Hull away

[CrouchingNunhiddenCucumber]

Got a good feeling about today, 0-2 with Dack involved in both. I suspect this will only happen after Tony realises the positive formation and line up against Carlisle is the way to go and makes some subs after an hour or so as I'm sure he'll go back to Evans and Smallwood from the start. 

[callumrovers]

On 17/08/2018 at 10:33, Stuart said:

Yeah. Momentum is overrated.

Let’s put that forward line that got 5 last time out (and could have had more) back in its box and go for a 1-0-and-shut-up-shop approach which has resulted in two draws.

He’d better get that 1-0 then because he is opening himself up for criticism if he changes a winning team and then doesn’t.

You do realise that Hull are a far better team than Carlise? If we set up with the same players that played against Carlise, we would concede a lot, didn't Carlise have 18 shots? 

[Stuart]

4 minutes ago, callumrovers said:

You do realise that Hull are a far better team than Carlise? If we set up with the same players that played against Carlise, we would concede a lot, didn't Carlise have 18 shots? 

No I hadn’t realised - thanks. I wish you’d have told me yesterday when I made that mistake though.

I did bring back Bennett to shore up the midfield in place of Conway. But I could be persuaded to bring back Evans or Smallwood in place of Travis as well.

Where I don’t think we should let Hull off the hook though is with our attack. Palmer, Dack, Rothwell and Armstrong could cause them real problems. Dropping three of them to play Graham, Bennett, and Evans, and bringing Smallwood (or even keeping Conway) is a negative move and could well invite pressure and see us trying to play on the break with no real pace to capitalise on it.

Despite Hull’s poor start (worse than us - they are below us) this was probably a game in our draw target column. Having dropped 2 points in our first two games, this would be an opportunity to upgrade that target and go for three points then make more conservative changes later in the game. Let’s at least go for it. 1 point isn’t that much better than 0. (That’s why they changed the win tally from 2 to 3 points nearly 40 years ago - to make teams go for wins more than draws).

Fun fact: I actually like the Iraqi league version of the rule. It would give managers like Bowyer and Mowbray nightmares though.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994–95_Iraqi_National_League

 

[roversfan99]

27 minutes ago, Stuart said:

No I hadn’t realised - thanks. I wish you’d have told me yesterday when I made that mistake though.

I did bring back Bennett to shore up the midfield in place of Conway. But I could be persuaded to bring back Evans or Smallwood in place of Travis as well.

Where I don’t think we should let Hull off the hook though is with our attack. Palmer, Dack, Rothwell and Armstrong could cause them real problems. Dropping three of them to play Graham, Bennett, and Evans, and bringing Smallwood (or even keeping Conway) is a negative move and could well invite pressure and see us trying to play on the break with no real pace to capitalise on it.

Despite Hull’s poor start (worse than us - they are below us) this was probably a game in our draw target column. Having dropped 2 points in our first two games, this would be an opportunity to upgrade that target and go for three points then make more conservative changes later in the game. Let’s at least go for it. 1 point isn’t that much better than 0. (That’s why they changed the win tally from 2 to 3 points nearly 40 years ago - to make teams go for wins more than draws).

Fun fact: I actually like the Iraqi league version of the rule. It would give managers like Bowyer and Mowbray nightmares though.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994–95_Iraqi_National_League

 

Bringing in Graham isnt a negative move. He is crucial in the way he is a focal point, his hold up is outstanding at times and he can get us up the pitch to allow our flair players to take advantage.

I agree with you in the main in terms of not adopting a negative mentality. I'd put Bennett and Evans in the centre of midfield, and then Dack, Graham and Armstrong are definites and the only debate is whether to start Palmer or Rothwell.

[Stuart]

6 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Bringing in Graham isnt a negative move. He is crucial in the way he is a focal point, his hold up is outstanding at times and he can get us up the pitch to allow our flair players to take advantage.

I agree with you in the main in terms of not adopting a negative mentality. I'd put Bennett and Evans in the centre of midfield, and then Dack, Graham and Armstrong are definites and the only debate is whether to start Palmer or Rothwell.

Not him per se but it is a less attacking than Armstrong.

It’ll be interesting to see the line up after such an emphatic win last time out.

[roversfan99]

Just now, Stuart said:

Not him per se but it is a less attacking than Armstrong.

