Ben Brereton Diaz

[Bbrovers2288]

1 hour ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

We won't win every game. Knee jerk formation changes back to what didn't get us here isn't what's needed. 

By your metric that we could have lost the Boro game, we could have won the Swansea game. You can't pick and choose to suit your argument that we have been "terrible for months" 

I agree WBA were there for the taking ,but they had attackers on the field who are individually worth more than put entire starting 11,first thing is don't concede l. Tiny margins in Breretons disallowed goal 

Well your part of the problem for me, only having one way to play is absolutely killing us , why can’t we have a few different formations to suit the opposition. Do we really need three defenders v hull or Swansea? 

[Bigdoggsteel]

10 minutes ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

Well your part of the problem for me, only having one way to play is absolutely killing us , why can’t we have a few different formations to suit the opposition. Do we really need three defenders v hull or Swansea? 

Ya we definitely needed 3 against Hull because Travis wasn't playing. Had a few things go against us that night as well 

Swansea maybe a change to 2 Centre halves could have helped,but we were missing attackers that day anyway. Brereton would have made a huge difference 

Edited February 15, 2022 by Bigdoggsteel

[Bbrovers2288]

46 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Ya we definitely needed 3 against Hull because Travis wasn't playing. Had a few things go against us that night as well 

Swansea maybe a change to 2 Centre halves could have helped,but we were missing attackers that day anyway. Brereton would have made a huge difference 

If Travis wasn’t playing I’d have stuck lenihan in the middle personally . I don’t get the want for us to be so limited. Would love a manager that could change games with tactics and subs 

[LordBaltimore]

Ben's injury has been followed in Chile, with eyes towards the upcoming final two qualifiers next month vs Brazil and Uruguay (along with goalkeeper Claudio Bravo in this note).

"¿Bravo & Ben out of [the Chilean national team] La Roja?"

"Red Alert: will Brereton play against Brazil?"

 

[tomphil]

21 hours ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

Well your part of the problem for me, only having one way to play is absolutely killing us , why can’t we have a few different formations to suit the opposition. Do we really need three defenders v hull or Swansea? 

I can't believe i'm reading this after the last few seasons when the main problem was messing around with systems and rotating according to opposition. Countless times the guy reporting for the local press got ten mins into an away game and still couldn't tell everyone who was playing where, nor was the formation actually was.

Yes we need a plan B but most of the success this season has come from having a system that suits and sticking to it. What we really needed was another good goalscoring forward. For me though he needs to start with square pegs in square holes and shame thing up from the bench when needed.

The use of subs recently has seen us back to predictable like for like changes and getting people on for the sake of it.  There's nothing inventive about chucking Gallagher on on 60 mins and just hoping or throwing Hedges on as right wing back with not long left.

That needs to improve.

[Bbrovers2288]

2 hours ago, tomphil said:

I can't believe i'm reading this after the last few seasons when the main problem was messing around with systems and rotating according to opposition. Countless times the guy reporting for the local press got ten mins into an away game and still couldn't tell everyone who was playing where, nor was the formation actually was.

Yes we need a plan B but most of the success this season has come from having a system that suits and sticking to it. What we really needed was another good goalscoring forward. For me though he needs to start with square pegs in square holes and shame thing up from the bench when needed.

The use of subs recently has seen us back to predictable like for like changes and getting people on for the sake of it.  There's nothing inventive about chucking Gallagher on on 60 mins and just hoping or throwing Hedges on as right wing back with not long left.

That needs to improve.

But the playing players out of position is as a consequence of not changing the rigid formation so we are having to shoehorn folk in positions they aren’t custom to. We should have 2-3 different formation able to change for players available-on form- opposition 

just standard management to be able to adapt to circumstances, not advocating change for change sake but when needed it’s a must

[Bigdoggsteel]

18 minutes ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

But the playing players out of position is as a consequence of not changing the rigid formation so we are having to shoehorn folk in positions they aren’t custom to. We should have 2-3 different formation able to change for players available-on form- opposition 

just standard management to be able to adapt to circumstances, not advocating change for change sake but when needed it’s a must

I don't think Liverpool and City do this even. They tweak where the players are positioned and swap players,  as do we. 

