Nottingham Forest Home

[tomphil]

3 hours ago, rovers11 said:

I know many will disagree, but I’ve been really impressed with our performances over the past few games. We’ve dominated the ball, won the ball back quickly and aggressively (Travis - what a player!), and have generally controlled the games. Plus, we’ve seen some real quality players in there that will surely mean we’ll win a lot of games this season - Holtby, Dack, Downing, Rothwell and Armstrong have looked good in patches.

Sometimes it’s not all about results at this stage of the season, you get a feel for how we may do based on performances too. I remember our first season we came down and our early season results were very good but performances were woeful - we ended up nearly getting relegated. Results have been ok this season and performances have been good imo. 

The big problem, as many have said, is that our 12m worth of strikers don’t look like they’ve got a goal between them. I have more hope in Brereton longer term than I do Gallagher, but feel like we need someone else shorter term. Sheff W are desperate to get Rhodes out of the door in Jan...just a thought. 

When other teams sit off a bit and look to stop you/counter and you retain the ball often sideways and backwards for long periods it gives the impression of dominating the ball.  I'd much rather we dominated the opposition.

On Gallagher i actually think he'll serve us well over time and at 3 million down plus add ons it's a lot of money tied up not as crazy as the pointless and very silly Brereton signing.  Gallagher wasn't a goal getting type before he came so i wasn't expecting what some seem to be and to me he's another who'd better suit being in one of those things of the dim and distant past - a strike partnership.  Him doing the graft and running the channels looking to drag defenders around and open up space.

But again in my humble opinion the wrong signing at the wrong time just like BB and having all that money tied up there is crazy and another reason the squad is lop sided.  Chuck Samuel in there and you've THREE non scoring non creative strikers the manger is persistently trying to make into 'wide right sided' strikers or some other bizarre name not yet invented.

Quite ridiculous really.

As for Rhodes absolutely no point Mowbray getting hold of a guy like him and tbh although i'll always hold him in high esteem he seems a proper busted flush now. A stint in league one playing every week would do Jordan the world of good i think that's where his future as a goalscorer lies.

Edited October 2, 2019 by tomphil

[Maji]

4 hours ago, rovers11 said:

Sometimes it’s not all about results at this stage of the season, you get a feel for how we may do based on performances too.

Don't take this the wrong way, but Professional sport is all about results, always. Our last two haven't been good enough, regardless of pointless stats etc. TM stated 12 points minimum and we have failed in that endeavour. The fact he even stated that displays he feels it is about results, regardless. We need points to stand a chance of the play offs, keeping the ball with no penetration or purpose is pointless, as we have discovered. Something needs to change in our play/selection to better our points total. 

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, tomphil said:

As for Rhodes absolutely no point Mowbray getting hold of a guy like him and tbh although i'll always hold him in high esteem he seems a proper busted flush now. A stint in league one playing every week would do Jordan the world of good i think that's where his future as a goalscorer lies.

I disagree. Rhodes has never actually been given a fair whack at any club he’s been to since Blackburn. He wasn’t given enough starting time and nobody since his time with us has tried to play to his strengths.

He’s a natural born scorer and it worked for him with us for reasons that we’ll maybe never fully know.

I just disagree entirely that he’s a League One level footballer. 

[rigger]

4 hours ago, rovers11 said:

I know many will disagree, but I’ve been really impressed with our performances over the past few games. We’ve dominated the ball, won the ball back quickly and aggressively (Travis - what a player!), and have generally controlled the games. Plus, we’ve seen some real quality players in there that will surely mean we’ll win a lot of games this season - Holtby, Dack, Downing, Rothwell and Armstrong have looked good in patches.

Sometimes it’s not all about results at this stage of the season, you get a feel for how we may do based on performances too. I remember our first season we came down and our early season results were very good but performances were woeful - we ended up nearly getting relegated. Results have been ok this season and performances have been good imo. 

The big problem, as many have said, is that our 12m worth of strikers don’t look like they’ve got a goal between them. I have more hope in Brereton longer term than I do Gallagher, but feel like we need someone else shorter term. Sheff W are desperate to get Rhodes out of the door in Jan...just a thought. 

It is if you have hopes of doing anything.

[Miller11]

Just now, JoeH said:

I disagree. Rhodes has never actually been given a fair whack at any club he’s been to since Blackburn. He wasn’t given enough starting time and nobody since his time with us has tried to play to his strengths.

He’s a natural born scorer and it worked for him with us for reasons that we’ll maybe never fully know.

I just disagree entirely that he’s a League One level footballer. 

Might have got a like on this if you’d called us Rovers!

