Tony Mowbray Discussion

[MarkBRFC]

11 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Mowbray said the aim was the play offs. This is pointed out on here enough, usually to criticize him. 

Here is the definition of success 

 

Case closed. 

So if your going off this, if we finish 7th and 2 points off the play offs, I presume the season is a failure?

[Dreams of 1995]

That's the problem with play offs, really. It's one almighty crush. If we lost in the play offs I wouldn't consider it a success, although I would differentiate between a seasons success and it.

Once, if, we get into the play offs then our season objective turns from getting into the play offs to winning them. If we don't win them, we've failed. When you take a general look back on the season though we at least put ourselves in the position and we go again next year with the idea that the only way is up. 

You don't have a season objective to get into the play offs and then lose and consider a success. You aim to get into the play offs because you think a) we may fail at getting into the top 2 and b) we can win promotion under them circumstances.

On the back of a pay off loss would I sack the manager? Fuck no but, if we are being pedantic, I also wouldn't say he had a 'successful' season, I'd say he had a good season but needs improvement.

[Mattyblue]

That, my Dreamy friend is it in a nutshell.

Edited March 5, 2020 by Mattyblue

[chaddyrovers]

9 hours ago, Mattyblue said:

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’.?
 

 

mentioned it over the last few weeks but you ignore it

8 hours ago, Mattyblue said:

Course you did

well I suggested you look at Paul Mani who says I've mention it long before he did. Plus roversfan99 back that up aswell. 

6 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

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.

Well we don't know if your way of play would benefit or actually make us worse results wise. We simply don't know. 

[Mattyblue]

If our ‘wide men don’t play wide’, what are they then? 

Edited March 5, 2020 by Mattyblue

[Paul Mani]

3 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

If our ‘wide men don’t play wide’, what are they then? 

If you watched the matches and understood football, you wouldn’t be asking that question. Perhaps you should have a private chat with your pal mr ‘elite football’ he’ll know the answer surely? ?

Edited March 5, 2020 by Paul Mani

[chaddyrovers]

15 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

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.

if we finish just outside the top 6 I would consider the season an improvement and we are going in the right direction. I know some Rovers fans who would be happy with a top half finish this season. I have discussed over the past few weeks the way we played with our so called wide players so I wont go over time after time. 

I would say Samuel was good against Hull playing from the right side. 

With the way we are playing we deffo don't need 2 wide men as we have Rothwell, Rankin Costello, and plus 1 more signing. I could see Buckley playing next to Travis next season. 

[Mattyblue]

Oh Mani.

I’m obviously picking up on the fact they can’t be ‘wide men’, if they don’t play wide, can they! Though I’m sure Gallagher spends most of his time toiling down the flank, but I’m sure your Jonty signed coaching manual will have a different term for it.

As for the Mr Elite football, please enlighten me?

[Paul Mani]

24 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

Oh Mani.

I’m obviously picking up on the fact they can’t be ‘wide men’, if they don’t play wide, can they! Though I’m sure Gallagher spends most of his time toiling down the flank, but I’m sure your Jonty signed coaching manual will have a different term for it.

As for the Mr Elite football, please enlighten me?

Haha - mate, I can see how much you want to meet him. I can sort it no probs. Bring your scarf and a selfie stick.

Prob best if you actually start really watching the matches though. Build your knowledge base up ??

[roversfan99]

39 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

mentioned it over the last few weeks but you ignore it

well I suggested you look at Paul Mani who says I've mention it long before he did. Plus roversfan99 back that up aswell. 

Well we don't know if your way of play would benefit or actually make us worse results wise. We simply don't know. 

You could apply that logic to everything. We could put me in net and we dont know 100% for sure until wed tried it as to whether I would be the spectacular failure or not.

All I can see is that this wide striker bollocks has hindered the team more than it has helped it.

[Mattyblue]

No I’ll learn from a guru like your good self Paul.

So where has Gallagher been playing for most of this season? As I’m pretty sure you’ve been posting too at a loss to why TM kept shunting him out wide? 

 

Edited March 5, 2020 by Mattyblue

[Mattyblue]

On 04/03/2020 at 15:29, Paul Mani said:

Tbh I can’t defend the Gallagher one. It’s bewildering really as the position really needs a technician. The only reason I can think that they play him there is to provide an ‘out’ ball or target if we need one. I genuinely don’t see Gallagher playing there long term because I think he’ll fight with Armstrong for that top spot.

 

Yeah thought so.

You need to start watching the games and get an understanding, obviously.

Edited March 5, 2020 by Mattyblue

[Paul Mani]

Based on our budget and expectation, top 6 IS success this season. This, in the main is because ‘top 6’ was our stated target and to hit your target is definitively success.

Of course the ultimate target is to go up but those now saying making the top six (and not going up) Is failure are the same people who predicted we’d be nowhere near the top end of the table and are now having to reassess their position because in spite of everything, we are still in the mix (yes, in the mix) with 10 games to go! 

[roversfan99]

3 minutes ago, Paul Mani said:

Haha - mate, I can see how much you want to meet him. I can sort it no probs. Bring your scarf and a selfie stick.

Prob best if you actually start really watching the matches though. Build your knowledge base up ??

Did you ever enlighten us on if and how you know Jonty?!

[chaddyrovers]

1 minute ago, roversfan99 said:

You could apply that logic to everything. We could put me in net and we dont know 100% for sure until wed tried it as to whether I would be the spectacular failure or not.

