Rovers v Villa - 15th September 2018

[chaddyrovers]

13 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

I was away on holiday for the Brentford game so cant comment on it but fair enough. I did hear that he played as a 10 on here which obviously is a no go with Dack returning, is that true? He was poor wide v Bristol, albeit he wasnt on his own with a poor performance, he was ineffective until being moved centrally v Reading, and didnt do much v Ipswich and Millwall. I feel like, with his versatility there is a bit of a question mark as to where he is best. Not doubting that he will be an important player but I feel like if he performs as he did wide last season, he wouldnt merit a place out wide as he didnt contribute nearly enough going forward, goals and assists, for all the credit he got about his character, personality, work rate, committment etc. Arguably his best spell of form was at right back, followed by central midfield. The reason I was particularly dissappointed was that the half season under Mowbray prior, he contributed quite a few brilliant goals.

Armstrong was superb playing wide last season. Sadly we failed to address our lack of natural width in the summer and have no one with Armstrongs pace. He was really poor v Bristol but played a 10 role that didnt suit him, in fact hes not played wide from memory this season bar briefly v Millwall.

My tactical discipline comment was based on Smallwoods comments about what he wants from his central midfielders. Bennetts natural instinct is to chase the ball round like a dog and his work rate is fantastic but that sort of performance would probably expose the centre backs too much.

Bennett was outstanding in the 10 role against Brentford which you miss. His work rate was 1st class. Shame you miss it. 

I feel that Bennett merit a place anywhere on the pitch. He has been our 2nd best player this season. 

I think Mowbray feels that Armstrong is better off playing of the striker if Dack isnt available then we tend more of 4-4-2 then 4-2-3-1. 

Bennett did excellent in centre midfield and show discipline when he had too. 

 

[Rogerb]

13 hours ago, Exiled in Toronto said:

Proper big club, Villa. Victorian supremacy, European cup winners, the Holte End, traditional kit (ish). I remember when they came down to the third division in Furphy’s time, beat us good and proper at Ewood with more away fans than we’ll see on Saturday.

Two cracking 5th round cup games under Kendall, we equalized last minute at Ewood with an OG then went to a packed Villa Park and took the lead, oniy for Tony Morley (I think) to rip us a new one.

And then the Steve Archibald 3-2 win was one of my top 10 Ewood games. The excitement of seeing a player like Archibald, a cracking game with cracking goals.

My prediction Rovers 3 (Crawford, Kennedy, Archibald) Villa 1 (Withe)

Villa brought around 10000 for that cup tie at Ewood under Kendall

[roversfan99]

Just now, chaddyrovers said:

Bennett was outstanding in the 10 role against Brentford which you miss. His work rate was 1st class. Shame you miss it. 

I feel that Bennett merit a place anywhere on the pitch. He has been our 2nd best player this season. 

I think Mowbray feels that Armstrong is better off playing of the striker if Dack isnt available then we tend more of 4-4-2 then 4-2-3-1. 

Bennett did excellent in centre midfield and show discipline when he had too. 

 

But I think even you would agree that if Dack is fit the 10 role is unavailable. Dack has to start.

Centre back? Left back? Up front? In net? Obviously your point doesnt make sense. He has to warrant and justify a place in the specific position chosen. If that is out wide, he needs to contribute with goals and assists. Something surely everyone would agree with. And something he did v Hull from out wide.

If that is what he thinks then id strongly disagree. He was superb from out wide last season and dovetailed perfectly with Dack and Graham. That was the performance level that made us all desperate to sign him permanently. He lacks the subtelty to play as a 10, and considering we have Palmer and Rothwell even in Dacks absence, and Bennett who was apparently very good as a 10, theres no need to play him there. Play him where he was so good last season, especially considering our chronic lack of width.

To clarify, he was very much the 12th man when I picked that team, hes a player that every squad needs in terms of he can fill in various positions. But if his primary position is out wide then he needs to be judged on attacking output too like anyone else. He does have 2 assists so far this season and he will start v Villa, I would like to see Rothwell given a start and wanted to shake things up after the Bristol game when I felt Bennett was as bad as anyone, but I would understand if Bennett plays. Smallwood less so.

