Bolton vs Rovers

[FGS5635]

Just now, roversfan99 said:

The squad is also lobsided to play 3 at the back. We only have 2 natural centre backs who he trusts (Downing is clearly not up to it) otherwise you are bringing in full backs and midfielders to make the numbers up.

It also gives us a problem regarding Nyambe as he is never a wing back, nor is he a centre back. 

Crucially, it hinders Dack in my opinion, he in particular has struggled when we have gone to a back 3, in that we play 2 players in behind Graham, rather than just Dack.

A lot of teams that play 3 at the back have success with full backs as the wider ones.

We have mulgrew, lenihan, rodwell, williams, nyambe, downing.

Im not sure 3 at the back in the aswer either, I just think TM wants to play it and his signings imo appear to back that up.

If he doesnt then I question his signings and wonder what he is thinking

[chaddyrovers]

Just now, roversfan99 said:

The squad is also lobsided to play 3 at the back. We only have 2 natural centre backs who he trusts (Downing is clearly not up to it) otherwise you are bringing in full backs and midfielders to make the numbers up.

It also gives us a problem regarding Nyambe as he is never a wing back, nor is he a centre back. 

Crucially, it hinders Dack in my opinion, he in particular has struggled when we have gone to a back 3, in that we play 2 players in behind Graham, rather than just Dack.

Nyambe, Lenihan, Mulgrew, Rodwell and Williams can play the 3 centre backs role. Bennett and Bell has wing backs. Dack can play the role with 2 strikers up front like we did on Wednesday. 

We have Reed, Smallwood, Evans and Rothwell can play the 2 centre midfielder roles. 

I wouldnt go 3 at the back for this game. Probably would for Swansea and west Brom games tho. 

[chaddyrovers]

Just now, FGS5635 said:

A lot of teams that play 3 at the back have success with full backs as the wider ones.

We have mulgrew, lenihan, rodwell, williams, nyambe, downing.

Im not sure 3 at the back in the aswer either, I just think TM wants to play it and his signings imo appear to back that up.

If he doesnt then I question his signings and wonder what he is thinking

He wanted Chapman back. He like Bennett wide. 

Why question the signings tho? 

[FGS5635]

Just now, chaddyrovers said:

He wanted Chapman back. He like Bennett wide. 

Why question the signings tho? 

I think if he really wanted chapman, then chapman would be here. We will never really know on that one

He spent nearly 10 million on 2 strikers who are on the bench because graham plays upfront on his own.

We have to many centre mids and 2 many numbers 10's and no width.

I just think all that plus how he started his time at rovers points to a desire to play 3 at the back.

If Im right his signings make sense to me and he just needs to crack on with it.

If he doesnt then I think he has assembled a lobsided squad and spent a lot of cash on bench players and square pegs in round holes

[K-Hod]

7 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

He wanted Chapman back. He like Bennett wide. 

Why question the signings tho? 

Chaddy lad, you can’t just ask people why they question things and try and shut down debate, you’re not Skepta...

[FGS5635]

I think often in life and even more so on forums, people are either black or white on a subject. There is a whole bundle of grey in the middle where decent debate can be had

 

[roversfan99]

6 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Nyambe, Lenihan, Mulgrew, Rodwell and Williams can play the 3 centre backs role. Bennett and Bell has wing backs. Dack can play the role with 2 strikers up front like we did on Wednesday. 

We have Reed, Smallwood, Evans and Rothwell can play the 2 centre midfielder roles. 

I wouldnt go 3 at the back for this game. Probably would for Swansea and west Brom games tho. 

 

4 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

He wanted Chapman back. He like Bennett wide. 

Why question the signings tho? 

Theres too many "can plays" in your list. I want specialists. Firstly, your wing backs, for whom I question their ability anyway as wing backs (Bennett defending 1 on 1 as we saw and also Bell going forward) but even so, if either are unavailable, there are no alternatives. Nyambe has looked like a fish out of water at centre back and isnt good enough going forward to play as a wing back. And Armstrong was deeper than Brereton, but either way, Dack was almost sidelined. I dont want the central partnership of Dack and Graham in any way being impeded.

Mowbrays signings are not above criticism. Looking at the team that played on Wednesday, only 2 of his 7 signings started, one of whom was here last season, and both were out of position. There is certainly some promise amidst his signings but they certainly arent above reproach. 