There is a reason we are where we are and that's consistency of personnel and formation. 

Edited February 16, 2022 by Bigdoggsteel

[Butty]

Having a settled formation and a team that picks itself every week is what you want at this level. There was a time as a Rovers fan you never know who would be starting from one game to the next and as we know that didn’t lead to success on the pitch. The reason we are where we are now this season is down to having a settled team and formation and Tombola Tinker man Tony taking a back seat. 

[Bbrovers2288]

20 minutes ago, Butty said:

Having a settled formation and a team that picks itself every week is what you want at this level. There was a time as a Rovers fan you never know who would be starting from one game to the next and as we know that didn’t lead to success on the pitch. The reason we are where we are now this season is down to having a settled team and formation and Tombola Tinker man Tony taking a back seat. 

Yea but we also need to change when injury’s, suspensions etc mean that formation is no longer our best option. We look lost of ideas at the moment , formation isn’t working 

[Bbrovers2288]

30 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

I don't think Liverpool and City do this even. They tweak where the players are positioned and swap players,  as do we. 

There is a reason we are where we are and that's consistency of personnel and formation. 

Trying to tell me that klopp and pep don’t change things to turn games? Shut up shop? Nonsense 

[Bigdoggsteel]

6 minutes ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

Trying to tell me that klopp and pep don’t change things to turn games? Shut up shop? Nonsense 

I just said they tweak positions and swap players. Do they change formation? 

 

[Bbrovers2288]

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

I just said they tweak positions and swap players. Do they change formation? 

 

Tweaking positions is changing formation is it not!!!!!

[Bigdoggsteel]

3 minutes ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

Tweaking positions is changing formation is it not!!!!

Yes but keeping the basic shape. You're talking about switching to a back 4 from a 3. We have seen in the past this just leads to confusion on the pitch. It's an unnecessary over complication at this level. You need consistency hard work, with a bit of quality in the final third. That's what leads to results

[Butty]

12 minutes ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

Yea but we also need to change when injury’s, suspensions etc mean that formation is no longer our best option. We look lost of ideas at the moment , formation isn’t working 

We did have some decent results with Gally Diaz and Dolan as a front three at the start of the season, I think I saw with that front three we have won 5 drawn 2 and lost 1 game. Maybe that’s the way on Saturday.

Of course when you have injuries and suspensions and don’t have like for like swaps for a formation that’s been working then maybe consider switching and yes the last few games have been poor. We just had that insane run with the back 5 and Khadra and Diaz up top didn’t we which was more what I was referring to in my initial post without in all honesty reading the rest of the thread properly 😂

[Bbrovers2288]

3 minutes ago, Butty said:

We did have some decent results with Gally Diaz and Dolan as a front three at the start of the season, I think I saw with that front three we have won 5 drawn 2 and lost 1 game. Maybe that’s the way on Saturday.

Of course when you have injuries and suspensions and don’t have like for like swaps for a formation that’s been working then maybe consider switching and yes the last few games have been poor. We just had that insane run with the back 5 and Khadra and Diaz up top didn’t we which was more what I was referring to in my initial post without in all honesty reading the rest of the thread properly 😂

Fair enough mate, it worked for a while no doubt but when it isn’t working then that’s when I want the manager to earn his corn by knowing how to effect the game to our benefit 

[Bbrovers2288]

6 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Yes but keeping the basic shape. You're talking about switching to a back 4 from a 3. We have seen in the past this just leads to confusion on the pitch. It's an unnecessary over complication at this level. You need consistency hard work, with a bit of quality in the final third. That's what leads to results

i don’t see how playing players in their correct positions over complicates things in all honesty. What confuses players is looking round and seeing gallagher in the right back role because we don’t change formation with nobody else fit in that position!

[Bigdoggsteel]

4 minutes ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

i don’t see how playing players in their correct positions over complicates things in all honesty. What confuses players is looking round and seeing gallagher in the right back role because we don’t change formation with nobody else fit in that position!

Gallagher played there what ,10 minutes one game, you're exaggerating about players playing out of position. Especially if that's your best example! 

[Bbrovers2288]

39 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Gallagher played there what ,10 minutes one game, you're exaggerating about players playing out of position. Especially if that's your best example! 