[Ewood Ace]

The thing with Bennett is that he will do a job and put in a shift wherever he plays but I'm not sure that when everyone is fit that he is our best player in any one position. He's a sort of jack of all trades master of none

[chaddyrovers]

2 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

But I think even you would agree that if Dack is fit the 10 role is unavailable. Dack has to start.

Centre back? Left back? Up front? In net? Obviously your point doesnt make sense. He has to warrant and justify a place in the specific position chosen. If that is out wide, he needs to contribute with goals and assists. Something surely everyone would agree with. And something he did v Hull from out wide.

If that is what he thinks then id strongly disagree. He was superb from out wide last season and dovetailed perfectly with Dack and Graham. That was the performance level that made us all desperate to sign him permanently. He lacks the subtelty to play as a 10, and considering we have Palmer and Rothwell even in Dacks absence, and Bennett who was apparently very good as a 10, theres no need to play him there. Play him where he was so good last season, especially considering our chronic lack of width.

To clarify, he was very much the 12th man when I picked that team, hes a player that every squad needs in terms of he can fill in various positions. But if his primary position is out wide then he needs to be judged on attacking output too like anyone else. He does have 2 assists so far this season and he will start v Villa, I would like to see Rothwell given a start and wanted to shake things up after the Bristol game when I felt Bennett was as bad as anyone, but I would understand if Bennett plays. Smallwood less so.

Bennett was good in the 10 role. No apparently about it Roversfan99. Bennett contributed fine last season. I shown you the stats before now and he fine last season. 

I would start Bennett for the Villa game for sure. Next to Evans for me. His work rate will be need considering how Villa play. Whoever plays the 10 role will have to be defensively as well as attacking wise. If Dack fit he played there. If not I would play Rothwell there. Palmer should not be playing the 10 role. For this game better coming off the bench. 

When we play Armstrong up front with Graham or Brereton its more of 4-4-2 then 4-2-3-1. 

Dack always start if fit which is something else ive said before to you.

[K-Hod]

Have I missed something? When has Elliott Bennett played the 10 role? 

For what it’s worth (and I love the guy), I wouldn’t want him in the team at no. 10 over any of our other players that can play there under any circumstances!

[chaddyrovers]

1 hour ago, K-Hod said:

Have I missed something? When has Elliott Bennett played the 10 role? 

For what it’s worth (and I love the guy), I wouldn’t want him in the team at no. 10 over any of our other players that can play there under any circumstances!

Brentford at home. Nuttall started up front. Graham on bench. Armstrong and Dack both injured. Palmer played wide right.

[roversfan99]

2 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

Bennett was good in the 10 role. No apparently about it Roversfan99. Bennett contributed fine last season. I shown you the stats before now and he fine last season. 

I would start Bennett for the Villa game for sure. Next to Evans for me. His work rate will be need considering how Villa play. Whoever plays the 10 role will have to be defensively as well as attacking wise. If Dack fit he played there. If not I would play Rothwell there. Palmer should not be playing the 10 role. For this game better coming off the bench. 

When we play Armstrong up front with Graham or Brereton its more of 4-4-2 then 4-2-3-1. 

Dack always start if fit which is something else ive said before to you.

Well I have higher standards than you on what is considered sufficient from a winger. Weve done this debate before, I dont think he got enough goals or assists when played wide. The same amount of assists and one more goals than Derrick Williams who got 1 goal and 5 assists. You did. Agree to disagree.

Whilst I agree that id start Palmer from the bench, he is a natural number 10. Playing him anywhere else is slightly out of position. 

I know, number 10 can be a second striker but either way Armstrong wasnt effective there. He was very effective wide last season is my point.

Agreed. If hes fit and not in jail, first name on the teamsheet.

[JBiz]

1 hour ago, chaddyrovers said:

Brentford at home. Nuttall started up front. Graham on bench. Armstrong and Dack both injured. Palmer played wide right.

Certainly didn’t play in a traditional number ten role. He may have swapped around with Rothwell, but he also swapped with Smallwood and Evans periodically, hence the work ethic being praised afterwards. Bennett certainly tracks and runs all day but he is not, and never will be a central attacking midfielder.