3 at the back is not the kind of formation that you tinker with. Look at Sheffield United, they play it every week and every player knows exactly what their role is and how to play it. Their squad and signings are built around it, they dont use it for half an hour then go to 4 at the back. If he wanted to use it then he should have started off in pre-season using it. If he wants to use it he should stick to it.

Just now, FGS5635 said:

I think if he really wanted chapman, then chapman would be here. We will never really know on that one

He spent nearly 10 million on 2 strikers who are on the bench because graham plays upfront on his own.

We have to many centre mids and 2 many numbers 10's and no width.

I just think all that plus how he started his time at rovers points to a desire to play 3 at the back.

If Im right his signings make sense to me and he just needs to crack on with it.

If he doesnt then I think he has assembled a lobsided squad and spent a lot of cash on bench players and square pegs in round holes

Totally agree on Chapman. If not him, then definitely a winger.

Also agree on your points regarding the balance of our squad. Mowbray does always seem to have thoughts of 3 at the back at the back of his mind, trailing it with no success occasionally, reverting back to 4, then repeating it. As Ive said above its a very specialist formation that requires the team being used to it and knowing exactly what it is doing. The question would be, if his squad is built with 3 at the back in mind, why play all of the season so far with 4 at the back?!

[FGS5635]

I think thats whats holding mowbray back from changing. I think he knows if he changes to 3 at the back we will probably go backwards. Now it could be 1 step back to make 2 or 3 forward, or it could just be backwards.

[bazza]

On 04/10/2018 at 07:08, SuisseRover said:

I'm travelling from Switzerland for this one. Does anyone know of any free minibus/coach places available, setting off from the Great Harwood, Rishton or Accrington area as an alternative to the official away travel? Normally I would travel to away games by train so that I can have a few beers, but that's not an option now due to the bus replacement fiasco. Thanks in advance for any info... 

Looks like no one can help you there, mate.

When you come, can you bring the Swiss railway network with you to replace ours, please?

[joey_big_nose]

Probs best 352 team

-------------------------Raya

-----Lenihan----Mulgrew----Williams

--Bennett----Evans------Reed-------Bell

--------------------------Dack

---------------Brereton---Graham

Hmm..... I'm not really convinced by it tbh. Think 4231 suits us better. Thing is the shortage of wide players we have any formation looks a bit weird.

 

Edited October 5, 2018 by joey_big_nose

[FGS5635]

31 minutes ago, joey_big_nose said:

Probs best 352 team

-------------------------Raya

-----Lenihan----Mulgrew----Williams

--Bennett----Evans------Reed-------Bell

--------------------------Dack

---------------Brereton---Graham

Hmm..... I'm not really convinced by it tbh. Think 4231 suits us better. Thing is the shortage of wide players we have any formation looks a bit weird.

 

Every player looks to be in their best position in that lineup though. No square pegs in rounds holes.

Could argue bennett is better in centre mid maybe, but he would be the only one and he certainly has all the attributes to be a very good wing back

[Fraserkirky]

2 hours ago, joey_big_nose said:

Probs best 352 team

-------------------------Raya

-----Lenihan----Mulgrew----Williams

--Bennett----Evans------Reed-------Bell

--------------------------Dack

---------------Brereton---Graham

Hmm..... I'm not really convinced by it tbh. Think 4231 suits us better. Thing is the shortage of wide players we have any formation looks a bit weird.

 

I'd have Rodwell in for Williams and Rothwell in for Evans. Wont happened but we would be good to see.

[SBlue]

11 hours ago, joey_big_nose said:

Probs best 352 team

-------------------------Raya

-----Lenihan----Mulgrew----Williams

--Bennett----Evans------Reed-------Bell

--------------------------Dack

---------------Brereton---Graham

Hmm..... I'm not really convinced by it tbh. Think 4231 suits us better. Thing is the shortage of wide players we have any formation looks a bit weird.

 

I think your theoretical 3-5-2 is ok (although Armstrong is in with a shout up top for me), but you’re right in the fact that our 4-2-3-1 has been highly effective.

It plays to the main strengths of Graham as the lone striker (probably the best in the league at being a focal point), to Armstrong’s ability as a nippy wide forward who can cut inside or get behind, and to Dack’s effectiveness in a free role/as a second striker. Dack excels with the two destroyers behind him. Evans and Smallwood aren’t better at much more than digging in, harassing and at letting Dack forget about defending too much.

