[Archived] Rovers v Doncaster Rovers

[Butty]

Just now, Tom said:

Right enough of the Shrimpers love in I called him out for being the messiah first as above! 

 

 

 

 

I praised him on a thread a few days ago Tom so I'm taking the credit.  Sign him up. 

[booth]

26 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Sheff Wed and Bolton both got promotion last season by playing 3-5-2 formation in this league

season before Wigan got promotion by playing 4-2-3-1 and 3-4-3 formations

This is why people think you're either naive or on the wind up Chaddy.

Why are you even debating this when the proof is right there in front of you? Wouldn't be so bad if it's a one off but you seem to enjoy arguing your point against any proof that may be right in front of your eyes.

Can you see us getting more points from Mowbray keep toying with the team week in week out. The teams you mentioned may have had players better suited than what we have, or even stuck to the formation rather than chopping and changing depending on the opposition.

[Butty]

Just now, booth said:

This is why people think you're either naive or on the wind up Chaddy.

Why are you even debating this when the proof is right there in front of you? Wouldn't be so bad if it's a one off but you seem to enjoy arguing your point against any proof that may be right in front of your eyes.

Can you see us getting more points from Mowbray keep toying with the team week in week out. The teams you mentioned may have had players better suited than what we have, or even stuck to the formation rather than chopping and changing depending on the opposition.

My thoughts exactly, any team in any division in the world no matter what players you have, Needs a formation and way of playing instilled in training and through playing it consistently in matches. Mowbray clearly doesn't know A. How he wants the players too play. B. What formation too use. And C. Which players to include in said starting 11 and formation. Consistency is key and it's worrying Mowbray seems too have got it so wrong ALREADY. 

[darrenrover]

9 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Sheff Wed and Bolton both got promotion last season by playing 3-5-2 formation in this league

season before Wigan got promotion by playing 4-2-3-1 and 3-4-3 formations

And the formations are it, the be all and end all in the quest for promotion?

It's rubbish chaddy, it doesn't matter a toss the formation if the players aren't good enough, fit enough or sufficiently motivated. Clearly ours lack motivation and fitness based upon the showing in the first couple of matches and in key games at the back end of last season, the buck stops with the manager. We've started this season in the same type of mindset that we saw against Bristol City, that's my worry.

I like Mowbray as a person and he appears very knowledgable about the game in general but it would appear he's a bit stubborn and would appear not a man manager.

I said before a ball was kicked this season that I was less than convinced, sadly I may be right. 442 is required and the team needs leadership and a collective heartbeat, is TM up to it?

What's been on display is currently a shambles.

[tomphil]

I think he does know how he wants to play but it's all wrong for the players he has and has recruited mostly because it's all wrong for this league it's just too easy for other teams to counter it then expose the glaring weaknesses.

Reminds me of Hodgson this type of thing and why do these managers just never learn ?  Stubborn or because they only really know one way after all despite the talk of different formations etc

[Shrimper]

57 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

didn't Sheff Utd and Bolton play 3-5-2 last season and achieved top 2 whilst Millwall play 4-4-2 formation last season?

the season before didn't Wigan win the league by playing 4-2-3-1/3-4-3 formation to achieved promotion?

The formation and the team I selected is ones where we can use Chapman, Dack and Gladwin to their best impact on the team and Samuel gives us pace, strengthen and goal threat up front.

Could Dack play in 2 man centre midfield partnership? I don't think he could.

Away from home Sheff U & Bolton played 4-5-1 & hit teams in the counter attack, if memory serves correct. Not sure what they did at home. We made a good Bolton team look distinctly average for 90+ minutes, until they hit us on the counter & stole 3 points. 

Millwall played a rigid 4-4-2, which featured tough CB's, two wingers, & two out-and-out strikers. 

Not sure what formation Wigan played, although I do know they had McAleney up front, partnered with some Northern Irish fella, who scored a bag full, despite being on fire.

Dack made his name playing in a 2-man CM role. Only last season he was given free reign to push forward, due to Gills lack of a goal-scoring threat. 

As for Samuel giving you pace, I didn't see it against our lot. I'd state it here and now, if he plays up front, on his own, with no support, he'll struggle to score 10 goals this season

[tomphil]

We aren't Bolton and we aren't Sheff Utd both those clubs have had their probs but we are a bigger mess on the inside than both put together they've retained their soul and heartbeat ours left the building years ago.

The soft under belly remains at Rovers and the vacuum's created off the pitch are evident on it not helped by having complete rookies in key coaching positions i.e keeper and 1st team coach. What can these guys bring to the table in terms of offering match situation advice to experienced players ?

Naff all is the answer.

