Hull away

[Parsonblue]

3 hours ago, 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.

The problem with the team at Carlisle was that it was defensively weak in midfield.  Time and again Carlisle ran through our midfield to have shots on goal.  Against a better team than Carlisle it would have been 5-5.  Fully expect Evans and Smallwood to be restored along with Bennett and Williams if fit.

[Stuart]

29 minutes ago, Parsonblue said:

The problem with the team at Carlisle was that it was defensively weak in midfield.  Time and again Carlisle ran through our midfield to have shots on goal.  Against a better team than Carlisle it would have been 5-5.  Fully expect Evans and Smallwood to be restored along with Bennett and Williams if fit.

Evans and Smallwood and Bennett means dropping Rothwell, Travis and Palmer. Before the Carlisle game people were calling for a strong selection to get some momentum, and because a win is a win. After winning that game it seems momentum isn’t important and that the win wasn’t really much of a win after all because Carlisle aren’t all that. (Even though they beat us 2-0 in a cup match only two seasons ago).

You say “fully expect” as in that’s what you think will probably happen but what are your own thoughts on that? Is it a good idea?

Based on Mowbray’s comments I fully expect Armstrong to be dropped for Graham as well. Which would basically mean none of our Summer signings are considered good enough in Mowbray’s eyes.

Some say it is cautious, I say it is needlessly negative. Especially in an away game following two draws and needing that first league win.

[Parsonblue]

7 minutes ago, Stuart said:

Evans and Smallwood and Bennett means dropping Rothwell, Travis and Palmer. Before the Carlisle game people were calling for a strong selection to get some momentum, and because a win is a win. After winning that game it seems momentum isn’t important and that the win wasn’t really much of a win after all because Carlisle aren’t all that. (Even though they beat us 2-0 in a cup match only two seasons ago).

You say “fully expect” as in that’s what you think will probably happen but what are your own thoughts on that? Is it a good idea?

Based on Mowbray’s comments I fully expect Armstrong to be dropped for Graham as well. Which would basically mean none of our Summer signings are considered good enough in Mowbray’s eyes.

Some say it is cautious, I say it is needlessly negative. Especially in an away game following two draws and needing that first league win.

I would put Evans, Smallwood and Bennett back without a moment's hesitation.  I would also have Graham back in the centre and play Armstrong out wide in place of Palmer - who for me doesn't do enough when we aren't in possession, something which from the sounds of it Mowbray is addressing.

[toogs]

I'd have a moments hesitation about Evans.

Actually, I wouldn't even have a moment.

[Stuart]

26 minutes ago, Parsonblue said:

I would put Evans, Smallwood and Bennett back without a moment's hesitation.  I would also have Graham back in the centre and play Armstrong out wide in place of Palmer - who for me doesn't do enough when we aren't in possession, something which from the sounds of it Mowbray is addressing.

Fair enough. I think Smallwood is suspect at this level and have no confidence in Evans but there you go.

On Palmer, it sounds like poor scouting/recruiting if we are already dropping our shining star loanee because he isn’t good enough to play against Hull.

Armstrong is wasted wide and we will lose something playing him there. Again, poor recruitment if we need to play an out-and-out forward on the wing in place of a midfielder/winger.

[tomphil]

Don't have a problem with him going back to the same side/formation of the first two league games if all available. We haven't lost yet i'd just like to see the tactics alter a little to be a bit more on the front foot in the first 15/20 mins.

[rovers11]

I expect Armstrong to come in for Palmer in the only change from the starting 11 against Millwall. I think our starting 11 will look a bit more dynamic after the loan window has closed, but I expect a more cautious side until we’ve got a few points on the board and bedded in the new players.

This game is a tough one to call. Hull City are a club on the slide and I wouldn’t be surprised to see them relegated in the next couple of seasons. They still have 1 or 2 talented players at their disposal so it won’t be an easy game. If Dack is on song, I think we’ll win. If not, a draw or Hull win. 

[Stuart]

1 hour ago, OnePhilT said:

Palmer will soon learn that he can't just be a brilliant attacker and not bother doing the defensive side here at Rovers. Once Mowbray sorts that out (and he's already openly acknowledged it), we'll have some player on our hands for the rest of the season.

Not really the point. If we need a 7 and an 11 and second 9 then we need to stop recruiting number 10s.

[Al]

8 hours ago, Stuart said:

Hull will have had this one on their winnable games list. Take Dack out of the equation and they will believe they can beat us.

That said, they’ve got off to a relatively poor start and we need to take advantage of this. An early goal could get the crowd on their back.

It’s the kind of game I’d like to see Mowbray be a little less cautious in and ask us to get forward and cause them problems. Having Bell rather than Williams might help with this.

Mostly the same team that put Carlisle to the sword would be interesting. Replacing Conway with Bennett...

I'd go with that but it's not defensive enough for our defensive minded manager.

[blueboy3333]

Is it officially a poor start to the season if we don't win tomorrow?

