Tony Mowbray Discussion

[47er]

8 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

been saying this for ages on here. It isn't Mowbray way of playing. 

I feel we need a right wide player but after that we have enough players

if it doesn't work, and it doesn't, another reason to find a new manager.

[tomphil]

I think if you rolled Brereton, Gallagher and Samuel into one you'd have a handy player who might be a handful.

However all 3 into 1 and you still wouldn't have a steady reliable goal scorer. We need to stop collecting identikit players and get someone in who can finish. And get rid of one or two of the others. 

Edited March 4, 2020 by tomphil

[BlackburnEnd75]

I dont think I've ever seen Rothwell start a game for us as a 10. I've seen him come on a as a sun there but only once or twice.

I reckon his best position would be on the left of a midfield 3 like as an 8 and a half. Pretty sure when he signed that's where he saw himself. 

[Stuart]

Surely Brereton was bought as the successor to Graham.

Just a shame that Gallagher was bought as the successor to Brereton.

[K-Hod]

32 minutes ago, Amo said:

Nah, just got no time for the likes of @Paul Mani and @Mashed Potatoes who blindly defend every decison Mowbray does or doesn't make. It stinks and I suspect they are connected to people at the club.

I think that’s perhaps a bit wide of the mark.

But still, I think there are some that won’t accept any criticism at all of Mowbray, which I don’t think is a healthy place to be in.

[Dreams of 1995]

26 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

I think that’s perhaps a bit wide of the mark.

But still, I think there are some that won’t accept any criticism at all of Mowbray, which I don’t think is a healthy place to be in.

Yep. The same can be said for the other side K-Hod. 

Some don’t give him any credit whatsoever. Lest we forget the whole “he’s only doing well because of injuries” debacle

[chaddyrovers]

10 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

The thing you cant accept is that just because its "Mowbrays way of playing" doesnt mean that people cannot criticise it or suggest alternatives. I think basically everyone would be in agreement that having either Brereton, Gallagher or Samuel as "wide strikers" doesnt work. We were rumoured to have tried for a few actual wingers in January so fingers crossed that a change is on the cards. Since though, Gallagher out wide has been a regular and has drawn much criticism.

We dont have enough players who can competently play wide.

why would you criticise something that has us so close to the playoffs. 

our wide players don't play wide but more inside in the 10 role with our full backs providing the width. Rothwell on Saturday spend more time in the 10 space than he did wide. Did Samuel play wide or did he play more inside. 

We try for Astu who you didn't want

9 hours ago, JHRover said:

So why did they sell everyone of value between 2015 and 2017? Please dont say Ffp because no other club behaved as we did and no other club was sanctioned.

The suspicion therefore is the lenders in India wanted some back so instructed a fire sale.

We can agree pre contract deals with players, yes.

But why would we do that and commit to summer signings in January when we might get promoted which would change everything.

We've never done this before and it is unlikely Mowbray will know his budget until he goes off to India. 

I will eat my hat if foreign players arrive in the early days of the summer window.

Lambert wanted rid Rhodes. He got Graham in as his replacement so that's was an upgrade for me. 

Hanley and Duffy wanted out of the club. Both now playing PL football. 

Marshall wanted out of Rovers. now at 10th English division level. 

Gestede wanted PL football. Joined Villa but his career never kick off. Now at Boro hardly pulling any trees up is he?

Also in Bowyer last season here we were under embargo meaning we couldn't sign players on more than 10k a week and no fees allowed. 

Depends who the players are and the quality of the them. All because we haven't before didn't mean we should do it. No wrong with looking at getting players soon. Rangers agreed a pre contract with Jones in January before he moved there in the summer. 

Lets hope you are eating that hat

[47er]

1 hour ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

Yep. The same can be said for the other side K-Hod. 

Some don’t give him any credit whatsoever. Lest we forget the whole “he’s only doing well because of injuries” debacle

TBF its a perfectly valid argument to say that, when his selection options were restricted by injuries and he had no ability to tinker, we kept largely the same side and did better!

Can't see any problem with that.

[roversfan99]

14 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

why would you criticise something that has us so close to the playoffs. 

our wide players don't play wide but more inside in the 10 role with our full backs providing the width. Rothwell on Saturday spend more time in the 10 space than he did wide. Did Samuel play wide or did he play more inside. 

We try for Astu who you didn't want

Lambert wanted rid Rhodes. He got Graham in as his replacement so that's was an upgrade for me. 