[A cup of beans]

2 minutes ago, tomphil said:

We aren't Bolton and we aren't Sheff Utd both those clubs have had their probs but we are a bigger mess on the inside than both put together they've retained their soul and heartbeat ours left the building years ago.

The soft under belly remains at Rovers and the vacuum's created off the pitch are evident on it not helped by having complete rookies in key coaching positions i.e keeper and 1st team coach. What can these guys bring to the table in terms of offering match situation advice to experienced players ?

Naff all is the answer.

Nailed it. 

The decline will only stop when things change for the better. And there's no sign of that.

[Bbrovers2288]

Rovers are cancer right now, rotten to the core and embarrassing to be a supporter of. Keep thinking we can't go any lower and then we do. Was gutted at relegation, but after summer signings I was actually quite excited for this season. Iv gave up two Saturdays which are gold dust for me as I do shift work, thinking we will at least be creating lots of chances and on top in games. Last two games have been a shambles, now lost confidance in mowbray. Get Williams to *%%* and nyambe. Also not addressed centre backs and raya also doesn't look up to it. For what it's worth I want to see a simple 4-4-2

 

raya

caddis. Mulgrew. Lenihan (sign a left back)

Conway bennet Smallwood chapman 

samuel dack 

 

[Shrimper]

1 hour ago, chaddyrovers said:

that's why I suggest us playing Dack just off Samuel with Chapman and Gladwin wide.

in a simple 4-2-3-1 formation.

Firstly, Rovers don't need to play with 6 defensive players. They just don't. Especially not at home FFS. 

If you did play that formation, as you did against us, the main striker is instantly isolated against two CB's. For 90 minutes he's effectively got to play with his back to goal & be the hold-up/target man, who is utterly dependant on support getting around him quickly. Is Graham or Samuel that kind of player? I've always thought Of Graham as a fox-in-the-box, who will poach goals from close range. Don't know enough about Samuel, but he sure didn't look to have much clout last week. Ergo, is playing either of them up front, on their own, playing to their strengths? 

Last Saturday, we had great success playing down your flanks. Why? Because your wide men attacked, lost the ball and left gaping holes that would make Katie Price blush. The balance was totally wrong, which made the midfield non-existent. Instead. It allowed our midfield, to bomb forward, in support of the strikers, and encouraged our full backs to push up, forcing you back to square one. Kightly & McGlashan ran the show, and that was because they were allowed the time & space. The only reason they were allowed that time & space, is because your midfield was so dis-jointed, nobody seemed to know whether they were coming or going, attacking or defending. 

 

[Butty]

11 minutes ago, Shrimper said:

Firstly, Rovers don't need to play with 6 defensive players. They just don't. Especially not at home FFS. 

If you did play that formation, as you did against us, the main striker is instantly isolated against two CB's. For 90 minutes he's effectively got to play with his back to goal & be the hold-up/target man, who is utterly dependant on support getting around him quickly. Is Graham or Samuel that kind of player? I've always thought Of Graham as a fox-in-the-box, who will poach goals from close range. Don't know enough about Samuel, but he sure didn't look to have much clout last week. Ergo, is playing either of them up front, on their own, playing to their strengths? 

Last Saturday, we had great success playing down your flanks. Why? Because your wide men attacked, lost the ball and left gaping holes that would make Katie Price blush. The balance was totally wrong, which made the midfield non-existent. Instead. It allowed our midfield, to bomb forward, in support of the strikers, and encouraged our full backs to push up, forcing you back to square one. Kightly & McGlashan ran the show, and that was because they were allowed the time & space. The only reason they were allowed that time & space, is because your midfield was so dis-jointed, nobody seemed to know whether they were coming or going, attacking or defending. 

 

Read this Chaddy. Don't just skim through and not acknowledge anything said. Read it mate.

[Shrimper]

When you go to Valley Parade next week, you'll face a team who religiously play 4-4-2, or 4-3-3. 

You've got two options IMO...

1) match them for formation, and hope Mowbray manages to buy enough sets of testicles for your lads to strap on, and battle for 90 mins. 

OR

2) play 4-5-1, accept that you'll have to soak up pressure, but hit them on the counter-attack. 

Personally I @#/? detest the defensive nature of a 4-5-1 formation, but I must admit, when utilised properly, it works a treat. But it MUST be utilised properly. Defend in numbers, attack in numbers with pace & precision. Not pretty, but a team of your calibre, will get the job done, against one of your promotion rivals. And that's the main thing

 

[DaveyB]

I think part of the reason we played 3 at the back today is that Mowbray doesn't really trust Ward (and who can blame him) and so he wanted Nyambe's pace back there to cover for him. Personally I've got no real problem with that, or with the formation per se, but starting with Caddis & Williams wide and leaving all of our creative players on the bench at home to Doncaster, in a game where we really needed to start positively and get on the front foot following a disappointing display last week, was frankly unforgivable. 

