[Archived] Gillingham away 17.3.18

[blueboy3333]

Just now, arbitro said:

We were mundane, predictable and easy to play against last night. The lack of intensity in our game is the real worry for me going forward.

We've been like that all season except when the oppo has left us space to counter-attack them. We don't play with intensity or imagination, certainly not in the vast majority of the home games I've seen.  It's not a criticism either, it's a fact. Yet, we still manage to win games. Hopefully we've not hit a bad run of form results wise.

[Bigdoggsteel]

Starting a not 100% fit Dack last night instead of Payne was a bad call. Not good for Dack and not good for Paynes confidence. We need a big performance Saturday 

[AJW]

14 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

Sounds like the Plymouth away game but this time we managed to nick a point. We need to bounce back at Bristol Rovers now.

And we will ... Shrews will drop points at Bradford tomorrow , we will win at Bristol and all will be well in the world 

[AAK]

25 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

From a Rovers fan on twitter

Evans had another good game, Raya did well & I thought Williams & Benno did ok too.  The rest were off their game but you can’t win them all.  Let’s not overreact, guys #rovers

Watching a different game than most then, Bennett and Williams distribution was awful. Evans was Evans, not up to much and Raya made a good save, but again, distribution awful. Smallwood has gone from a 7/10 player every game to a 5/10 player every game. Can't play brilliant in them all though, and if Shrewsbury don't win tomorrow it would be a good point.

[arbitro]

From Mowbray post match

 

“It was a difficult night for us in that we didn’t quite get the fluency that we usually play with," he confessed. "Defensively they had three big centre halves who kept heading it out and booting it clear.

He is correct but why did we keep knocking balls that were meat and drink to Gillingham. Long diagonal balls from back to front have become the order of the day in a league were most teams are bigger than us.

[DE.]

47 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Starting a not 100% fit Dack last night instead of Payne was a bad call. Not good for Dack and not good for Paynes confidence. We need a big performance Saturday 

Yeah, starting a half fit Dack ahead of Payne suggests TM doesn't trust Payne at all. It's not like we were playing a top six team, it was @#/?ing Gillingham. If he can't trust Payne to play against that standard of team I'm not sure why he's here at all. 

[Bigdoggsteel]

9 minutes ago, DE. said:

Yeah, starting a half fit Dack ahead of Payne suggests TM doesn't trust Payne at all. It's not like we were playing a top six team, it was @#/?ing Gillingham. If he can't trust Payne to play against that standard of team I'm not sure why he's here at all. 

It was a weird call. I have a bad feeling Mowbray is going to try and just fall over the line with an ultra cautious approach. 

Even though we are 5 points plus goal difference ahead,things can turn so quickly. A win Saturday will take some pressure off, but I'm actually worried about the Peterborough game. Have a bad feeling about it. Anyway, need Bradford to do us a favour first 

[roversfan99]

One thing I dont really get is Mowbrays seeming insistence on having almost a designated super sub, now Payne, previously Chapman.

When Payne starts, especially over the likes of Conway and Antonsson, we start games on the front foot, hes another headache for defenders, he links well especially with Dack and it allows us to attack more from the start.

He has had an impact starting games, Walsall home and seemingly away we started well and on the front foot and he was a big part of that, whereas he has struggled to impact the last 3 games from the bench, hes failed to get into the game.

Hes a good player perhaps often overlooked for more conservative alternatives. Need to start him Dack Graham and Armstrong all together as much as we can. 

Would also like to see Whittingham start next game in his correct position in an attempt to try and get a bit more control of the midfield.

[roversfan99]

6 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

@jim mk2 thanks for match report. 

I wouldnt say Samuel is target man type of striker but more of a striker who run the channels and behind the defence. Would you agree? 

On the performance, was Armstrong barely in the game?

How did our back 4 play? What effective did Evans and Smallwood?

 

8 hours ago, garnersfags said:

I can't understand the criticism of posters who are concerned that we haven't played well for a number of games, and that we are making some very ordinary teams look like promotion contenders. 

It's hard to watch and disappointing.

This is NOT a comment on our season or Mowbray.

Recently it has seemed easier for opposing managers to tactically nullify our major threats. 

Yes, we've had a good season but the match threads on this messageboard are for us to comment on this particular match. 

It's disappointing to be repeatedly frustrated (as we were tonight) by teams with a tenth of our resources, and shows us that we will have to seriously invest to guarantee midtable Championship stability. This tempers my enjoyment of a promising season. 

I apologise if this is unreasonably negative in some members eyes.

I think its about us getting the balance. Last night from all accounts we were shocking so I can understand the criticism on yesterday in isolation and have offered that myself. We are still in the driving seat in general for 2nd and a continuation of our current run of results will do it. 

