[Archived] ROVERS V Rochdale

[blueboy3333]

Just now, arbitro said:

I would leave Mulgrew at centre back. His calm, steadying assurance is vital from that position and I think the other defenders are better because of this. I do think though that once Lenihan gets up to speed Mowbray will revert to his favoured three at the back system.

Mopwbray's been quite clear he won't be moving Mulgrew into midfield, something along the lines of 'I've never even considered it' when he was interviewed about it. Mulgrew doesn't have the legs for it in this division. He'd be like Whittingham, struggling to cope with the runners etc. He's far better off at the back where he can see everything in front of him.

As for 3 at the back it would be absolute madness now to change it. I'm hoping Lenihan slots into midfield alongside Smallwood to give added bite and cover and that we buy a quality winger that doesn't need to spend as much time worrying about covering for Whittingham like Bennett has to.

[dingles staying down 4ever]

4 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

Mopwbray's been quite clear he won't be moving Mulgrew into midfield, something along the lines of 'I've never even considered it' when he was interviewed about it. Mulgrew doesn't have the legs for it in this division. He'd be like Whittingham, struggling to cope with the runners etc. He's far better off at the back where he can see everything in front of him.

As for 3 at the back it would be absolute madness now to change it. I'm hoping Lenihan slots into midfield alongside Smallwood to give added bite and cover and that we buy a quality winger that doesn't need to spend as much time worrying about covering for Whittingham like Bennett has to.

Lenihan is a poor midfielder. Far better with the game played in front of him. 

Accept your point about Whittingham not having legs but did Tugay have legs at 38? He had midfield runners to do his work.  Mulgrew has a better range of passing than Whittingham so put him just in front of the back 4 with 2 midfielders such as Smallwood and Tomlinson to do his running.

[blueboy3333]

2 minutes ago, dingles staying down 4ever said:

Lenihan is a poor midfielder. Far better with the game played in front of him. 

Accept your point about Whittingham not having legs but did Tugay have legs at 38? He had midfield runners to do his work.  Mulgrew has a better range of passing than Whittingham so put him just in front of the back 4 with 2 midfielders such as Smallwood and Tomlinson to do his running.

Mulgrew is no Tugay. And if you put him in front of the back 4 with two more midfielders in front of him who are you dropping? Dack? A wide player leaving us lopsided?

Lenihan was superb for Burton in midfield. JFH raved about him. To say he's a poor midfielder is a bit premature. He would certainly lessen the load on Smallwood and he's a good passer. He can also get around the pitch, unlike Evans and Whittingham.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

Just now, dingles staying down 4ever said:

Lenihan is a poor midfielder. Far better with the game played in front of him. 

Accept your point about Whittingham not having legs but did Tugay have legs at 38? He had midfield runners to do his work.  Mulgrew has a better range of passing than Whittingham so put him just in front of the back 4 with 2 midfielders such as Smallwood and Tomlinson to do his running.

The Tugay's of this world don't come along often. He's the best passer of a ball I've ever seen at Ewood and I go back to the Ronnie and Dougie era. So expecting Charlie to be as effective is unrealistic. Leave the back 4 as they are. Leave Dack where he is and get a winger who can get at teams out wide and partner for Smallwood who's just as hard working but maybe a bit smarter in possession. Maybe Lenihan can play there, we'll see.

[tomphil]

49 minutes ago, dingles staying down 4ever said:

Lenihan is a poor midfielder. Far better with the game played in front of him. 

Accept your point about Whittingham not having legs but did Tugay have legs at 38? He had midfield runners to do his work.  Mulgrew has a better range of passing than Whittingham so put him just in front of the back 4 with 2 midfielders such as Smallwood and Tomlinson to do his running.

The word was a while ago that Mulgrew wanted to play centre half and wasn't keen on being a left back of left side of a three, all about being in contention for Scotland I think plus he obviously feels it's his best position.

There's a perfectly good argument for him playing in front of the back 4 but I doubt it'll ever be happening.

[jim mk2]

You play your best players in their best positions - not move them to accommodate others. England made the same mistake with Scholes.

Rather than tinker with a winning formula keep Mulgrew where he is - and strengthen the team with specialist players for the positions where we are lacking. 

The transfer window should be all about quality of player, not numbers.

[joey_big_nose]

4 hours ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

I'm not sure I can see Dack playing in central midfield. He likes to run with the ball into danger areas not pass it there. He's not really a perceptive passer of the ball but more an instinctive passing player. Plus I don't see him doing much tackling in midfield, being honest we bought him to score goals not make tackles.

Initially I would agree with you, but after watching the game on Boxing Day I came to the conclusion that Dack was playing very well but had little in front of him to benefit from his quality.

He does create and score his own goals, but think he could do even more damage from deeper with two strikers in front. He's the best player I've seen in this division. We need to exploit that to the maximum. 

