Tony Mowbray Discussion

[tomphil]

1 hour ago, Mattyblue said:

I’m no fan of Bell, but he has to play for the balance of the side. 

It’s only for one game, and who knows Cunningham coming in might be the rocket up his arse it often looks like he needs.

If he learnt to hold his position and stand his man up better he'd be ok but similar to Henley it just doesn't seem to improve. Against a pacy winger who wasn't much good with his final ball he'd probably look ok.   

Some good right sided players though at this level and therein lies the problem.

[Bigdoggsteel]

39 minutes ago, tomphil said:

If he learnt to hold his position and stand his man up better he'd be ok but similar to Henley it just doesn't seem to improve. Against a pacy winger who wasn't much good with his final ball he'd probably look ok.   

Some good right sided players though at this level and therein lies the problem.

Indeed. Hopefully with us on the front foot more, Bell can show his strengths. 

The Big Dogg banker - Bell first goal on Saturday 

?

[rigger]

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

Indeed. Hopefully with us on the front foot more, Bell can show his strengths. 

The Big Dogg banker - Bell first goal on Saturday 

?

Own goal 

[roversfan99]

3 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Indeed. Hopefully with us on the front foot more, Bell can show his strengths. 

The Big Dogg banker - Bell first goal on Saturday 

?

I've yet to see any of these strengths but fingers crossed.

[Mr. E]

We have great attacking power but TM cannot get anything out of our strikers. He is clueless and helpless. We need someone with better stategy. We need to change managers before it's too late.

[Colt Seavers]

It was clear during the first half that our style was playing into the hands of their defence. Mowbray left it far, far too late in making a change. There was no way that Graham and Gallagher were ever going to match their physicality so why try? Armstrong and Rothwell with their pace and trickery would have been a much better option to start the game, with Chapman on the bench to come on in the last 20 minutes and apply the coup de gras.

Wasted opportunity against a mediocre opponent. 

 

[DE.]

18 minutes ago, Mr. E said:

We have great attacking power but TM cannot get anything out of our strikers.

Mostly because he has an obsession with playing them on the wing tbf. 

[Mr. E]

Just now, DE. said:

Mostly because he has an obsession with playing them on the wing tbf. 

Yep and he has made it clear he will not change this philosophy no matter what. He is too stubborn and it is costing us points.

[Norbert Rassragr]

The clean sheets are very welcome, but there needs to be more threat up front. It's like we can have a defence or a good attack, but not both. It's not promotion form anyway.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

Teams that can't score usually end up getting relegated.

[tomphil]

He says we need to find the balance which is true but you need the front men in their correct positions and you need some pace out wide. More than ever though you need to be able to put decent balls in another major flaw in our current set up aside from relying on 1 dead ball specialist.

Mulgrew might have scored in this but we might have let two in as well so we are a work in progress again.

[AAK]

Im simply not happy with him because hes signed 3 strikers for big money and none of them play as strikers and none of them are even competent wingers, its just absolutley crazy. Added to this none of his key men, bar dack, are his own signings. Id say now, Graham, Dack, travis, williams, lenihan and bennett (because hes made him captain) are his main men. Johnson you could argue, but his passing is poor at times. When i say main men, i mean can be relied upon, are consistent in their CORRECT positions and he will probably play if available and fully fit. Bennett not always 2 out of those 3 but hes captain.

Edited August 24, 2019 by AAK

[JBiz]

Just now, AAK said:

Im simply not happy with him because hes signed 3 strikers for big money and none of them play as strikers and none of them are even competent wingers, its just absolutley crazy. Added to this none of his key men, bar dack, are his own signings. Id say now, Graham, Dack, travis, williams, lenihan and bennett (because hes made him captain) are his main men. Johnson you could argue, but his passing is poor at times. When i say main men, i mean can be relied upon, are consistent in their CORRECT positions and he will probably play if available and fully fit. Bennett not always 2 out of those 3 but hes captain.

I think it’s a bit rich to ignore everything to favour the criticism for signing a couple of young forwards.

Everything that seemingly comes from the club these days references a “learning culture” so I personally can see why they favour investing money into youth as opposed to filling the squad with big wage older lads.

The two we’ve picked up by the way, Johnson and Downing - look a damn sight better than their recent equivalents too, hence why it’s rich to ignore those two (seemingly, it’s early days) good signings, to criticise others!

[Gary C]

4 hours ago, Colt Seavers said:

It was clear during the first half that our style was playing into the hands of their defence. Mowbray left it far, far too late in making a change. There was no way that Graham and Gallagher were ever going to match their physicality so why try? Armstrong and Rothwell with their pace and trickery would have been a much better option to start the game, with Chapman on the bench to come on in the last 20 minutes and apply the coup de gras.

Wasted opportunity against a mediocre opponent. 

 

Chapman had only played the day before with the under 23s so was not going to be considered. But I agree the team could have been set up better today.

[Colt Seavers]

Just now, Gary C said:

Chapman had only played the day before with the under 23s so was not going to be considered. But I agree the team could have been set up better today.

Yes I watched him last night. He wasn't very good to be honest. 

No the point I was making was that Chapman shouldn't have played last night, he should be an option on match days. I wouldn't start him but for a last ditch fifteen minute cameo, he is a better option than even Rothwell in my opinion. I think Gallagher or even (gulp) Brereton need a run of games up front with Danny coming on after 70 minutes rather than going off then. 