Hanley and Duffy wanted out of the club. Both now playing PL football. 

Marshall wanted out of Rovers. now at 10th English division level. 

Gestede wanted PL football. Joined Villa but his career never kick off. Now at Boro hardly pulling any trees up is he?

Also in Bowyer last season here we were under embargo meaning we couldn't sign players on more than 10k a week and no fees allowed. 

Depends who the players are and the quality of the them. All because we haven't before didn't mean we should do it. No wrong with looking at getting players soon. Rangers agreed a pre contract with Jones in January before he moved there in the summer. 

Lets hope you are eating that hat

For a start, the target is a top 6 finish, ergo our current finish would be slightly below expectation. I know that it isnt as simple as that and think we are doing ok but your justification is bizarre, to imply that being close to expectations means that the team cannot be criticised in any way is ridicilious even for you.

But just as you can have a functional element of a poor team, you can have a dysfunctional aspect of one performing well. We have Lenihan and Adarabioyo at CB, Travis and Downing in midfield and have had the goals of Dack and now Armstrong, all strengths through our team. We are far better in central areas than in wide areas, with only Nyambe a strength and even he needs to improve his final ball. The wide areas HAVE NOT been a strength and all parts of the team are not equally responsible. Samuel, superb at Charlton in his natural position was totally ineffective v Swansea. Rothwell has done bugger all all season. 

I wanted a winger and we were linked with a few, Atsu is dog shit but that is totally irrrlevant to the fact that we need 2 good wide men. He wouldnt have fixed that either way.

[Dreams of 1995]

28 minutes ago, 47er said:

TBF its a perfectly valid argument to say that, when his selection options were restricted by injuries and he had no ability to tinker, we kept largely the same side and did better!

Can't see any problem with that.

Of course you can’t. ?

Perfect.

[Sparks Rover]

57 minutes ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

Of course you can’t. ?

Perfect.

What problem do you have with that? It's a reasonable stance

Edited March 5, 2020 by Sparks Rover

[Mattyblue]

Like how Chaddy is now just copying Mani’s tactical view from yesterday about inverted wide men and full backs providing the width. 

‘Our wide men don’t play wide’.?
 

 

Edited March 5, 2020 by Mattyblue

[chaddyrovers]

Cos Mani is right tho. 

I did commented on our Wide player not playing wide and our full backs for weeks now

[Mattyblue]

13 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Cos Mani is right tho. 

I did commented on our Wide player not playing wide and our full backs for weeks now

Course you did

[Mattyblue]

10 minutes ago, Paul Mani said:

Argh, don’t rise to it. You were banging on about the manager not playing wingers long before me mate. Matty likes to power up on subtle remarks like that. Not sure why. Bit weird really.

Powering up on subtle remarks gets me out of bed in the morning.

It’s either that or I’d ‘power up’ by referring to players and staff with monikers like ‘Jonty’ and ‘Bucko’ full David Brent style to try and give the impression I know more than the square root of feck all to what goes on inside the club.

Edited March 5, 2020 by Mattyblue

[Blue blood]

17 minutes ago, Paul Mani said:

My opinion of the current regime is balanced. It is my tone which is positive. I won’t change either as they’ve served me very well in life.

 

In the past few days you have suggested that we have all the players we need to play our inverted winger system (despite Gally and Bereton playing there, the latter regularly) and suggested the club (not your opinion or idea but the club) brought Bereton as understudy to play the Dack role. That's hardly balanced. 

A positive tone is fine, and for all TMs frustrations he's not a total dud because we are where we are - he has to have something about him. But there are some glaring holes in his style. 

(Incidentally if he were a total dud I think there'd be less criticism of him. Everyone would accept he is useless and that'd be it.) 

[Paul Mani]

24 minutes ago, Blue blood said:

In the past few days you have suggested that we have all the players we need to play our inverted winger system (despite Gally and Bereton playing there, the latter regularly) and suggested the club (not your opinion or idea but the club) brought Bereton as understudy to play the Dack role. That's hardly balanced. 

A positive tone is fine, and for all TMs frustrations he's not a total dud because we are where we are - he has to have something about him. But there are some glaring holes in his style. 

(Incidentally if he were a total dud I think there'd be less criticism of him. Everyone would accept he is useless and that'd be it.) 