6 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

@jim mk2 thanks for match report. 

I wouldnt say Samuel is target man type of striker but more of a striker who run the channels and behind the defence. Would you agree? 

On the performance, was Armstrong barely in the game?

How did our back 4 play? What effective did Evans and Smallwood?

Hes one of them strikers who offers absolutely no threat to goal whatsoever. Been a terrible signing.

[JHRover]

1 hour ago, blueboy3333 said:

Sounds like the Plymouth away game but this time we managed to nick a point. We need to bounce back at Bristol Rovers now.

Having calmed down a bit from last night on my way into work this morning I was thinking the same thing - the closest comparison I could make to last night was the Plymouth away performance, the only major difference being that Plymouth took their opportunities and got ahead early doors and we never looked like getting back into it whilst Gillingham squandered their chance when it came.

From Rovers point of view it was poor, poor stuff. Marginally better in the second 45 but only by virtue of us actually stringing a few passes together on the edge of their area, we didn't create an opportunity worthy of the name. That is the problem. We all know we can't win them all and won't play well every week and I'm getting tired of hearing it, but the good performances are actually in the vast minority and for a side starting top of the league to turn up with such an approach was worrying. As said above the pace, urgency etc. was of a side going through the motions rather than one battling it out for promotion.

If fitness or tiredness is the issue here I'd love someone to explain how/why the likes of Gillingham and Southend, without anything to play for, are able to overcome such issues and why our manager persists with the same players if they aren't fresh enough to go and perform 3 times a week, having assembled a squad supposedly to cope over 46 games and the rigours that come with it better than rivals.

I really didn't understand the decision to start with Dack when he clearly wasn't up to speed and Conway when you can guarantee he will need to be subbed after 60 minutes. There's 2 subs used up before we've started and we'd rolled all our dice by the hour mark by taking Graham off. For all the stick he gets Samuel changed things for the better last night as he actually had the ball at his feet and was involved in the game albeit in a limited capacity unlike the anonymous Graham. The arrival of Whittingham rather than Antonsson was odd.

Lots of talk on twitter about 1 defeat in 30 being an important factor here. Not really. If we draw at Bristol it will be 1 in 31 but we'll have dropped 4 points in a week. Clearly it is better to win one and lose one than draw both and unbeaten runs don't necessarily equate to promotion, as Huddersfield's record breaking season a few years ago proves.

Major improvement needed.

[K-Hod]

Whilst I understand that after a game emotions are at their highest, some of the baiting on here last night was as poor as Rovers' performance sounded.

I thought we'd moved past the days of 'happy clappers' and 'tremblers' but evidently not.

Can we turn it in going forward please?

[tomphil]

Sounds like they went with the mindset nick a point anything else is a bonus, got the job done so credit for that but it's a dangerous strategy as we've seen before. Would help if we had a big guy to bring on up front and put a real shift in later in games. Someone who causes defenders probs and opens space up for others in the absence of a goal scorer, Samuel is neither and Mowbrays persistence of keep getting him on the pitch somehow is annoying now, it doesn't work to the desired effect so scrap it and try something else.

One of those nights though that could have been worse but the next one is even trickier, you can grind your way to promotion of course you can but you won't draw your way to it especially when you have teams like Wigan & Shrewsbury who might lose the odd one but go out to try to put teams to the sword every game and usually do.

Game on !!!

[BlackburnEnd75]

9 minutes ago, JHRover said:

 

From Rovers point of view it was poor, poor stuff. Marginally better in the second 45 but only by virtue of us actually stringing a few passes together on the edge of their area, we didn't create an opportunity worthy of the name. That is the problem. We all know we can't win them all and won't play well every week and I'm getting tired of hearing it, but the good performances are actually in the vast minority and for a side starting top of the league to turn up with such an approach was worrying. As said above the pace, urgency etc. was of a side going through the motions rather than one battling it out for promotion.

If fitness or tiredness is the issue here I'd love someone to explain how/why the likes of Gillingham and Southend, without anything to play for, are able to overcome such issues and why our manager persists with the same players if they aren't fresh enough to go and perform 3 times a week, having assembled a squad supposedly to cope over 46 games and the rigours that come with it better than rivals.

I really didn't understand the decision to start with Dack when he clearly wasn't up to speed and Conway when you can guarantee he will need to be subbed after 60 minutes. There's 2 subs used up before we've started and we'd rolled all our dice by the hour mark by taking Graham off. For all the stick he gets Samuel changed things for the better last night as he actually had the ball at his feet and was involved in the game albeit in a limited capacity unlike the anonymous Graham. The arrival of Whittingham rather than Antonsson was odd.