It also gets Bennett in the team. For me he isn’t experienced enough in the CM position, certainly not at this level, and Wednesday night shows that he really isn’t a right back either. Nyambe is a better wing back in the 5, but Bennett simply has to be involved somehow from the start.

Basically, we play the best formation to suit our best players.

Plan B has turned out to be getting two up top and five in midfield which can get a little negative against decent teams that can move the ball. We just lack the class and composure in the two pivot roles to deal with pressure - it’s the main weakness in our preferred formation too. 

I like Reed in DM  - he’s a fighter and a bit more positive on the ball. I'm looking forward to seeing if Davenport is in Mowbray’s plans too. He sounds exactly the player and pedigree needed to get his foot on it and pop it around from deep. When/if he gets fit it will still take time to come to fruition though and we couldn’t half do with someone in that Tugay role right now.

 

There’s an infinity of ways to skin a cat, of course.

But we’ve only lost two games against decent teams by playing a 4-2-3-1.

Let’s play OUR game and OUR formation at The Breezeblock.

 

Lads. It’s Bolton.

We have everything we need to win comfortably.

 

                 Raya

Travis  Lenihan  Mulgrew  Bell

     Reed  Evans/Smallwood

Bennett  Dack  Armstrong

                Graham 

 

3-1 Rovers

(Lenihan gives away a pen)

 

 

 

 

Edited October 6, 2018 by S8 & Blue

[old darwen blue]

5 hours ago, Blue n whites said:

Just travelled down from scotland for the game. Phoned round the usual travel as Just found out about transport issues. The rovers travel sold out. Anyone got any plans or no of any spare travel going. Last resort is taxi. Anyone drinking in bolton

Why not message that suisserover who posted earlier? Then you can meet up and book a private hire car for you both, shouldn’t be that expensive and you can get them to pick you up after the game. 

[USABlue]

On 04/10/2018 at 20:07, RevidgeBlue said:

As someone else said, scrappy 1-0 win needed to get the show back on the road after two very disappointing results at home.

My nerves can't handle 1-0, come to think, 3-0 wasn't any better.

[philipl]

Just read we have lost our last five away games against the Trotters. Time to set that record straight then.

Today will be all about who wants it more. On paper, I'd take the Rovers squad over Bolton Wanderers' marginally but the difference is not enough to produce a result. 

[arbitro]

We need some real intensity in our game today and we need to be at it from the start. Mowbray had intimated that we may sit in and play on the break judging from his comments about Bolton's style of play. If that is the case we will need to be compact, disciplined and keep our shape. If he does adopt this approach I would be tempted to play Armstrong down the middle in the role he played at Hull. He at least can get in behind and his mobility against a lumbering Bolton defence could be key.

[blueboy3333]

41 minutes ago, arbitro said:

We need some real intensity in our game today and we need to be at it from the start. Mowbray had intimated that we may sit in and play on the break judging from his comments about Bolton's style of play.

We do that anyway but from what I read so do Bolton. It will be two teams hoofing it down the pitch and staying behind the ball. 

Should be a classic.

[Blue n whites]

7 hours ago, old darwen blue said:

Why not message that suisserover who posted earlier? Then you can meet up and book a private hire car for you both, shouldn’t be that expensive and you can get them to pick you up after the game. 

Cheers for the reply. All sorted now. Bus into bolton from the park pub then taxi with some other stragglers 

[FGS5635]

We need to stop worrying about the opposition and picking teams around stopping them. We need to look at our strengths and play to them and let them worry about us.

[arbitro]

1 hour ago, blueboy3333 said:

We do that anyway but from what I read so do Bolton. It will be two teams hoofing it down the pitch and staying behind the ball. 

Should be a classic.

That's pretty much why I suggested Armstrong rather than Graham to make us less one dimensional. I think Mowbray just needs to be smarter today. Dack or Armstrong up against Lowe could yield some free kicks in dangerous positions.

[tomphil]

1 hour ago, FGS5635 said:

We need to stop worrying about the opposition and picking teams around stopping them. We need to look at our strengths and play to them and let them worry about us.

