[Archived] Rovers v Bury

[Lancaster Rover]

There is nothing like reading another clubs messageboard to summon up an instant dislike of their fans. I can honestly say I'd barely given Shrewsbury a minutes thought until recently, my knowledge of them prior to this season started and stopped with Luke Rodgers who scored a hatful of goals for them around 2001 ish and later ended up at New York Red Bulls playing alongside Thierry Henry!

[CrouchingNunhiddenCucumber]

34 minutes ago, DE. said:

By what metric? We won more than we lost in 13/14 and 14/15 under Bowyer...

He's won 51.1% of his games, Bowyer won 34.65%. 

[Rogerb]

19 minutes ago, JacknOry said:

We are 'more arrogant' according to 'little old Shrewsbury' it seems for expecting to beat second-bottom Bury.

http://blueandamber.proboards.com/thread/96758/more-arrogance

The irony from the OP is a joy to behold considering just a couple of threads down in their forum - there is a thread where they are blaming the referee for their defeat against Rotherham.

That forum seems to have a thing about us at one stage there were 4 seperate threads running about Rovers the other week. They are becoming obsessive. There is certainly not the same attention paid to Wigan

 

 

 

 

 

 

[JHRover]

1 minute ago, CrouchingNunhiddenCucumber said:

He's won 51.1% of his games, Bowyer won 34.65%. 

Meaningless statistics when Bowyer was in the Championship trying to compete against Derby/Wednesday/Norwich and various other clubs with more financial clout and stronger squads.

Mowbray has a better win record at Rovers than Dyce has at Burnley.

[JacknOry]

Just now, Rogerb said:

That forum seems to have a thing about us at one stage there were 4 seperate threads running about Rovers the other week. They are becoming obsessive. There is certainly not the same attention paid to Wigan

Yup I saw that too - they dont like us much for some reason.

I would still have them up automatically with us instead of Wigan as it would be one less relegation spot to have to worry about.

[DE.]

47 minutes ago, Gav said:

BY WHAT METRIC?

Try looking at the league table for once DE, it doesn't lie and tells you everything you need to know!

The exact quote was "He's got the team winning more than they are losing for the first time since Venky's weasled into town"

Well, no. As stated, we won more than we lost under GB in a higher division. I appreciate you and a few others here have dropped your expectations through the floor but the facts are what they are.

[DE.]

19 minutes ago, CrouchingNunhiddenCucumber said:

He's won 51.1% of his games, Bowyer won 34.65%. 

You didn't say highest win percentage, though, you said "He's got the team winning more than they are losing for the first time since Venky's weasled into town", which isn't true in any sense. There is an argument to be had for win % being meaningless, particularly when you're talking completely different situations in different divisions, but I think it's self-explanatory enough not to expand on?

[CrouchingNunhiddenCucumber]

6 minutes ago, JHRover said:

Meaningless statistics when Bowyer was in the Championship trying to compete against Derby/Wednesday/Norwich and various other clubs with more financial clout and stronger squads.

Mowbray has a better win record at Rovers than Dyce has at Burnley.

Doesn't fit your narrative again - Mowbray's victories include Nottingham Forest, Aston Villa, and a team you actually refer to Derby, when we were in the Championship. 

Good. 

[CrouchingNunhiddenCucumber]

Just now, DE. said:

You didn't say highest win percentage, though, you said "He's got the team winning more than they are losing for the first time since Venky's weasled into town", which isn't true in any sense. There is an argument to be had for win % being meaningless, particularly when you're talking completely different situations in different divisions, but I think it's self-explanatory enough not to expand on?

When I said "winning more than they are losing" I think that makes fairly good sense when you look at the % no? Win 51.1% Loss 15.5%.

If you'd like I will change my sentence to "he has the highest win % of any manager since Venky's arrived"

And yes there is an argument to be had for win % being meaningless when it doesn't fit your anti-Mowbray narrative. I'm not saying he is a God or anything close, but he's as good as we have had in the last 8 years.

[JacknOry]

Just now, CrouchingNunhiddenCucumber said:

Doesn't fit your narrative again - Mowbray's victories include Nottingham Forest, Aston Villa, and a team you actually refer to Derby, when we were in the Championship. 

Good. 

Surely you should have just made your original post a lot clearer rather than arguing anyone down that took it for how it was structured.

I also read it that you were saying, that this is the first time that we have won more than we lost. This is not the first time we have won more than we lost.