Edit - for clarity I think Dack's best position is central midfield. He's a classic box to box player. Good engine, strength, can run with the ball. You can play him as a number 10 with 1 striker to allow a more defensive formation, but this level there's no need to do that. The opposition does not have the quality in 8/10 cases to require us to play two sitting centre mids. It's daft to have Evans and Smallwood sitting and then also Dack dripping off against a shambolic outfit like Rochdale.

[chaddyrovers]

4 hours ago, dingles staying down 4ever said:

Personally, especially now Lenihan is getting fit, I'd move Mulgrew into midfield and push Dack closer to Graham. Mulgrew is the one player who could see Dack's movement quicker. Quicker ball movement would help to make up for the team's general lack of pace.

Mulgrew and Mowbray both say his position is centre back. Why move him from centre back?

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

Just now, joey_big_nose said:

Initially I would agree with you, but after watching the game on Boxing Day I came to the conclusion that Dack was playing very well but had little in front of him to benefit from his quality.

He does create and score his own goals, but think he could do even more damage from deeper with two strikers in front. He's the best player I've seen in this division. We need to exploit that to the maximum. 

Edit - for clarity I think Dack's best position is central midfield. He's a classic box to box player. Good engine, strength, can run with the ball. You can play him as a number 10 with 1 striker to allow a more defensive formation, but this level there's no need to do that. The opposition does not have the quality in 8/10 cases to require us to play two sitting centre mids. It's daft to have Evans and Smallwood sitting and then also Dack dripping off against a shambolic outfit like Rochdale.

Yeah, he's all those things but when it comes to passing, he only lends you the ball.  Lot's of really good players aren't too bothered about how you get the ball just as long as you give it them back ASAP. 

 

 

[joey_big_nose]

7 minutes ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

Yeah, he's all those things but when it comes to passing, he only lends you the ball.  Lot's of really good players aren't too bothered about how you get the ball just as long as you give it them back ASAP. 

 

 

Agreed, but when he's got it deeper and earlier he can do more damage driving forward imo.  He'll drag out 2 or 3 players every time.

[Al]

On ‎27‎/‎12‎/‎2017 at 15:06, roversfan99 said:

I dont think he did, Dack in the first half in particular i thought was below his usual standards. The 2 wide men created nothing for him either. He held it up as best he could, and showed much more desire and work rate than Nuttall. That said, we didnt create any chances really.

I dont think any of the strikers are making themselves undroppable, but Graham scored in the 2 cup games, and v Charlton, hes shown his work rate recently, unlike the other 2 at times, hes had a poor season but for me hes easily the best striker at the club.

NOOOO he's past it. Samuel is by far the best we have.

[dingles staying down 4ever]

3 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

Mulgrew and Mowbray both say his position is centre back. Why move him from centre back?

Mowbray will not want to upset his star player. Mulgrew's football ability is wasted as centre half.

[Garage Flower]

Set pieces aside our back 5 have been a shining light of this season. I can see Lenihan coming back in at centre half as soon as he’s fit, I can see him maybe playing centre mid. You need to bare in mind it was a while ago we played him centre mid and it was in the championship. We’ve all seen the difference in quality between the two leagues. 

Mulgrew will play centre half for the rest of the season. Talk of him playing centre mid at this stage of his career in this league is just daft and that’s not even thinking on his injury record.

[chaddyrovers]

44 minutes ago, dingles staying down 4ever said:

Mowbray will not want to upset his star player. Mulgrew's football ability is wasted as centre half.

Mulgrew doesnt have fitness for centre midfielder each game week in week out. 

Mulgrew has said he wants to be a centre back

[DaveyB]

On 27/12/2017 at 01:36, chaddyrovers said:

But Graham had more support than Nuttall did second half. 

Today performance was poor but we won. Thats all that matter. 

I don’t understand this. Did you see the game? We didn’t change formation. Dack played the same position all game, as did Bennett, and Conway replaced Antonnson on the left - so how do you come to the conclusion that Graham had more support?

 

Don’t get me wrong, I actually think Nuttall did ok when he came on and gave us more mobility which we needed. However, he also had 3 half-chances, which I think Graham or Samuel might have have done better with. The first a throughball played by Dack, which Joe somehow turned the wrong way to chase and allowed their right back to cover round, a cross from the right (from Bennett maybe?) which he got something on, but couldn’t direct it on target, and an in-swinging ball to the back post from Conway, which from where I was sat it looked like Joe lost the flight of and it went over him. 

I don’t recall Graham getting similar service, so I’m even more confused by your insistence that Graham had more support than Nuttall. Could it be that, having written Graham off in previous weeks, you’re now just posting to confirm that opinion??

 

Personally I would start with Graham atm as his hold up play is superior to our other strikers. Samuel is a great option to bring on when the game is stretched and defenders are getting tired. I’d also give Nuttall a couple of games back in the u23’s to refind his goalscoring form - because when he’s not scoring he offers us far less than the other 2 strikers. 