Armstrong wide right and Rothwell to battle Downing on the other side is my preferred option. I am generally accepting of Mowbray being here and find that there is a lot to like about him but we could have won that game today with a little more imagination and courage from him. 

 

[DE.]

Just now, Colt Seavers said:

we could have won that game today with a little more imagination and courage from him. 

That will essentially be Mowbray's epitaph when he eventually departs. There's a decent manager in there but he needs to take a trip to Oz to find his courage.

[Gary C]

56 minutes ago, Colt Seavers said:

Yes I watched him last night. He wasn't very good to be honest. 

No the point I was making was that Chapman shouldn't have played last night, he should be an option on match days. I wouldn't start him but for a last ditch fifteen minute cameo, he is a better option than even Rothwell in my opinion. I think Gallagher or even (gulp) Brereton need a run of games up front with Danny coming on after 70 minutes rather than going off then. 

Armstrong wide right and Rothwell to battle Downing on the other side is my preferred option. I am generally accepting of Mowbray being here and find that there is a lot to like about him but we could have won that game today with a little more imagination and courage from him. 

 

He should have changed things earlier. We needed to keep the ball on the floor. Their CBS won everything in the air. Lacked creativity, Dack was poor today Rothwell didn't get into his flow. Armstrong pace caused issues when he came on but to be fair at the start of the day I would have been happy with a point and that's what we got. I agree Ben needs games when hes back fit to try and show if he can replicate his pre season form

[Blue blood]

I wonder if his management of Dack will be his undoing. The system is set up around him yet he isn't delivering at the moment. Given the system limits a number of our other players perhaps the conundrum can simply come down to get Dack performing or change the system. 

A 4-4-2 with a combo of Graham/Gally/Armstrong up front could cause a lot of problems for teams and give Rovers more attacking presence. 

Alternatively he could try Rothwell in Dack's position and keep the formation.

Going forwards something needs to change without us messing up our newfound defensive solidity. 

[roversfan99]

3 hours ago, Blue blood said:

I wonder if his management of Dack will be his undoing. The system is set up around him yet he isn't delivering at the moment. Given the system limits a number of our other players perhaps the conundrum can simply come down to get Dack performing or change the system. 

A 4-4-2 with a combo of Graham/Gally/Armstrong up front could cause a lot of problems for teams and give Rovers more attacking presence. 

Alternatively he could try Rothwell in Dack's position and keep the formation.

Going forwards something needs to change without us messing up our newfound defensive solidity. 

"The system is set up around him yet he isn't delivering at the moment."

The formation yes somewhat, but there is no way that you could argue that our way of playing at the moment is in any way beneficial to getting the best out of Bradley Dack.

You mention swapping him for Rothwell, but we massively improved last season when they BOTH played.

You also suggest playing Gallagher up front, he played up front twice, did nothing, and has in fact offered nothing in any of the 5 games, even though we have often gone more direct.

 

[JBiz]

Just now, roversfan99 said:

"You also suggest playing Gallagher up front, he played up front twice, did nothing, and has in fact offered nothing in any of the 5 games, even though we have often gone more direct.

 

That’s an opinion, not a fact - and I would also add that I think you’re completely wrong.

Example - the goal vs Hull.

[roversfan99]

Just now, Harry The Bass said:

That’s an opinion, not a fact - and I would also add that I think you’re completely wrong.

Example - the goal vs Hull.

Fair enough, he did well to earn a foul out wide.

He hasn't offered any threat of a goal however, which isnt ideal for a 5m striker, and the likes of Rothwell could only dream of the sort of patience that Gallagher is getting from the manager at the moment.

[JBiz]

Just now, roversfan99 said:

Fair enough, he did well to earn a foul out wide.

He hasn't offered any threat of a goal however, which isnt ideal for a 5m striker, and the likes of Rothwell could only dream of the sort of patience that Gallagher is getting from the manager at the moment.

 

A more confident SG for example heads in against Hull, he has had a few chances in each game but nothing guilt edge.

Neither has Dack, Armstrong, Graham, Rothwell, etc etc.

In both roles he’s performed, the pressing, linking and holding up has been good for me. He is a physical presence most teams will suffer against. Just because he hasn’t bagged, does not mean he’s done nowt, imo.

[roversfan99]

Just now, Harry The Bass said:

 

A more confident SG for example heads in against Hull, he has had a few chances in each game but nothing guilt edge.

Neither has Dack, Armstrong, Graham, Rothwell, etc etc.

In both roles he’s performed, the pressing, linking and holding up has been good for me. He is a physical presence most teams will suffer against. Just because he hasn’t bagged, does not mean he’s done nowt, imo.

The thing is, Dack and Graham have credit in the bank as proven performers, Rothwell has not been given a chance really (a solitary start and away at Fulham) despite his form at the end of last season. In general we havent been anywhere near good enough going forward, dont even think thats subjective, as improved as weve been defensively.

[JBiz]

Just now, roversfan99 said:

The thing is, Dack and Graham have credit in the bank as proven performers, Rothwell has not been given a chance really (a solitary start and away at Fulham) despite his form at the end of last season. In general we havent been anywhere near good enough going forward, dont even think thats subjective, as improved as weve been defensively.

Huge jump from “in fact he’s done nothing” that though RF

[Ewood Ace]

26 minutes ago, Harry The Bass said:

Neither has Dack, Armstrong, Graham, Rothwell, etc etc.

Graham has already scored and Rothwell has only had one start, whereas Gallagher has started every game.