 

[CrouchingNunhiddenCucumber]

10 minutes ago, DE. said:

The exact quote was "He's got the team winning more than they are losing for the first time since Venky's weasled into town"

Well, no. As stated, we won more than we lost under GB in a higher division. I appreciate you and a few others here have dropped your expectations through the floor but the facts are what they are.

My expectations have been re-assessed since we got relegated to League One. That doesn't mean I like Venky's or can ignore what they have done, I realise we need to get out of this League on the first attempt and believe Mowbray is making a decent attempt at it is all. 

[Admiral Nelsen]

3 minutes ago, JacknOry said:

We are 'more arrogant' according to 'little old Shrewsbury' it seems for expecting to beat second-bottom Bury.

http://blueandamber.proboards.com/thread/96758/more-arrogance

The irony from the OP is a joy to behold considering just a couple of threads down in their forum - there is a thread where they are blaming the referee for their defeat against Rotherham.

Some of the posts there are a bit on an eye opener! 

Amazing amount of hostility given how you'd expect them to still be pinching themselves that they're still up there with us. 

[CrouchingNunhiddenCucumber]

Just now, JacknOry said:

Surely you should have just made your original post a lot clearer rather than arguing anyone down that took it for how it was structured.

I also read it that you were saying, that this is the first time that we have won more than we lost. This is not the first time we have won more than we lost.

 

The issue isn't how clear the post was, it's that it doesn't align with your opinion on Mowbray. It's all good though, I can hold my hands up that I should have made it clearer;

I am in love with Tony Mowbray. 

[DE.]

Just now, CrouchingNunhiddenCucumber said:

When I said "winning more than they are losing" I think that makes fairly good sense when you look at the % no? Win 51.1% Loss 15.5%.

If you'd like I will change my sentence to "he has the highest win % of any manager since Venky's arrived"

And yes there is an argument to be had for win % being meaningless when it doesn't fit your anti-Mowbray narrative. I'm not saying he is a God or anything close, but he's as good as we have had in the last 8 years.

Perhaps I'm just sensitive to the ridiculous uber-positivity espoused on here sometimes. I like TM and hope he gets us up because he's an all around decent bloke, have said this many times so am certainly not "anti-Mowbray" in any sense. It's folly to ignore his mistakes, though, and it seems like there are some posters on here who want an echo chamber rather than a forum. I'm happy to have the latter! 

[JacknOry]

Just now, CrouchingNunhiddenCucumber said:

The issue isn't how clear the post was, it's that it doesn't align with your opinion on Mowbray. It's all good though, I can hold my hands up that I should have made it clearer;

I am in love with Tony Mowbray. 

Umm okay then.

Mowbray has the best win percentage since they rolled into town might have been a better way to say it.

The counter argue to that is that most of those games have been in a division that we were favourites to win, with the largest wage bill and with the biggest net spend on new transfers.

[CrouchingNunhiddenCucumber]

Just now, DE. said:

Perhaps I'm just sensitive to the ridiculous uber-positivity espoused on here sometimes. I like TM and hope he gets us up because he's an all around decent bloke, have said this many times so am certainly not "anti-Mowbray" in any sense. It's folly to ignore his mistakes, though, and it seems like there are some posters on here who want an echo chamber rather than a forum. I'm happy to have the latter! 

Fair points, well made. I'm certainly not an overly positive person and I'm slightly emotional that I have come across like that. It's just I honestly think TM is about as good as we will get being where we are at the moment. Hopefully that will change in the next few years. 

[CrouchingNunhiddenCucumber]

Just now, JacknOry said:

Umm okay then.

Mowbray has the best win percentage since they rolled into town might have been a better way to say it.

The counter argue to that is that most of those games have been in a division that we were favourites to win, with the largest wage bill and with the biggest net spend on new transfers.

I agree to some extent however the largest wage bill doesn't always mean you are the best team in the League - Spurs wage bill is mid table for the Premiership isn't it?

And in truth we could have quite easily kept sliding down the League's as many posters on here predicted. 

If we had had Mowbray for the whole of last year in the Championship I doubt we would have gone down and yet the squad was the same as when we had Coyle. He deserves some credit.

[nathan_rovers1]

59 minutes ago, TBTF said:

Calm down Nathan- somebody will turn up .They always do. I don't think you need to be nervous about it.

Very good! I am hopeful the players will also.... 