I still think we can come good, but we need to learn some lessons and fast 

[tomphil]

Anyone know if there is any Bradford tickets left or if its pay on the day ?

Be shocked if they haven't shifted the initial 1200.

[RV Blue]

Resign Mowbray! The only way he goes is if he sacks himself. What has our club become? Heartbreaking.

[Gone to seed]

Football is actually a very simple concept when you thnk about it. You just need players who are capable of doing the basics reliably, but who are also able to stretch out a little and add some flair. For me the basics include being able to defend, score goals and retain possession. Everything else is polish. As things stand we have neither the basics nor any polish at the heart of this side. I agree with DarrenRover about Mowbray being likeable and knowledgeable, but unless TM can see that he needs to turn out eleven players plus bench who are capable of delivering the basics, then he is surely on a short plank here. Systems and formations are the realm of those who have already proven their ability to do the basics. Back to the basics, Tony, and get the basics right before trying to show off.

I shudder to think what the mood on here might be in a couple of weeks time, following what promises to be a difficult fixture against our knuckle-dragging brethren. To be honest I couldn't care less what the result is, if the team that plays that day wears the Rovers colours with pride, fights and battles for the full duration of the game, and does their 100% best to win. That is, the antithesis of today's woeful showing.

COYB

 

[USABlue]

3 hours ago, A cup of beans said:

Nailed it. 

The decline will only stop when things change for the better.

Oh really?  Who would of thunk it.

[GreenRover]

Watch the highlights there. What a horror show. Was very close to flying over from Ireland to watch this game. Thank God I didn't. I would have been livid. Absolute horror show. The worst thing was that in the highlight reel we only had two opportunities. Just 2. My God very similar to last years start. Worrying times. Hard to be a Blackburn supporter these days

[not exactly Scarface]

Had a look at the team BBC sports home page, didn't realise the club had lost it's opening two fixtures.    Don't know what's going on up there, maybe it's a hangover from the shock of relegation from the championship in May or the club hasn't adjusted to League One level.      Sad to see one of the founder members of the football league and Premier League Champions of recent years in the situation you find themselves.

Should make it back at the first attempt by end of season so don't worry too much over the first few days, there's ample time in the months ahead to regain position in the championship.   Sometimes you need that black cloud before you find that silver lining.

[AllRoverAsia]

8 hours ago, Shrimper said:

Nothing to brag about really, our fanbase is full of halfwits. They're easy to spot these days 

That is OTT, unfair and fecking rude to a long term poster on this MB.

Call your own lot halfwits by all means but not one of ours.

[chaddyrovers]

7 hours ago, booth said:

This is why people think you're either naive or on the wind up Chaddy.

Why are you even debating this when the proof is right there in front of you? Wouldn't be so bad if it's a one off but you seem to enjoy arguing your point against any proof that may be right in front of your eyes.

Can you see us getting more points from Mowbray keep toying with the team week in week out. The teams you mentioned may have had players better suited than what we have, or even stuck to the formation rather than chopping and changing depending on the opposition.

I'm talking football and nothing to do with being on the wind up. This is a Rovers football messageboard and I am talking football. nothing else. Maybe stop the personal and stick to football.

what proof? I have shown that 3 at the back can work in this league and the last 3 champions of this league all played 3 at the back. Sheff Utd only had 1 point after 4 games last season and won the league in the end

6 hours ago, Shrimper said:

Away from home Sheff U & Bolton played 4-5-1 & hit teams in the counter attack, if memory serves correct. Not sure what they did at home. We made a good Bolton team look distinctly average for 90+ minutes, until they hit us on the counter & stole 3 points. 

Millwall played a rigid 4-4-2, which featured tough CB's, two wingers, & two out-and-out strikers. 

Not sure what formation Wigan played, although I do know they had McAleney up front, partnered with some Northern Irish fella, who scored a bag full, despite being on fire.

Dack made his name playing in a 2-man CM role. Only last season he was given free reign to push forward, due to Gills lack of a goal-scoring threat. 

As for Samuel giving you pace, I didn't see it against our lot. I'd state it here and now, if he plays up front, on his own, with no support, he'll struggle to score 10 goals this season

I only remember Sheff Utd playing a 3-5-2 formation cos they had Clarke and Sharp up front.

Wigan and Bristol City both played 3 at the back to win the league in the 2 previous seasons aswell.

That's why I would play Gladwin, Dack and Chapman in behind Samuel to give him the support.