[Stuart]

36 minutes ago, Al said:

I'd go with that but it's not defensive enough for our defensive minded manager.

Agreed Al.

[Stuart]

Just now, blueboy3333 said:

Is it officially a poor start to the season if we don't win tomorrow?

Depends.

2 points from 9 is poor.

3 points from 9 is disappointing.

[blueboy3333]

Just now, Stuart said:

Depends.

2 points from 9 is poor.

3 points from 9 is disappointing.

September looks a bit hellish fixture-wise. We need a win from Hull or Reading to settle the nerves. 

[Stuart]

Just now, blueboy3333 said:

September looks a bit hellish fixture-wise. We need a win from Hull or Reading to settle the nerves. 

Wouldn’t disagree. In the context of a bad September then yes it would have been a poor start. Which is why (already) we need to be looking at getting points where we may not have previously targeted.

[roversfan99]

5 or 6 points is what id expect in the next 3 games personally.

[adz4d2]

I believe he will go for it and play same 4 up top as mid week, his comments may just have been a smokescreen as there is a lot more media attention this year and he has to play the media, and if i were him i wouldnt want my next opponent to know what team or tactics i am going to play. 

[Blueandwhitemike]

 

After listening to TM's post-match interview on Tuesday he mentioned going with 2 and a 1/2  attackers and a Bennett or Conway on the other side.  I don't think he wants to play Bennett in a 2 in the middle, not saying he will never do it but it isn't his preference.

Given his other comments, like Parsonblue, I'd expect Smallwood, Evans, Bennett, and Graham all back.   I have my doubts about Smallwood and I think TM wants to replace him but doesn't think Travis is trustworthy enough yet.

I also don't think that with  Evans and Smallwood in midfield that there  is enough passing ability to play  Armstrong down the middle on his own, I know we have Dack but he can't do it all on his own and although I didn't see the game it seemed like Rothwell and Travis allowed Dack to stay further forward against Carlisle.

I don't think the dropping of Palmer means he's a bad signing just yet, rather it's just that he's not adapted to how TM wants us to play just yet.  I  do hope he cottons on quickly though.

 

[blueboy3333]

1 hour ago, adz4d2 said:

I believe he will go for it and play same 4 up top as mid week, his comments may just have been a smokescreen as there is a lot more media attention this year and he has to play the media, and if i were him i wouldnt want my next opponent to know what team or tactics i am going to play. 

Mowbray is a cautious manager. He was cautious in League 1. 

[Drover]

I'm still intrigued by rothwell after the last 2 appearances. Stupid question but what actually is he? What's his natural position? Is he capable of doing the stuff when we're out of possession as well for those that saw him in midweek or is that why we were defensively weak?

[Bigdoggsteel]

10 hours ago, blueboy3333 said:

Mowbray is a cautious manager. He was cautious in League 1. 

I think the game against Carlisle was the least cautious I have ever seen him. Ruthlessly destroying a league 2 club with no mercy. Then coming out saying Caddis and Whittingham can exit the building. Get in Tony lad, you ruthless man 

Edited August 18, 2018 by Bigdoggsteel

[DaveyB]

Whilst Travis has looked impressive in spells, particularly in the Oldham game last season, I don’t think he’s ready yet. He struggled when he came on last week and, by all accounts, he didn’t particularly stand out in midweek against a league 2 side, so I can’t see him starting just yet - nor do I think he should. 

I agree with most on Smallwood that his lack of composure is an issue, but he does at least give us positional stability - more so than Bennett. Bennett got injured last week by the corner flag having chased down a lost cause - he does that a lot, and it’s great for fans to see him constantly chasing and harrassing players, but it does mean that it leaves the other CM with a large area to cover at times. 

Evans I think has been better recently - certainly one of our better performers last week - and personally I think he’s done enough to keep his place for now.

I’d also love to see Rothwell in there, that’s where he wants to play and is a midfielder who will pick up the ball and look to get forward - something we haven’t had since Dunn used to play in a midfield 2 under Hughes. However, I don’t think Evans (or Smallwood, Bennett or Travis) is capable of doing the amount of defensive covering that would be needed to facilitate that, so for now at least, Evans and Smallwood is probably the right call - certainly away from home. 

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

Neither of Evans or Smallwood are going to be good enough often enough in this league. That's why I'm scratching my head as to  current transfer policy. 

[Bigdoggsteel]

12 minutes ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

Neither of Evans or Smallwood are going to be good enough often enough in this league. That's why I'm scratching my head as to  current transfer policy. 

2/3 of the players we signed this window are centre midfielders... 

[tomphil]

When Evans is fit he plays he's another who's place is guaranteed under whoever is manager here, sometimes it would be nice to have a different kind of player to come in. Maybe Rothwell is that lad so if he comes in and plays well and we win he should stay in there and partner one of the others.

 

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

3 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

2/3 of the players we signed this window are centre midfielders... 

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 ?

Edited August 18, 2018 by Tyrone Shoelaces