[JacknOry]

Just now, CrouchingNunhiddenCucumber said:

I agree to some extent however the largest wage bill doesn't always mean you are the best team in the League - Spurs wage bill is mid table for the Premiership isn't it?

And in truth we could have quite easily kept sliding down the League's as many posters on here predicted. 

If we had had Mowbray for the whole of last year in the Championship I doubt we would have gone down and yet the squad was the same as when we had Coyle. He deserves some credit.

True in a way, but we would have been slipping down the league without the investment we surprisingly got. Without Dack, Smallwood and to a lesser extent the likes of Samuel and Downing and had we sold our best players like in previous years - do you think we would be in the hunt for promotion?

[JHRover]

17 minutes ago, CrouchingNunhiddenCucumber said:

Doesn't fit your narrative again - Mowbray's victories include Nottingham Forest, Aston Villa, and a team you actually refer to Derby, when we were in the Championship. 

Good. 

What's my narrative? You were comparing Bowyer and Mowbray's win percentages. Bowyer was manager for more than 2.5 years all of which was spent in the Championship, part of which was under a transfer embargo, and his 3rd year was overshadowed by selling off our best players. Mowbray spent the minority of his time as manager in the Championship and the majority as the biggest and richest club in the 3rd division. Add to that he's not had to sell anyone. Its not really surprising that he's got a better win percentage given he's been here for less time and most of that has been at a lower level with a squad that 95% of people believe is more than good enough to win this league.

Mowbray could take us down to the Conference and then spend 5 years finishing in the play-offs every season. He'd have a very impressive win percentage at the end of that but we'd be deep in the mire. It means nothing if it doesn't secure promotion.

 

 

[CrouchingNunhiddenCucumber]

Just now, JacknOry said:

True in a way, but we would have been slipping down the league without the investment we surprisingly got. Without Dack, Smallwood and to a lesser extent the likes of Samuel and Downing and had we sold our best players like in previous years - do you think we would be in the hunt for promotion?

So you can credit Venky's for the investment but you can't credit Mowbray for identifying those players and selling Blackburn Rovers as an attractive proposition to them?

In answer to your question no I don't, we needed money to buy these players as we'd have struggled with last year's squad. 

[Lancs Rover]

2 hours ago, CrouchingNunhiddenCucumber said:

I suspect at least 67% of you (personally) would be happy that Mowbray had been sacked. 

Mowbray's only negative in my mind is that he tries to fight his dourness rather than fully accepting it. You can't fight dour.

He's got the team winning more than they are losing for the first time since Venky's weasled into town and for that I will always love him in a non sexual way. Ok a bit sexual. 

Tony Dourinho? 

[JacknOry]

Just now, CrouchingNunhiddenCucumber said:

So you can credit Venky's for the investment but you can't credit Mowbray for identifying those players and selling Blackburn Rovers as an attractive proposition to them?

In answer to your question no I don't, we needed money to buy these players as we'd have struggled with last year's squad. 

I do not credit the Venkies for anything...they invested as they had little other option and its hardly like they spent a lot considering the 30 mil they have taken from sales in the last couple of years.

If you read many of my posts I HAVE credited TM for his signings, I actually think its one of his strengths. This does not mean he should not be questioned for his performance in other areas, however.

[CrouchingNunhiddenCucumber]

1 minute ago, JHRover said:

What's my narrative? You were comparing Bowyer and Mowbray's win percentages. Bowyer was manager for more than 2.5 years all of which was spent in the Championship, part of which was under a transfer embargo, and his 3rd year was overshadowed by selling off our best players. Mowbray spent the minority of his time as manager in the Championship and the majority as the biggest and richest club in the 3rd division. Add to that he's not had to sell anyone. Its not really surprising that he's got a better win percentage given he's been here for less time and most of that has been at a lower level with a squad that 95% of people believe is more than good enough to win this league.

Mowbray could take us down to the Conference and then spend 5 years finishing in the play-offs every season. He'd have a very impressive win percentage at the end of that but we'd be deep in the mire. It means nothing if it doesn't secure promotion.

 

 

I liked Bowyer, he was also dour. He also had an £8m forward at his disposal. I believe if we had had Mowbray with that squad at that time he'd have got us into the play-offs. 

[AllRoverAsia]

2 minutes ago, markread said:

Tony Dourinho? 

Tony Dourbray?

Tony Drawbray?

PS: I like Tony but in a non sexual way