It’ll be interesting to see the line up after such an emphatic win last time out.

Both worked well in tandem last season, and Graham doesnt deserve to be dropped, so id like to see both.

Grahams hold up would allow Armstrong, Dack and Palmer/Rothwell to run into the space he vacates when coming short for the ball. 

[Drover]

First game for a while where I've been able to get down (thankfully a lot of Yorkshire clubs in the championship). Think it will be a close game but hoping we will nick it 2-1. Mulgrew and Dack to score. Heard it here first.

[Bigdoggsteel]

2 hours ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

Yes but are they any better than what we've already got ? If they are they should be playing . If not why did we sign them ?

Maybe Davenport and Rothwell are better, but I think the guys currently starting deserve a few games there before ejecting them. 

[RV Blue]

Not confident about today for some reason. They battered us in January. I really hope Evans and Smallwood don’t play together in midfield, Evans is unreliable and Smallwood is a decent League 1 player.

Edited August 18, 2018 by RV Blue

[47er]

Obvious I know, but lose this and we are off to a poor start. Got to keep that momentum going.

[Drover]

5 minutes ago, 47er said:

Obvious I know, but lose this and we are off to a poor start. Got to keep that momentum going.

Will a draw be considered momentum? Feel we need our first win in the next 2 games or heads will start to drop

[Wing Wizard Windy Miller]

34 minutes ago, Drover said:

Will a draw be considered momentum? Feel we need our first win in the next 2 games or heads will start to drop

Draw wouldn't be the end of the world.  Unbeaten and all that.  Win would make it a good start. Lose and you would have to say (given who we've played) that it's a poor return.

Don't fancy us today. I think we will get our first win on Weds.

2-0 Hull.

Edited August 18, 2018 by Wing Wizard Windy Miller

[47er]

34 minutes ago, Drover said:

Will a draw be considered momentum? Feel we need our first win in the next 2 games or heads will start to drop

An away draw is always good but I get your point.

[Wing Wizard Windy Miller]

Just now, 47er said:

An away draw is always good but I get your point.

Couple of wins would do our recruitment chances the world of good you would think.  If we are bottom 3  after a couple more games, can't see many wanting to come permanently.

[chaddyrovers]

[Stuart]

Palmer and Arma stay, Graham on the bench.

Smallwood, Evans and Bennett return.

Travis and Rothwell on the bench.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

8 minutes ago, Wing Wizard Windy Miller said:

Draw wouldn't be the end of the world.  Unbeaten and all that.  Win would make it a good start. Lose and you would have to say (given who we've played) that it's a poor return.

Don't fancy us today. I think we will get our first win on Weds.

2-0 Hull.

I'd always take an away draw. I think we might get one today.

edit . That was before I saw the team. I don't fancy us with that line up, losing by one now.

Edited August 18, 2018 by Tyrone Shoelaces

[Stuart]

Rovers change to a video tweet to avoid being pasted onto social media, yet a third party are already out with the team.

Bet 10 will be pleased.

[roversfan99]

Wouldn't have dropped Graham to fit in all 3 of Bennett, Evans and Smallwood who surely is now a performance away from being dropped.

That said, theres definitely pace and flair in the 3 attacking players in that team.

Not a fan of the stupid video revealing the team.

[Ewood Ace]

Don't like a midfield two of Evans and Smallwood it was our weakest area last season in League 1. Would have played Armstrong wide in place of Bennett and put Graham up top as I worry about Armstrong holding the ball up as the lone striker.  

[bluebruce]

Very surprised he has stuck with Arma up front. Could mean we are going for the win, or just that we plan to hit them on the counter with Armstrong's pace.

Or simply that TM is being cautious with DG's knees.

[dallydally]

Just now, bluebruce said:

Very surprised he has stuck with Arma up front. Could mean we are going for the win, or just that we plan to hit them on the counter with Armstrong's pace.

Or simply that TM is being cautious with DG's knees.

Usual cautious Mowbray playing Evans and Smallwood

[Drover]

ALERT. Card machine in the stadium is down therefore no cash no pints/food!

[dallydally]

Just now, Drover said:

ALERT. Card machine in the stadium is down therefore no cash no pints/food!

?

[Wing Wizard Windy Miller]

Yikes.  Thought TM preferred 2.5 attackers.  Not even got that.  Be very surprised if we get anything with that line up.