Rhodes can definitely do a very good job at this level, but he needs to be in a team playing to his strengths. Gestede exactly the same - when you put crosses in the box for him you knew he was going to get on the end of 9/10 of them. We really ought to have been promoted with them two firing like they were. I’m concerned we are going to look back on this current period as another missed opportunity to get promoted if we don’t find a more coherent way of playing and a more effective way of getting results pretty quickly.

Plenty of talk about a work in progress - but how long can we build before we expect to do something. The similarities between now and those Bowyer days are there, and it won’t be long before this squad is dismantled if we don’t see some success.

[Blue blood]

Focussing on the positives as am a bit depressed with the same flipping issues every game, is that Armstrong has recently improved his form, which is a much needed boost. 

Now if he performed like that regularly Armstrong wouldn't be at Rovers, but if he could keep the consistency for more than (by my average) 1 in 10 good games to even 1 in 2 or 3 he would be an asset and a very handy option on the right side or up front. 

The other positive is in isolation a decent point if disappointing not to win. I'm not too sure looking back we will be too disappointed not to win this one, it's results like Luton that kill us. 

Put it this way, if you beat the bottom 8 teams home and away that's 48 points, which is a significant proportion of the points needed for a good charge at playoffs. Assuming play offs needs 80 points (could be wrong on this, haven't researched it) from the other 30 games you'd only need just over a point per game. If it were 90 points the ratio still isn't poor. Granted it's not that simplistic, and upsets happen  and circumstances prevent this, but I don't think this would be a totally unrealistic set of targets to aim at. Obviously you want to win every game but you hopefully get the point. 

Hmm not amazing at posting positively after all. 

[tomphil]

2 hours ago, JoeH said:

I disagree. Rhodes has never actually been given a fair whack at any club he’s been to since Blackburn. He wasn’t given enough starting time and nobody since his time with us has tried to play to his strengths.

He’s a natural born scorer and it worked for him with us for reasons that we’ll maybe never fully know.

I just disagree entirely that he’s a League One level footballer. 

He's missed too much regular football in the last few years i'm afraid and he's made an awful lot of money whilst doing so. His rep as a big money goal poacher is all but gone he needs to start again.

By league one i mean he'll score down there in a decent set up however they play as long as he gets chances. In the Championship it's just about nailed on fact that a team has to set up a certain way to get the best out of him and nobody seems to want to do that or persist with it at least so he's expected to be a super sub or something.

[USABlue]

6 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

Well we will have to agree to disagree. Yes Ive seen Rich Sharpe tweet today and he makes a fair point, But the form of Downing has push Rothwell out. Johnson was good with Travis early season also. 

Yes I have mention our style and its effectiveness(as well a few other who you don't quote) cos I think its better suited to our players and make used of our best players better. Teams this season has man marked Dack more this season ;like Luton, Cardiff have. I've seen progress with the style and whilst its not the finished product. It is work in progress. It hasn't peak yet. Judge it over a season. If you look at yesterday game around 60 mins in we kept the ball in possession under pressure from Forest and passing it well to until the final cross when no-one was there. Last season we would have played it in behind. Look at our goal yesterday where we pass it through the defence and we get our goal. Yes abit of luck in then but we deserve it. 

Not sure Holtby can play in deeper role next to Travis. Thought Holtby look good in the 10 role but that's where Dack plays. We have different options now which we didn't last season and deeper squad depth

Personally thought Holtby looked a class above, gives.me.the feeling that something can happen whenever he is on the ball.  Thought it odd that both our attackers most likely to get on the end of anything Holtby could get in the box were removed.  There was a couple of great balls in that no one got onto.  Even a Gally flick or a Graham knock down could have bore fruit.  Other "irritants" Dack was crap, fantastic pass for the goal though.  Also Travis, I am going to be watching this kid's game now.  Time and again he recieved the ball, Travis of old would control the ball turn and sprint forward with the ball.  Lately, Mowbary's Travis pulls an Evans control the ball and look for the safe, sideways or backwards pass.  It is not his game it will stunt his game and progress but it is clearly what TM wants, it's; crap.  Least that is how I see it.  Anyone else noticed this?

[USABlue]

5 hours ago, tomphil said:

When other teams sit off a bit and look to stop you/counter and you retain the ball often sideways and backwards for long periods it gives the impression of dominating the ball.  I'd much rather we dominated the opposition.

On Gallagher i actually think he'll serve us well over time and at 3 million down plus add ons it's a lot of money tied up not as crazy as the pointless and very silly Brereton signing.  Gallagher wasn't a goal getting type before he came so i wasn't expecting what some seem to be and to me he's another who'd better suit being in one of those things of the dim and distant past - a strike partnership.  Him doing the graft and running the channels looking to drag defenders around and open up space.