All I can see is that this wide striker bollocks has hindered the team more than it has helped it.

well you could. You can suggest things that might make the team better but at the minute I think we are doing fairly goodish. I would like to see Rothwell not keep inside so much. I rather he played wider at times to stretch the play a bit. 

You complain that Gallagher is used as this wide striker bollocks you called it but you are very happy to do to Adam Armstrong who has been best striker this season. So why the double standards?

[Paul Mani]

2 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

No I’ll learn from a guru like your good self Paul.

So where has Gallagher been playing for most of this season? As I’m pretty sure you’ve been posting too at a loss to why TM kept shunting him out wide? 

(Still waiting - Mr Elite Football??)

I haven’t got time to babysit you pal. Just pay attention next time you’re at the match. ??

Im sure Mr Elite will ‘slide in’ to your DM’s soon. He loves you! ❤️

[chaddyrovers]

2 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Did you ever enlighten us on if and how you know Jonty?!

yes he did

[Mattyblue]

1 minute ago, Paul Mani said:

I haven’t got time to babysit you pal. Just pay attention next time you’re at the match. ??

Im sure Mr Elite will ‘slide in’ to your DM’s soon. He loves you! ❤️

So you can’t explain the fact you’ve been moaning about SG playing wide, even though he doesn’t play wide. Fair enough.

As for the second paragraph, you 12 years old?

[Paul Mani]

1 minute ago, roversfan99 said:

Did you ever enlighten us on if and how you know Jonty?!

I don’t think even the good lord could enlighten you buddy. Turn it in will ya ??

[K-Hod]

Hi Everyone, can we please remember to be polite and not be dicks to each other? 
There won’t be any more warnings about this, just bans. Don’t say we never said anything!
Thanks.

[Blue blood]

8 hours ago, Paul Mani said:

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...

Without trying to be patronising or incur a ban this is a much more balanced post. Had you put this with all the players needed to play the inverted winger role I think I would have had a lot less issues with it. 

I still disagree mind! But more in an agree to disagree kind of way. Buckley and Holtby are better playing in the middle; the former really looks lost out wide. Also 4 players for 2 positions isn't much - especially when you consider a) 2 are youngsters still cutting their teeth, b) one is injury prone and c) they are also covering Dack's position as well. So it's 4 (2 arguably unproven) across 3 positions which isn't great. Unless it's centre back in which case 3 for 2 positions with one covering elsewhere as well is fine... 

Factor in Dack is also missing till Christmas (which I had initially forgotten) and then it's 4 across 3 positions which is a bit thin. Unless we switch to a 4-4-2 but then the wide players have a somewhat different role.

I guess you could say Downing and Bennett cover these positions too but they aren't inverted wingers but do much better on their usual side and are more wide midfielders. Also both are often needed elsewhere as well. So yeah, disagree we have enough for said system but appreciate the acknowledgement that TM has some batnuts thinking of what a wide/inverted-wide player looks like. 

[Bigdoggsteel]

3 hours ago, Amo said:

That's what you took away from that?

You were talking nonsense that I somehow compare making the play offs to winning the premier League. I didn't really know what to take from it,so I just had a go. 

 

[Bigdoggsteel]

3 hours ago, MarkBRFC said:

So if your going off this, if we finish 7th and 2 points off the play offs, I presume the season is a failure?

Obviously he would have failed in his target to make the play offs.

Is that what you want to happen? 

[Silas]

"Success" and "failure" are such absolute words to use in the Championship.  

Yes, we all know promotion is the aim of pretty much every club in the league. But using those words as barometers, you would have 3 successful managers each season and 21 "failures" every year.

Seems harsh to call 21 managers failures after being in what many argue is the most competitive league in the World, top to bottom.

I know one thing, if we do have some money to spend in the summer, conversations with potential players should be much easier having finished in the Top 8 than they would have been last year after finishing 15th. 

Players want to join clubs they think are going somewhere and have a chance of success. 

Also, (barring spawny gits Huddersfield),  very few clubs suddenly fire themselves up from the bottom half of the Championship to promotion. Most do it by having 2 or 3 seasons up there in the mix ( oh yes, I went there ?) and then eventually make the leap. 

If this is the 1st of our spell of seasons up there competing, I'll take it for now. Bearing in mind the last time we even finished top half of the table was 5 years ago, and we finished that season a massive 11 pts behind 6th. Not like we've been knocking on the door recently.  

[Bigdoggsteel]

3 hours ago, Mattyblue said:

We hit an arbitrary target of TM and it’s case closed? I’m taking about the club, you know that thing that’s been here for 150 years and will be after TM departs.

TM wants to progress the club, I do. Top 6 helps to do that. However, losing play offs doesn’t not equate to success. Getting to a cup final is great also, shows you are a good side, not a success if you lose it.

I’m not sure you understand the point of professional sport BDS.

Last line a bit arsey. 

"Arbitrary target" , no ,an aim, which if met equals success. At the beginning of the season the play offs would habe been seen as a huge success, now I think you and few others are changing it so that the manager and players only get credit if they they actually win the play offs. I gave you the definition of success. If that's not good enough for you,I can't add anymore.

Not sure why you are bringing cup finals in either, nobody was talking about them and it's hardly relevant to us. I suppose that's what happens when you have lost the argument and have nothing else to add.