[dingles staying down 4ever]

19 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Mulgrew doesnt have fitness for centre midfielder each game week in week out. 

Mulgrew has said he wants to be a centre back

At what stage have I suggested centre of midfield? With two runners he does not need fitness. Play him in a position where his feet can do the business. Other midfielders who played in the position I'm suggesting were Glenn Hoddle and Guillet at the end of their careers.

Our defence also requires tightening up, an extra defensive player can't do any harm

[roversfan99]

Mulgrews been the main one heading crosses away, he leads from defence, he can bring it out from there too but hes not a midfielder.

Once Lenihans fit Downing should make way who has been shaky recently and isnt on the other 2's level.

[chaddyrovers]

30 minutes ago, DaveyB said:

I don’t understand this. Did you see the game? We didn’t change formation. Dack played the same position all game, as did Bennett, and Conway replaced Antonnson on the left - so how do you come to the conclusion that Graham had more support?

Dave, I was at the game as always. Like I said before I dont miss games. 

Dack played 10 role but when Nuttall came on Dack dropped deeper and we went 4-5-1. Nuttall was isolated most of the time. 

Bennett, Dack and Antonsson gave more support to Graham. 

[RV Blue]

9 hours ago, blueboy3333 said:

As for 3 at the back it would be absolute madness now to change it. I'm hoping Lenihan slots into midfield alongside Smallwood to give added bite and cover and that we buy a quality winger that doesn't need to spend as much time worrying about covering for Whittingham like Bennett has to.

That would be the most uncreative midfield partnership in history. I don't think Lenihan is a midfielder in the first place, and he certainly wouldn't fit well with a player like Smallwood next to him.

[blueboy3333]

1 hour ago, RV Blue said:

That would be the most uncreative midfield partnership in history. I don't think Lenihan is a midfielder in the first place, and he certainly wouldn't fit well with a player like Smallwood next to him.

Lenihan grew up a midfielder in the Academy and when he went to Burton. And he would hardly be breaking up a creative midfield. He literally couldn't do any worse on that front, and he be a darn sight better at tracking runners and winning the ball than Whitingham and Evans.

[islander200]

2 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

Dave, I was at the game as always. Like I said before I dont miss games. 

Dack played 10 role but when Nuttall came on Dack dropped deeper and we went 4-5-1. Nuttall was isolated most of the time. 

Bennett, Dack and Antonsson gave more support to Graham. 

Up until we scored we created nothing in the first half, Graham had nothing to work off

[JacknOry]

2 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

Dave, I was at the game as always. Like I said before I dont miss games. 

Dack played 10 role but when Nuttall came on Dack dropped deeper and we went 4-5-1. Nuttall was isolated most of the time. 

Bennett, Dack and Antonsson gave more support to Graham. 

Well you do - you have missed plenty by your own admittance. Fair enough it was due to good reasons but you HAVE missed games mr superfan.

[chaddyrovers]

27 minutes ago, islander200 said:

Up until we scored we created nothing in the first half, Graham had nothing to work off

Did Graham work hard? Nope. 

Did Graham try to win the ball back or chase the keeper down? Nope

Graham did nothing again..

16 minutes ago, JacknOry said:

Well you do - you have missed plenty by your own admittance. Fair enough it was due to good reasons but you HAVE missed games mr superfan.

I dont miss League games at all. Not missed a home League Game since becoming ST holders over 20 years ago. 

I do miss cup games yes but I'm talking League games most of the time. Cups are good but we havent come close to winning a cup since Mark Hughes days as manager. Yes Big Sam did get us to semi final but we were well beaten by Villa

[RV Blue]

41 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

Lenihan grew up a midfielder in the Academy and when he went to Burton. And he would hardly be breaking up a creative midfield. He literally couldn't do any worse on that front, and he be a darn sight better at tracking runners and winning the ball than Whitingham and Evans.

I'm not saying he'd be any worse than what we have because that would be impossible, I'm saying that we should be looking to sign a midfielder and play Lenihan at the back instead of Downing.

[JacknOry]

Just now, chaddyrovers said:

Did Graham work hard? Nope. 

Did Graham try to win the ball back or chase the keeper down? Nope

Graham did nothing again..

I dont miss League games at all. Not missed a home League Game since becoming ST holders over 20 years ago. 

I do miss cup games yes but I'm talking League games most of the time. Cups are good but we havent come close to winning a cup since Mark Hughes days as manager. Yes Big Sam did get us to semi final but we were well beaten by Villa

You might want to change your original statement then - as you said you dont miss games.Perhaps say i dont miss home games and only miss cup games and away games? Your statement that 'you dont miss games' kinda suggests that you dont miss ANY Rovers games.