

Wept

If ain't Rev, it's Stuart

What particular gripes is that they moaned and moaned about Bowyer and the need for a 'proper' manager.

When they get that, they then moan and moan about the 'proper' manager being a 'proper' manager and making those difficult but necessary decisions.

Isn't it ironic

It's like a black fly in your Chardonay. As well as being tiresome and tedious.

[Dean]

Here's hoping. Sacrificing a player for the kind of money to rebuild your team can be looked on as a necessary evil.

But you do actually have to then follow through. Right now we haven't done that and still have gaping holes. We used to have a right back issue and a bit of a left back one, now both need sorting. Gomez has covered the old Dunn role for 6 months but we still don't have a general to give them a rocket. Plus we also need to replace two strikers, maybe Graham will get a deal to replace Gestede, Watt has easily replaced Lawrence, and Jackson is a decent 3rd/4th striker but we now need to replace Rhodes. All that with about £10m. Let's hope Lambert gets the chance.

I think it's better to look at the squad on its own merit, rather than trying to join dots saying "X replaces Y". At the moment we've got Graham with Brown backing up as the main striker, with Watt and Jackson as the support strikers.

It remains to be seen whether Graham is up to the task. Hopefully he is, then all we'd really need is an improvement on Brown as the back up option. There won't be a big money Rhodes replacement coming in on top of what we have, it wouldn't balance.

And anyway, even if you look at it from a like for like perspective... Gestede = Graham, Rhodes = Watt, Lawrence = Jackson?

[den]

Den. With respect just because you have decided something doesn't mean that you get to direct discussion about it.

Instead of trying to shout down every post I make, stick me on ignore, there's a good chap.

'My man' never got a chance to play alongside our new players responsible for those much improved performances. Like I said, ironic then that our manager is concerned that we aren't finishing the chances we are now making.

Stuart, I wouldn't dream of putting you on ignore because you're a very good poster.

[RevidgeBlue]

We have 18 games to go. While I accept that it isn't an exact science but rather a reasonable length of time over which to guage things, I am willing to wager that we score more goals, accrue more points, and are generally better to watch in our last 18 league games than we were in our first 18 of this season.

Surely that is all that really matters, rather than these silly and academic Rhodes debates?

Very well put. There is however a more important long term concern that our star asset has departed for 9m and been replaced by a couple of guys on loan with absolutely no guarantee that a penny of the proceeds will actually be reinvested back into the team. All things being equal we'll be left with Jackson on the books when everyone's loan period and/or contract expires.

I'd say it'd be a qualified success if we equal the poor points ratio achieved whilst we had he who must not be named and scrape up with 9m in the bank.

However it's what happens to that 9m and what we do after that that counts.

[RevidgeBlue]

As you would say "wept".

You make it sound as though only me and Stuart wanted GB out, not everyone on here bar 3 or 4 posters.

(In reply to Jim royle. Cocked up the quote thingy.)