We very rarely did that in league 1 despite having such a stronger squad than most if not all but one.  Wigan on the other hand imposed themselves on teams and looked to over power them, some different types in their squad though so maybe that was easier to drill into them, that's why they won it.

It's not the way of TM and his gang though, odd game aside he lets them off the leash then reels them back in.  His methods proved to work last season so they'll probably work again in guiding us to a safe midtable finish this.

It is a bit frustrating at times though as we can see a mile away this squad is better and looks happier when they get stuck in and play with a bit of freedom and intensity.

[Leonard Venkhater]

14 hours ago, FGS5635 said:

I think often in life and even more so on forums, people are either black or white on a subject. There is a whole bundle of grey in the middle where decent debate can be had

 

Are you Tim Farron?

[joey_big_nose]

10 hours ago, S8 & Blue said:

I think your theoretical 3-5-2 is ok (although Armstrong is in with a shout up top for me), but you’re right in the fact that our 4-2-3-1 has been highly effective.

It plays to the main strengths of Graham as the lone striker (probably the best in the league at being a focal point), to Armstrong’s ability as a nippy wide forward who can cut inside or get behind, and to Dack’s effectiveness in a free role/as a second striker. Dack excels with the two destroyers behind him. Evans and Smallwood aren’t better at much more than digging in, harassing and at letting Dack forget about defending too much.

It also gets Bennett in the team. For me he isn’t experienced enough in the CM position, certainly not at this level, and Wednesday night shows that he really isn’t a right back either. Nyambe is a better wing back in the 5, but Bennett simply has to be involved somehow from the start.

Basically, we play the best formation to suit our best players.

Plan B has turned out to be getting two up top and five in midfield which can get a little negative against decent teams that can move the ball. We just lack the class and composure in the two pivot roles to deal with pressure - it’s the main weakness in our preferred formation too. 

I like Reed in DM  - he’s a fighter and a bit more positive on the ball. I'm looking forward to seeing if Davenport is in Mowbray’s plans too. He sounds exactly the player and pedigree needed to get his foot on it and pop it around from deep. When/if he gets fit it will still take time to come to fruition though and we couldn’t half do with someone in that Tugay role right now.

 

There’s an infinity of ways to skin a cat, of course.

But we’ve only lost two games against decent teams by playing a 4-2-3-1.

Let’s play OUR game and OUR formation at The Breezeblock.

 

Lads. It’s Bolton.

We have everything we need to win comfortably.

 

                 Raya

Travis  Lenihan  Mulgrew  Bell

     Reed  Evans/Smallwood

Bennett  Dack  Armstrong

                Graham 

 

3-1 Rovers

(Lenihan gives away a pen)

 

 

 

 

I agree with this, I only really think we flipped to 3 at the back on Wednesday because Sheffield United were killing us and we needed to match them up.

If we can dictate things we are always going 4231 as it suits Dack and Graham as you say. It's just frustrating the single proper wide player we have (Conway) is 33 now, losing pace and thus himself changing his game to play inside more. It really limits our attacking style to only have options who will come inside all the time - Palmer, Rothwell, Bennett, Armstrong, Reed, increasingly Conway etc. At least one decent out an out winger and it's a different story.

Mowbray has broadly recruited well, but has too many central players generally. I count eight (!!) centre mids (Smallwood, Evans, Rothwell, Palmer, Reed, Rodwell, Travis, Davenport), plus Bennett who fills in there on occasion.

[47er]

36 minutes ago, joey_big_nose said:

I agree with this, I only really think we flipped to 3 at the back on Wednesday because Sheffield United were killing us and we needed to match them up.

If we can dictate things we are always going 4231 as it suits Dack and Graham as you say. It's just frustrating the single proper wide player we have (Conway) is 33 now, losing pace and thus himself changing his game to play inside more. It really limits our attacking style to only have options who will come inside all the time - Palmer, Rothwell, Bennett, Armstrong, Reed, increasingly Conway etc. At least one decent out an out winger and it's a different story.

Mowbray has broadly recruited well, but has too many central players generally. I count eight (!!) centre mids (Smallwood, Evans, Rothwell, Palmer, Reed, Rodwell, Travis, Davenport), plus Bennett who fills in there on occasion.

Wonder if he'll go for Freeman to make it 9?

Agree with everything you say, in fact have said it often!