I think he’d suit a box to box central mid these days, perhaps even in a two next to a more technically able midfielder to unlock defences. He strikes me as a player who started off as a flying winger but has evolved into a “warhurst”.

[chaddyrovers]

11 minutes ago, Biz said:

Certainly didn’t play in a traditional number ten role. He may have swapped around with Rothwell, but he also swapped with Smallwood and Evans periodically, hence the work ethic being praised afterwards. Bennett certainly tracks and runs all day but he is not, and never will be a central attacking midfielder.

I think he’d suit a box to box central mid these days, perhaps even in a two next to a more technically able midfielder to unlock defences. He strikes me as a player who started off as a flying winger but has evolved into a “warhurst”.

He did the role he was asked. Work hard, chase, closing down from the 10 role. Not allow their playmaker time on the ball. He deserve his man of the match award that day. 

He was a flying winger in his younger days. 

 

[blueboy3333]

Bennett was the No.10 against Brentford. He played there so he could close down their CB's and stop them playing out from the back. He did it superbly. It was certainly a defensive role though, he wasn't Zico. 

[HowieFive0]

Bennett, Palmer and Rothwell all played the no.10 role v Brentford  ... TM got them to swap around ..especially the first half.

[JHRover]

Hopefully Mowbray will have seen Villa get dismantled at Sheffield United the other week by an aggressive attacking side and also lose at struggling Burton in the cup before that and go into this one with ambitions of putting them to the sword. All isn't well there at the moment and Bruce is under pressure to get them going again. 6 without a win. 

No doubt we'll get a week of stories and interviews about what a brilliant side they are and how tough it will be, but we're at home so we need to be at them from the off and if we do that I fancy our chances.

[jim mk2]

Just now, JHRover said:

Hopefully Mowbray will have seen Villa get dismantled at Sheffield United the other week by an aggressive attacking side and also lose at struggling Burton in the cup before that and go into this one with ambitions of putting them to the sword. All isn't well there at the moment and Bruce is under pressure to get them going again. 6 without a win. 

No doubt we'll get a week of stories and interviews about what a brilliant side they are and how tough it will be, but we're at home so we need to be at them from the off and if we do that I fancy our chances.

 

In view of Rovers' record of munificence against teams in need of a fillip I'd say the game is a nailed-on Villa win.. 

[chaddyrovers]

1 hour ago, roversfan99 said:

Well I have higher standards than you on what is considered sufficient from a winger. Weve done this debate before, I dont think he got enough goals or assists when played wide. The same amount of assists and one more goals than Derrick Williams who got 1 goal and 5 assists. You did. Agree to disagree.

Whilst I agree that id start Palmer from the bench, he is a natural number 10. Playing him anywhere else is slightly out of position. 

I know, number 10 can be a second striker but either way Armstrong wasnt effective there. He was very effective wide last season is my point.

Agreed. If hes fit and not in jail, first name on the teamsheet.

Bennett was 3rd in assists stats. Hardly poor was it. Mulgrew only got 5 and considering he took corners and some free kicks I would have thought it be higher. 

Thats last season not this season regarding Armstrong. I like to see him play wide right and expose Villa slowness in defence behind Villa left back/left centre back. 

[roversfan99]

3 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Bennett was 3rd in assists stats. Hardly poor was it. Mulgrew only got 5 and considering he took corners and some free kicks I would have thought it be higher. 

Thats last season not this season regarding Armstrong. I like to see him play wide right and expose Villa slowness in defence behind Villa left back/left centre back. 

7 goal contributions isnt enough especially at a low level. For me anyway.

Makes no sense to move him from a position in which he thrived to one that doesnt suit his skillset. 

[chaddyrovers]

24 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

7 goal contributions isnt enough especially at a low level. For me anyway.

Makes no sense to move him from a position in which he thrived to one that doesnt suit his skillset. 

3rd highest in the squad. https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/blackburn-rovers/leistungsdaten/verein/164/plus/1?reldata=%262017

A wide player in our team has to do both side of the game but Bennett does fine. 