But again in my humble opinion the wrong signing at the wrong time just like BB and having all that money tied up there is crazy and another reason the squad is lop sided.  Chuck Samuel in there and you've THREE non scoring non creative strikers the manger is persistently trying to make into 'wide right sided' strikers or some other bizarre name not yet invented.

Quite ridiculous really.

As for Rhodes absolutely no point Mowbray getting hold of a guy like him and tbh although i'll always hold him in high esteem he seems a proper busted flush now. A stint in league one playing every week would do Jordan the world of good i think that's where his future as a goalscorer lies.

In Gally I think he will come good.  At least he is putting in a shift.  Been several instances where he has been a bit too soft or bit too heavy with his first or second touch that had he got it right would have created something.  He will get it right I think.  Anyone seen anything good.from Samuel in his cameos.cos.I have not.  As I have mentioned I would rather have kept SG or DG on.  I think we may have another coaches pet in Samuel.  Again anyone else?

[USABlue]

9 hours ago, Amo said:

That's our only hope imo, that Mowbray stumbles on the winning formula and sticks with it.

Mowbary stick with it?  Has he ever stuck with anything outside if Bennett?  Who BTW I think has been playing quite well for the most part.

[USABlue]

5 hours ago, tomphil said:

When other teams sit off a bit and look to stop you/counter and you retain the ball often sideways and backwards for long periods it gives the impression of dominating the ball.  I'd much rather we dominated the opposition.

On Gallagher i actually think he'll serve us well over time and at 3 million down plus add ons it's a lot of money tied up not as crazy as the pointless and very silly Brereton signing.  Gallagher wasn't a goal getting type before he came so i wasn't expecting what some seem to be and to me he's another who'd better suit being in one of those things of the dim and distant past - a strike partnership.  Him doing the graft and running the channels looking to drag defenders around and open up space.

But again in my humble opinion the wrong signing at the wrong time just like BB and having all that money tied up there is crazy and another reason the squad is lop sided.  Chuck Samuel in there and you've THREE non scoring non creative strikers the manger is persistently trying to make into 'wide right sided' strikers or some other bizarre name not yet invented.

Quite ridiculous really.

As for Rhodes absolutely no point Mowbray getting hold of a guy like him and tbh although i'll always hold him in high esteem he seems a proper busted flush now. A stint in league one playing every week would do Jordan the world of good i think that's where his future as a goalscorer lies.

Yeah we have enough wingers.

[dingles staying down 4ever]

6 hours ago, USABlue said:

In Gally I think he will come good.  At least he is putting in a shift.  Been several instances where he has been a bit too soft or bit too heavy with his first or second touch that had he got it right would have created something.  He will get it right I think.  Anyone seen anything good.from Samuel in his cameos.cos.I have not.  As I have mentioned I would rather have kept SG or DG on.  I think we may have another coaches pet in Samuel.  Again anyone else?

Sorry but there is nothing there to suggest that Gally will come good. How many times do we hear Rovers fans like a player for putting in a shift. Might as well go down Pleasy and pick a player as I'm sure they would put a shift in as well.

We need players with some ability with the ball not those who run around a lot.

[dingles staying down 4ever]

22 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

Well we seen the impact he had last time. Did you seen that season? 

Gallagher wants the ball to feet and run on to. 

When he wons the flicks ons no one is close to him. 

As a team he had about 4 proper chances this season. 

Playing long balls to him isnt his game 

 

Yes I saw that season and wasn't overly impressed then. I don't get he wants the ball to feet and run onto. That would imply he has great pace or great skill to dribble the lad has neither.

You say the possession is an improvement and I agree but tactically we must be getting something wrong. You say he wins flick ons but no one is near him then it needs Mowbray to coach this so that other players are feeding off it. Otherwise it's still lost possession in the end.

The fact that you say he has had 4 proper chances this season is done to two things. One, as others as said, is we don't create enough chances. I'll say this not seriously but to make a point as it wasn't true, its just as well Andy Cole does not play for Rovers as he wouldn't score as he needed 5 chances to score according to Glenn Hoddle. Forwards aren't going to take every chance but the more we create the more likely we are to score.

Secondly and this maybe a confidence thing is that he hides in the box. In that I mean when the ball comes in he usually has allowed a defender to get in front of him or when a shooting opportunity comes his way he looks to lay it off. Forwards need to be greedy, they have to belief in themselves to score everytime. I just dont see that in Gally.

[Atko's Engine]

I thought it was a fairly decent, professional performance overall, especially coming off the back of the Luton game. Far more composed against a better side. It wasn't out-of-your-seat exciting, apart from the 10 minute spell near the end.

Gally was poor again (arguably out of position) , so was Dack (1 great pass aside). Add in DG hardly seeing the ball, that amounts to a big disadvantage.  