Lots of talk on twitter about 1 defeat in 30 being an important factor here. Not really. If we draw at Bristol it will be 1 in 31 but we'll have dropped 4 points in a week. Clearly it is better to win one and lose one than draw both and unbeaten runs don't necessarily equate to promotion, as Huddersfield's record breaking season a few years ago proves.

Major improvement needed.

In bold is an excellent point. Dack looked like he was carrying a knock against MK Dons, came off early against Southend, he's clearly not 100% and should've been saved for Saturday. Your point about Conway and Graham is also very true neither can do 2 games in 4 days and both need to be subbed. So with the Dack gamble and those two players only being able to last 60 mins Mowbray effectively had his changes decided for him which limited what we could do from the bench. Last night we needed a double change at half time to get us moving the ball and we couldn't do it. When Whittingham came on he needed to come on for one for either Evans or Smallwood but he couldn't.

We really struggled to string passes together last night, it was only when Payne (who should've started) and Whittingham came on that we managed to do this at all.

We have the squad but he chose not to use it last night. The lack of movement last night was very worrying, we were so flat. You've gotta use the squad better.  

 

[BlackburnEnd75]

If we win on Saturday its a decent point if we don't its a missed opportunity

[tomphil]

It's just one of those times where the unbeaten run or only lost one in thirty is getting many airings, all that's great but does it apply to Wigan and Shrews ?  No yet look where they are.

Chances will have to be taken at some point and the manager will have to be bold, he's done it before and dragged us up here so I hope he doesn't get the wobbles now. 

Also got to credit Gillingham who are trying to ensure they stay in this league and probably put in one of their most solid displays for a while by the sounds of it.

[oldjamfan1]

Just now, BlackburnEnd75 said:

If we win on Saturday its a decent point if we don't its a missed opportunity

If Shrewsbury don't win at Bradford it will also seem like a decent point. 

[47er]

1 hour ago, JHRover said:

Having calmed down a bit from last night on my way into work this morning I was thinking the same thing - the closest comparison I could make to last night was the Plymouth away performance, the only major difference being that Plymouth took their opportunities and got ahead early doors and we never looked like getting back into it whilst Gillingham squandered their chance when it came.

From Rovers point of view it was poor, poor stuff. Marginally better in the second 45 but only by virtue of us actually stringing a few passes together on the edge of their area, we didn't create an opportunity worthy of the name. That is the problem. We all know we can't win them all and won't play well every week and I'm getting tired of hearing it, but the good performances are actually in the vast minority and for a side starting top of the league to turn up with such an approach was worrying. As said above the pace, urgency etc. was of a side going through the motions rather than one battling it out for promotion.

If fitness or tiredness is the issue here I'd love someone to explain how/why the likes of Gillingham and Southend, without anything to play for, are able to overcome such issues and why our manager persists with the same players if they aren't fresh enough to go and perform 3 times a week, having assembled a squad supposedly to cope over 46 games and the rigours that come with it better than rivals.

I really didn't understand the decision to start with Dack when he clearly wasn't up to speed and Conway when you can guarantee he will need to be subbed after 60 minutes. There's 2 subs used up before we've started and we'd rolled all our dice by the hour mark by taking Graham off. For all the stick he gets Samuel changed things for the better last night as he actually had the ball at his feet and was involved in the game albeit in a limited capacity unlike the anonymous Graham. The arrival of Whittingham rather than Antonsson was odd.

Lots of talk on twitter about 1 defeat in 30 being an important factor here. Not really. If we draw at Bristol it will be 1 in 31 but we'll have dropped 4 points in a week. Clearly it is better to win one and lose one than draw both and unbeaten runs don't necessarily equate to promotion, as Huddersfield's record breaking season a few years ago proves.

Major improvement needed.

We were all down in the dumps after the Plymouth result but after that we were awesome (at least in terms of results) and haven't lost since! So same again please.

[jim mk2]

Easy to criticise Rovers and Mowbray but credit should be given to Gillingham.

Their manager had clearly been watching tapes of us and had instructed his side to press us back hard and early. Armstrong was identified as a danger and was double and sometimes triple marked. Every one of their players also put in a shift. and they might feel they should have won.

Armstrong isn't a winger. He can run the wide channel like Samuel but he is far more effective playing down the middle with a big striker. With Conway's decline, we've lacked a good proper winger all season.

On to the next game, but an improvement will be needed to get even a point out of the Bristol game.  

 

[DE.]