[blueboy3333]

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/16693284.how-rovers-are-shaping-up-in-the-championship-statistics/?ref=mac

I missed these the other day. We are the kings of hoofball in the Championship:  'Rovers have averaged 17 crosses per game, only three teams attempting fewer, while at an average of 87, no team has tried more long balls' ….. and we have 'a pass success rate is just 67.9 per cent, the sixth worst' but we have put the 2nd most tackles in. 

Probably a fair reflection on what I've seen at home this season. 

[blueboy3333]

10 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

7 goal contributions isnt enough especially at a low level. For me anyway.

Makes no sense to move him from a position in which he thrived to one that doesnt suit his skillset. 

The point is he was third in the assists last season whether you think that is good enough or not.  Only Graham and Dack contributed more. Bennett has chipped in with 2 assists already this season (three if you count the penalty he won against Reading) That's probably the most in the team. He's also made the 2nd most tackles in the league this season (along with Evans). This is all from (mainly) out wide. He is the perfect player for Mowbray, who clearly  doesn't want flying wingers. He has the perfect skillset for what Mowbray wants him to do. 

[tomphil]

Verdict - More crosses and less long balls.

Now back to talking about that pacy winger and big target man we didn't source in the window..........

[islander200]

11 hours ago, JHRover said:

Hopefully Mowbray will have seen Villa get dismantled at Sheffield United the other week by an aggressive attacking side and also lose at struggling Burton in the cup before that and go into this one with ambitions of putting them to the sword. All isn't well there at the moment and Bruce is under pressure to get them going again. 6 without a win. 

No doubt we'll get a week of stories and interviews about what a brilliant side they are and how tough it will be, but we're at home so we need to be at them from the off and if we do that I fancy our chances.

Villa could have Abraham and Bolasie to call upon this time.It will be a tough game.

Id definitely be starting Bennett wide of the 3 in this match as our full backs are going to need a little help.

Abraham,El Ghazi,Bolasie and Grealish could be their front four and those 4 wouldnt look out of place in the league above.

Although i hope we are positive and go for the win it will be an extremely tough game and we cant go too attacking as that front four could tear us apart 

[roversfan99]

48 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

The point is he was third in the assists last season whether you think that is good enough or not.  Only Graham and Dack contributed more. Bennett has chipped in with 2 assists already this season (three if you count the penalty he won against Reading) That's probably the most in the team. He's also made the 2nd most tackles in the league this season (along with Evans). This is all from (mainly) out wide. He is the perfect player for Mowbray, who clearly  doesn't want flying wingers. He has the perfect skillset for what Mowbray wants him to do. 

Last season, the majority of our attacking players were only here or only available for half a season (Armstrong and Payne only joined in January and Chapman and Antonsson had lengthy injury spells) but I stand by my statement that at such a poor level, Bennett didnt contribute enough going forward last season. His goal drought obviously niggled at him hence his relief when he finally did score, as shown in his interviews. The season before he showed he could score goals. You say whether I think that is good enough but that is what the discussion is about. 

Whilst I appreciate that Mowbray had ideals of what he wants from a winger, and it is something I acknowledged but that doesnt mean that I have to agree with it. I feel we lack width and are slightly imbalanced in attacking positions. The point that I have always made is that even if a wide man was chosen partially for his defensive work rate, I would still expect him to make an attacking contribition in order to merit a place in that position. 

As you said, 2 assists in 6 isnt a bad return, Rothwells inclusion was a personal decision made based on very promising cameos, and his selection was baring in mind 2 tricky away games during the rest of the week that Bennetts more hard working aspects could be much more useful in. Villa have big defensive question marks and we are at home so I would like to see a positive approach.

[jim mk2]

8 minutes ago, meadows said:

I do wish people would get it in their heads that you ‘bear in mind’ not bare. 

One  ‘bares’ ones arse on the town hall steps on the occasion of something happening which was declared highly unlikely. 

 

Can a bare bear bear it when it bares its arse in bear market?

[Leonard Venkhater]

1 hour ago, meadows said:

I do wish people would get it in their heads that you ‘bear in mind’ not bare. 

One  ‘bares’ ones arse on the town hall steps on the occasion of something happening which was declared highly unlikely. 

one's lol

[old darwen blue]

Into not in?