In my humble opinion, we HAVE got the players to play in the way that Mowbray WANTS to play. Holtby, Rothwell, Bucko and JRC fit that profile perfectly. I think the manager would be playing the first two in those positions every week if they were fit. I can see what they’re trying to do tactically which is why I find the Gallagher inclusion bewildering. So yes, I agree that there are some glaring holes in Mowbrays thinking...

[tomphil]

How has the narrative now swung to Lambert wanted rid of Rhodes ?

[47er]

8 hours ago, 47er said:

TBF its a perfectly valid argument to say that, when his selection options were restricted by injuries and he had no ability to tinker, we kept largely the same side and did better!

Can't see any problem with that.

 

7 hours ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

Of course you can’t. ?

Perfect.

You started all this off with this comment " Lest we forget the whole “he’s only doing well because of injuries” debacle".

I've made a valid argument that it wasn't a "debacle" at all and there's good points to be made. Your reply seems to indicate that there is no debate to be had.

I wonder what you think the point of a Message Board is? Its a Rovers Board not a "cheer site" for Mowbray fans.

Your's is the same mind-set as Chaddy and others condemning Sharpe for saying something critical for a change.

 

 

 

[roversfan99]

2 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

Cos Mani is right tho. 

I did commented on our Wide player not playing wide and our full backs for weeks now

You did but you struggle to comprehend that the way Mowbray plays (like any manager) and the most effective way are not always the same thing.

[Dreams of 1995]

1 hour ago, 47er said:

 

You started all this off with this comment " Lest we forget the whole “he’s only doing well because of injuries” debacle".

I've made a valid argument that it wasn't a "debacle" at all and there's good points to be made. Your reply seems to indicate that there is no debate to be had.

I wonder what you think the point of a Message Board is? Its a Rovers Board not a "cheer site" for Mowbray fans.

Your's is the same mind-set as Chaddy and others condemning Sharpe for saying something critical for a change.

It's not a valid argument. To claim the team and the manager are doing well because of the injuries is a ridiculous statement. Our good form extends back to November and Dack got injured at Christmas time; Holtby in February; Rothwell late January; Corry Evans mid January. Our good form extends equally before our injury 'crisis' than it does after. Likewise I remember trying to argue against certain posters who claimed that the argument Mowbray was doing excellent despite injuries was wrong because "the injuries hadn't happened for the entire duration of our form and we should see a dip" or similar. When that good form continued it changed from that to "oh yeah it's because of them injuries (that we said weren't actually that bad at the time and claimed he had a full squad for most of it) happening".  It's a nonsense argument, sorry to say. As usual the goalposts got moved to suit this agenda for a contrarian opinion.

Might I add 47er that I've been as equally critical as I have supportive of TM in his time here. I'm not asking for this to be an echo chamber, like it does become in certain topics from each side of this polarised debate. Over my time on this board I've seen you accuse several people of being 'Venky stooges' (myself included I may add, after like 3 posts) simply because their opinion differs from your own. Stop contradicting yourself.

I don't quite know how to respond to the last part because it's completely irrelevant. I never condemned Sharpes article, or even commented on it. If you want my views I thought it was a decent piece of journalism and the LT should be more active in looking at the club and players and finding better stories than they do currently. I don't want my local journalist to be a hack and after finding controversy about my club but I also don't want them to be pushing the same shit over and over. There's a fine line to be drawn.

We should stop with this "your are just like Chaddy" nonsense that's become a way for the likes of you to try and demean an opinion (that you say should be allowed!). Like him how - I'm a Rovers supporter? I post on here? On the one hand you don't want it to be an echo chamber and on the other you don't like people with the "mindset of Chaddy"; like being like Chaddy is somehow a negative. Honestly, it would be funny if it wasn't so sad, but you can't even see how you blatantly contradict yourself post after post in this froth-at-the-mouth desire to be allowed to post continual claptrap about the manager. You are never in the mood to discuss, I never see you discussing anything of note really, just a couple of sentence remarks how one "shouldn't bother" or how "he's just like Chaddy!". It's boring, like you, and this echo chamber you are talking about resonates from within yourself.

Edited March 5, 2020 by Dreams of 1995

[Bigdoggsteel]

9 hours ago, 47er said:

TBF its a perfectly valid argument to say that, when his selection options were restricted by injuries and he had no ability to tinker, we kept largely the same side and did better!

Can't see any problem with that.

Maybe in the mind of someone who has an agenda they seem incapable of stepping away from. For logical and reasonable people it's clearly a nonsense theory designed to undermine the manager at any cost. It's quite sad actually,but luckily most see through it. 