But overall I can see improvement in how we're playing. Far fewer long balls over the heads of midfield, retaining & recycling possession better. We just need to find that killer ball more often. If we have the ball it limits what the opposition can do. Use it better in possession and that makes it a platform to build from.  

Points & performances matter at this stage. Points wise we're about where we were last season  but performances have been better. I think (hope) we'll start to see more of Holtby & Rothwell in particular this next round of games,  now that we're a bit more comfortable in possession.

I'm fairly upbeat, and think there's enough plus points about where we are to have realistic expectations of a top 6 finish.

As fans of a club like Rovers and given what we've suffered, I think sometimes we focus on faults more than positives. An outsider looking in (with ref to Ian Dowie's apparent comments, or the comments of other non-biased observers or even opposition fans) can have a better perspective than we sometimes do. We are, and should be, our own worst critics, but in the main we're viewed as a developing team, with good strength in depth & as dangerous opponents. If we can just find that final ball better / sooner, capitalise on that with more efforts on target then we'll be a real threat IMO.

 

[Guest]

14 hours ago, Miller11 said:

Plenty of talk about a work in progress - but how long can we build before we expect to do something. The similarities between now and those Bowyer days are there, and it won’t be long before this squad is dismantled if we don’t see some success.

Fully agree. One day, just like Rhodes and Gestede, Dack will move on, flop, and we'll all think what we always think, the grass is VERY rarely greener outside of Ewood Park. In my personal opinion, we'll now never get a decent amount for Dack, we chose to keep him, so we have to succeed with him - or it'll be a really big error.

I agree that this whole "Work in progress" thing is a farce. We've been a work in progress since 2013, our League One relegation should never have happened, but that doesn't mean that life resets and we forget about all the "progress" made before hand.

[Doug]

Was only thinking the other day about the similarities between Dack and Rhodes.

Both are the types of player that if they don't score / have a moment of magic, then neither are often not worth their place on the team sheet.

The other side of this is that the players (Josh King / Rothwell etc.) that don't get selected as 'we cannot drop Rhodes or Dack' will leave due to lack of game time.

Very difficult to balance the players feelings and the team requirements all at the same time.

My view, when we had Rhodes, Gestede and King was that my selection up front would have been Gestede and King more often than not.

[Amo]

Just now, Doug said:

My view, when we had Rhodes, Gestede and King was that my selection up front would have been Gestede and King more often than not.

I'm still stupefied that we had those three and couldn't even make the playoffs.

[roversfan99]

Theres no way that Rhodes and Gestede could have been broken up, we had a 40 goal a season strikeforce. 

Dack cant be dropped, like Rhodes he is a guaranteed goal scorer.

[Doug]

17 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Theres no way that Rhodes and Gestede could have been broken up, we had a 40 goal a season strikeforce. 

Dack cant be dropped, like Rhodes he is a guaranteed goal scorer.

Both goalscorers and good ones, but can you guarantee their place when they play one good game in 3 or less in Rhodes case?

[MCMC1875]

On 02/10/2019 at 12:14, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

I was just looking at the records the other day. When did a Rovers player last score a hat trick ? In the 1963-64 season Fred Pickering score 3 hat tricks and Andy McEvoy scored 5 including 4 goals twice !  How things have changed !

Rudy Gestede scored a hat trick on 21 April 2014 against Birmingham City.

[roversfan99]

43 minutes ago, Doug said:

Both goalscorers and good ones, but can you guarantee their place when they play one good game in 3 or less in Rhodes case?

Rhodes consistently scored a goal every other game, thats what you want from your strikers. Them 2 were doing their job and then some.

[roversfan99]

Just now, MCMC1875 said:

Rudy Gestede scored a hat trick on 21 April 2014 against Birmingham City.

Seem to remember him also getting one at home to Forest.

[Doug]

Just now, roversfan99 said:

Rhodes consistently scored a goal every other game, thats what you want from your strikers. Them 2 were doing their job and then some.

Yes, they scored goals, but we could not fit Josh King in due to their 'success'.

We scored goals but didn't get promoted! 

King would have been the better contributor to that team IMO and would likely have scored as many as Rhodes, given the service provided.

 

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

Just now, Doug said:

Yes, they scored goals, but we could not fit Josh King in due to their 'success'.

We scored goals but didn't get promoted! 

King would have been the better contributor to that team IMO and would likely have scored as many as Rhodes, given the service provided.

 

If you were a centre half who would you rather have to mark - King or Rhodes ? Rhodes every time for me. He won't out run me and he won't hurt me.

[MCMC1875]

13 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Rhodes consistently scored a goal every other game, thats what you want from your strikers. Them 2 were doing their job and then some.

Seem to remember that Rhodes and Gestede scored more goals that season that Shearer and Sutton scored in 94/95 and we never even made the play offs!