Wigan played 3-4-3 and 4-3-3 during their promotion season I am told by a fan of them who I know. He also said the players have to go on the field in the right mindset in this league and realised this league isn't easy but harder than the championship

5 hours ago, Shrimper said:

Firstly, Rovers don't need to play with 6 defensive players. They just don't. Especially not at home FFS. 

If you did play that formation, as you did against us, the main striker is instantly isolated against two CB's. For 90 minutes he's effectively got to play with his back to goal & be the hold-up/target man, who is utterly dependant on support getting around him quickly. Is Graham or Samuel that kind of player? I've always thought Of Graham as a fox-in-the-box, who will poach goals from close range. Don't know enough about Samuel, but he sure didn't look to have much clout last week. Ergo, is playing either of them up front, on their own, playing to their strengths? 

Last Saturday, we had great success playing down your flanks. Why? Because your wide men attacked, lost the ball and left gaping holes that would make Katie Price blush. The balance was totally wrong, which made the midfield non-existent. Instead. It allowed our midfield, to bomb forward, in support of the strikers, and encouraged our full backs to push up, forcing you back to square one. Kightly & McGlashan ran the show, and that was because they were allowed the time & space. The only reason they were allowed that time & space, is because your midfield was so dis-jointed, nobody seemed to know whether they were coming or going, attacking or defending. 

 

we have to play the ball on the floor but move it quickly and have some movement in between the lines far to static yesterday until Dack, Samuel and Gladwin can on yesterday. We signed Chapman who has pace, tricky and skills and should be either starting or come off the bench. The players yesterday were far too deep and no support to Graham, midfield too deep and 3 defensive midfield was poor by Mowbray and the centre area was too congestion. the space was down the wings and our wing backs were too deep and played like full backs. Williams was awful yesterday and I think Doyle will be our 1st left back/wing back by end of the season as I think he will develop and become a better player than Williams. Mowbray this week has to get the players on the training ground and from Monday onwards work on 1 formation and the way we will play and stick to it. Also an experience centre back at this level needs to be sign but expect us to loan one from PL or Championship club 

5 hours ago, Shrimper said:

When you go to Valley Parade next week, you'll face a team who religiously play 4-4-2, or 4-3-3. 

You've got two options IMO...

1) match them for formation, and hope Mowbray manages to buy enough sets of testicles for your lads to strap on, and battle for 90 mins. 

OR

2) play 4-5-1, accept that you'll have to soak up pressure, but hit them on the counter-attack. 

Personally I @#/? detest the defensive nature of a 4-5-1 formation, but I must admit, when utilised properly, it works a treat. But it MUST be utilised properly. Defend in numbers, attack in numbers with pace & precision. Not pretty, but a team of your calibre, will get the job done, against one of your promotion rivals. And that's the main thing

 

so 4-2-3-1/4-5-1 counter attack style would work?

Don't Bradford play 4-4-1-1 or 3-5-2 formation? from what I watched last season I seen McCall play both. Think he made a good signing in McCartan from Stanley in the summer.

5 hours ago, DaveyB said:

I think part of the reason we played 3 at the back today is that Mowbray doesn't really trust Ward (and who can blame him) and so he wanted Nyambe's pace back there to cover for him. Personally I've got no real problem with that, or with the formation per se, but starting with Caddis & Williams wide and leaving all of our creative players on the bench at home to Doncaster, in a game where we really needed to start positively and get on the front foot following a disappointing display last week, was frankly unforgivable. 

I still think we can come good, but we need to learn some lessons and fast 

Mowbray said last season that Ward cant play in a 2 man centre back partnership

 

[blueboy3333]

2 hours ago, AllRoverAsia said:

That is OTT, unfair and fecking rude to a long term poster on this MB.

Call your own lot halfwits by all means but not one of ours.

Spot on mate. It's time Shrimper packed up his nets and did one back to Southend.

[matt83]

We've seen it before with teams where there are 11 blokes on a pitch but no game plan. There has to be a purpose, what are we trying to do. Two league games and two formations. I watched the championship goals on channel 5 and most teams have pace and wingers. Rovers have nothing. No width, no pace, no big man up top, no attacking midfielder as such and no plan seemingly just 11 blokes playing football.

As a person I've liked Mowbray more than most we've had down here but sense he's going the same way as every other Venkys manager in that he's unaccountable for personal mistakes. Not my fault governor. 

[McClarky]

The goals we gave away were shocking.  Really basic errors that you would be surprised to see in Sunday League. What was Raya doing for the last 1. For a start why was he out iof his area and then why couldn't he just head it away? Bizarre.  

I heard about the half time warm up as well. At least some people in the ground were having fun.

[MCMC1875]

1 hour ago, chaddyrovers said:

 

 

.