You know who is being played out of position- John buckley!! He isn’t an attacking mid. Dack is an attacking mid

gallagher on the wing in general. There is plentyyyy of players I could give you that are/ have been playing out of position. I don’t get why you want us so rigid and one way of playing that clearly opposition managers have clicked onto now 

[roversfan99]

2 minutes ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

You know who is being played out of position- John buckley!! He isn’t an attacking mid. Dack is an attacking mid

gallagher on the wing in general. There is plentyyyy of players I could give you that are/ have been playing out of position. I don’t get why you want us so rigid and one way of playing that clearly opposition managers have clicked onto now 

Buckley has played as an attacking midfielder all season including throughout our winning run. Gallagher has played either wide of a 3 or as one of 2 wide strikers in basically every appearance too.

[Bbrovers2288]

6 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Buckley has played as an attacking midfielder all season including throughout our winning run. Gallagher has played either wide of a 3 or as one of 2 wide strikers in basically every appearance too.

Is he good at it though? Gallagher is wide right, not through the middle as is his best position 

[roversfan99]

10 minutes ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

Is he good at it though? Gallagher is wide right, not through the middle as is his best position 

He was instrumental in our winning run, no one was calling him to be moved then, for me it allows his main strength to be maximised which is nicking the ball off people, and also playing through balls. Conversely, his main weakness is his shooting which is blatant when played there. 

Gallagher hasnt played as an orthodox striker for a long while barring maybe the odd cameo that doesnt immediately come to mind. I have never subscribed to the idea that he is a natural centre forward wasted, I just dont think he is very good full stop but he is probably no less effective as one of 2 wide strikers compared to as the main central striker.

[Bbrovers2288]

40 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

He was instrumental in our winning run, no one was calling him to be moved then, for me it allows his main strength to be maximised which is nicking the ball off people, and also playing through balls. Conversely, his main weakness is his shooting which is blatant when played there. 

Gallagher hasnt played as an orthodox striker for a long while barring maybe the odd cameo that doesnt immediately come to mind. I have never subscribed to the idea that he is a natural centre forward wasted, I just dont think he is very good full stop but he is probably no less effective as one of 2 wide strikers compared to as the main central striker.

See id rather buckley behind dictating play, nicking balls there and spreading it. I don’t actually think his through balls are that good if you watch, lot of times he plays the wrong or poor ball when given the chance, I’d say rothwell is more attacking minded than buckley. 
gallagher isn’t the best but being asked to run the channels ain’t his strength 

[roversfan99]

28 minutes ago, Bbrovers2288 said:

See id rather buckley behind dictating play, nicking balls there and spreading it. I don’t actually think his through balls are that good if you watch, lot of times he plays the wrong or poor ball when given the chance, I’d say rothwell is more attacking minded than buckley. 
gallagher isn’t the best but being asked to run the channels ain’t his strength 

Rothwell has thrived in that deeper role and the best season of a previously average career.

And Gallagher is better running long distances than he is holding the ball up and playing with his back to goal, so it makes a bit of sense. He wouldnt be in my starting 11 though, thats for sure.

 

[Bbrovers2288]

36 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Rothwell has thrived in that deeper role and the best season of a previously average career.

And Gallagher is better running long distances than he is holding the ball up and playing with his back to goal, so it makes a bit of sense. He wouldnt be in my starting 11 though, thats for sure.

 

Rothwell can actually score and unlock though

[joey_big_nose]

I agree that we do need more than one formation. Though it's a bit weird to say that we haven't got any alternatives.- this season we've played 433, 4231 and 343. 

Tony has chosen to stick with the 343 because he thinks it's best for us to get results. Defensively it's hard to disagree due to the superb way the back three has performed. Since October only Hull and Forest have given us any real defensive issues which is a phenomenal record. When we played a four before October our defence was not that great.

Offensively on the other hand is a different story. The thing that does my nut in is we don't seem to change away from a front 3 even when it's obviously not working. To go to a front 2 and put an extra player in midfield might have helped against Hull and Forest but we stuck with the same setup.

Just so dispiriting to see Gallagher up and down the right all the time trying to cross the ball....

Edited February 17, 2022 by joey_big_nose