Gillingham's last four games prior to last night:

Gillingham 0-0 Doncaster

Southend 4-0 Gillingham

Gillingham 1-2 Mk Dons

Bradford 1-0 Gillingham

We were playing a team last night in extremely poor form. A team who lost to Southend, MK Dons and Bradford in the last month. I don't think there can be any excuses here, last night was a terrible performance against a very poor side. Some of our players are probably paid more a week than the entire first 11 of Gillingham. I could accept a draw if we played well and it just didn't work out for us, but the performance last night was totally unacceptable. I hope Mowbray makes that clear.

[JHRover]

9 minutes ago, DE. said:

Gillingham's last four games prior to last night:

Gillingham 0-0 Doncaster

Southend 4-0 Gillingham

Gillingham 1-2 Mk Dons

Bradford 1-0 Gillingham

We were playing a team last night in extremely poor form. A team who lost to Southend, MK Dons and Bradford in the last month. I don't think there can be any excuses here, last night was a terrible performance against a very poor side. Some of our players are probably paid more a week than the entire first 11 of Gillingham. I could accept a draw if we played well and it just didn't work out for us, but the performance last night was totally unacceptable. I hope Mowbray makes that clear.

I would certainly hope that Mowbray is concerned by what he saw last night. If he isn't, or he does what some fans seem to want to do and just shrugs his shoulders and says 'yeah but Gillingham did well' or 'yeah but 1 defeat in 30' or 'yeah but we can't play well every week' or 'yeah but we're still in the top 2 so nothing to worry about' then he's falling short. I expect he will be concerned and will be hoping to address our issues in the next couple of days.

That's why I don't understand some of the reaction from some fans towards those who have criticised and raised concerns. That sort of thing needs to be done following poor performances by the players and management team to avoid it happening again and ensure we don't repeat it on Saturday, so why those fans who criticise are a problem I'm not sure.

I expect we'll get more of it in the build up to Saturday about how good a side Bristol Rovers are when they actually aren't. We need to look at ourselves and buck our ideas up. We limped to victories over MK and Southend when other clubs around us have demolished them recently and limped to a draw last night against a side dropping quickly down the table.

[DE.]

I'm trying not to be overly critical due to our good league position and overall form (results wise), but the fans who made a tough midweek trip to Gillingham last night deserved better than that half-arsed performance and to watch Peter Whittingham play right wing for almost half the match. 

People have mentioned fatigue but I don't think that's the problem. All season we've struggled to break down teams who sit back and defend, and almost every time it's Dack who does something special to break the deadlock, whether it's an assist for Graham or scoring himself. The only other way we break through is a Mulgrew free kick. 

It seems to me TM is well aware of our limitations in this regard, hence the decision to play Dack. He was obviously hoping we'd get a goal or two in the first 60 minutes and that he could then take Dack off and work on holding onto that lead for the rest of the game. Unfortunately for him Dack didn't have enough in the tank last night and when he and Graham were both withdrawn by the 65th minute it was game over for Rovers unless Mulgrew could fire in a free kick - which obviously this time didn't happen. 

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

Just now, DE. said:

Gillingham's last four games prior to last night:

Gillingham 0-0 Doncaster

Southend 4-0 Gillingham

Gillingham 1-2 Mk Dons

Bradford 1-0 Gillingham

We were playing a team last night in extremely poor form. A team who lost to Southend, MK Dons and Bradford in the last month. I don't think there can be any excuses here, last night was a terrible performance against a very poor side. Some of our players are probably paid more a week than the entire first 11 of Gillingham. I could accept a draw if we played well and it just didn't work out for us, but the performance last night was totally unacceptable. I hope Mowbray makes that clear.

Reading those latest results for Gillingham I can see why they set up like an " away " team and were happy to play for a point. I was a bit puzzled at first as to why a home team that are as good as safe would be prepared to not give it a go. Looking at those scores tells me why.

[DE.]

Just now, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

Reading those latest results for Gillingham I can see why they set up like an " away " team and were happy to play for a point. I was a bit puzzled at first as to why a home team that are as good as safe would be prepared to not give it a go. Looking at those scores tells me why.

Problem is we set up like the away team as well (which we were, in fairness) which led to a pretty dire first 45. Two teams desperate not to lose. 

[JBiz]

11 minutes ago, DE. said:

Problem is we set up like the away team as well (which we were, in fairness) which led to a pretty dire first 45. Two teams desperate not to lose. 

Don’t buy it. Setting up to defend and putting on a performance lacking final ball, a bit of creative spark are two different things.

 

[DE.]

Just now, Biz said:

Don’t buy it. Setting up to defend and putting on a performance lacking final ball, a bit of creative spark are two different things.

 

We only had one shot until something like the 60th minute. That's not just 'lacking a creative spark' is it?