You have been criticizing him for tinkering continually anyway, even up to the last game. So how do you square that with your theory? See this is what happens when you moan yourself into a corner. 

[47er]

26 minutes ago, Dreams of 1995 said:

It's not a valid argument. To claim the team and the manager are doing well because of the injuries is a ridiculous statement. Our good form extends back to November and Dack got injured at Christmas time; Holtby in February; Rothwell late January; Corry Evans mid January. Our good form extends equally before our injury 'crisis' than it does after. Likewise I remember trying to argue against certain posters who claimed that the argument Mowbray was doing excellent despite injuries was wrong because "the injuries hadn't happened for the entire duration of our form and we should see a dip" or similar. When that good form continued it changed from that to "oh yeah it's because of them injuries (that we said weren't actually that bad at the time and claimed he had a full squad for most of it) happening".  It's a nonsense argument, sorry to say. As usual the goalposts got moved to suit this agenda for a contrarian opinion.

Might I add 47er that I've been as equally critical as I have supportive of TM in his time here. I'm not asking for this to be an echo chamber, like it does become in certain topics from each side of this polarised debate. Over my time on this board I've seen you accuse several people of being 'Venky stooges' (myself included I may add, after like 3 posts) simply because their opinion differs from your own. Stop contradicting yourself.

I don't quite know how to respond to the last part because it's completely irrelevant. I never condemned Sharpes article, or even commented on it. If you want my views I thought it was a decent piece of journalism and the LT should be more active in looking at the club and players and finding better stories than they do currently. I don't want my local journalist to be a hack and after finding controversy about my club but I also don't want them to be pushing the same shit over and over. There's a fine line to be drawn.

We should stop with this "your are just like Chaddy" nonsense that's become a way for the likes of you to try and demean an opinion (that you say should be allowed!). Like him how - I'm a Rovers supporter? I post on here? On the one hand you don't want it to be an echo chamber and on the other you don't like people with the "mindset of Chaddy"; like being like Chaddy is somehow a negative. Honestly, it would be funny if it wasn't so sad, but you can't even see how you blatantly contradict yourself post after post in this froth-at-the-mouth desire to be allowed to post continual claptrap about the manager. You are never in the mood to discuss, I never see you discussing anything of note really, just a couple of sentence remarks how one "shouldn't bother" or how "he's just like Chaddy!". It's boring, like you, and this echo chamber you are talking about resonates from within yourself.

Hard to know where to go with this! I'll just stick with what I've written.

Sparks Rover has got it, you have missed the whole point.

[JHRover]

10 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

 

Lambert wanted rid Rhodes. He got Graham in as his replacement so that's was an upgrade for me. 

Hanley and Duffy wanted out of the club. Both now playing PL football. 

Marshall wanted out of Rovers. now at 10th English division level. 

Gestede wanted PL football. Joined Villa but his career never kick off. Now at Boro hardly pulling any trees up is he?

Also in Bowyer last season here we were under embargo meaning we couldn't sign players on more than 10k a week and no fees allowed. 

Depends who the players are and the quality of the them. All because we haven't before didn't mean we should do it. No wrong with looking at getting players soon. Rangers agreed a pre contract with Jones in January before he moved there in the summer. 

Lets hope you are eating that hat

I think there's more than a bit of revisionism and rose tinted outlook on life in here.

Lambert wanted rid of Rhodes? Perhaps. But I think it was quite obvious at the time that the reason for that was because he was led to believe that he would be getting all or a large portion of the cash back to address other areas. Would he really have sold him if told he wouldn't get any money back? Unlikely.

It was the owners failing to honour their side of things that led to Lambert walking and indirectly to Coyle arriving and relegation to League One.

Graham has been great but that's beside the point. He was brought in on a 6 month loan and only after he loved it here and started scoring did he decide to move here full time when his contract expired.

Hanley, Duffy and Marshall all left for rival clubs when it became clear what direction we were taking having sold our best players and appointed a joker as manager. Before that policy began clubs like Brighton and Wolves were inferior to us.

[Amo]

13 hours ago, K-Hod said:

I think that’s perhaps a bit wide of the mark.

But still, I think there are some that won’t accept any criticism at all of Mowbray, which I don’t think is a healthy place to be in.

Come on Khod, you've been on here long enough to know that people from the club monitor this site and take an active interest in what gets posted.

Edited March 5, 2020 by Amo