Preston Away

[tomphil]

1 hour ago, Mattyblue said:

Possibly, whatever it was, it wasn’t a fan base turning on the manager.

Absolutely knew it wouldn't even if we'd been tanked 3 nil because it's grim acceptance most expected defeat. Not many regulars will have been surprised at the manner of it either.

But this is Rovers fans and you know well enough we are serious slow burners but when it blows it tends to blow all of a sudden quite spectacularly.  Then there is no way back Mowbray and his crew should thank their lucky stars they have at the moment one of the most patient ( referred to by greats like Dalglish, Souness & even Hodgson ) and passive fanbases in England in the stands.

Boro for all the mutual love in would have torn a strip off him before now as would a good few others.

[Herbie6590]

9 hours ago, Crimpshrine said:

Come on! He is responsible for the team he puts out. The buck stops with the manager. End of.

You said it yourself - "Mowbary is ultimately accountable". I think you are defending the indefensible.

No, I’m pointing out the difference between responsibility & accountability as we all seem to keep mixing up the two.

Mowbray is ultimately accountable, end of, we all agree on this. However, once he has picked the team (for which he is accountable) the players have a degree of personal responsibility for their individual performances. Walton dropped a clanger. Bennett dropped a clanger. The players solely are responsible for those errors. They are experienced professionals who will know they cocked up.

Mowbray now must decide how to react to those mistakes & for that reaction he is responsible but he can only react post-event, the players react on the field, real time.

Mowbray buys, sells, trains & sets them up - in game, the players need to stand up & take some share of the blame for what’s going on IMHO. Tommy Spurr said as much on the Radio Lancs preview on Friday. He said the players need to ask themselves some searching questions.

Nobody comes out of yesterday covered in glory save for Gallagher who seemed to discover himself at least for 45 minutes.

[Stuart]

Just now, Herbie6590 said:

Of course he is, but at 4pm yesterday as that cross came over...Mowbray is powerless. He can only react post event.

Stop digging Ian! ?

There’s a reason managers have subs to call on. I can only assume yesterday’s FM game was in Athletic mode rather than Tactical.

We really shouldn’t be pointing at one moment as being irreversible or somehow irretrievable. If that one moment changed the entire match (as Mowbray seemed to suggest yesterday) then our problems run much deeper.

For someone so honourable he does seem to dig his players out pretty regularly and deflects any blame. Contrast with Hasenhuttl who, despite being a player down after 12 minutes, took full responsibility for his team’s complete no show. A good man manager will take the flak in public and hammer the players in private. Mowbray seems to do the opposite.

[dingles staying down 4ever]

Just now, Herbie6590 said:

No, I’m pointing out the difference between responsibility & accountability as we all seem to keep mixing up the two.

Mowbray is ultimately accountable, end of, we all agree on this. However, once he has picked the team (for which he is accountable) the players have a degree of personal responsibility for their individual performances. Walton dropped a clanger. Bennett dropped a clanger. The players solely are responsible for those errors. They are experienced professionals who will know they cocked up.

Mowbray now must decide how to react to those mistakes & for that reaction he is responsible but he can only react post-event, the players react on the field, real time.

Mowbray buys, sells, trains & sets them up - in game, the players need to stand up & take some share of the blame for what’s going on IMHO. Tommy Spurr said as much on the Radio Lancs preview on Friday. He said the players need to ask themselves some searching questions.

Nobody comes out of yesterday covered in glory save for Gallagher who seemed to discover himself at least for 45 minutes.

Mowbray has already decided, Nyambe dropped Bennett back to right back

[Herbie6590]

Just now, Stuart said:

Stop digging Ian! ?

There’s a reason managers have subs to call on. I can only assume yesterday’s FM game was in Athletic mode rather than Tactical.

We really shouldn’t be pointing at one moment as being irreversible or somehow irretrievable. If that one moment changed the entire match (as Mowbray seemed to suggest yesterday) then our problems run much deeper.

For someone so honourable he does seem to dig his players out pretty regularly and deflects any blame. Contrast with Hasenhuttl who, despite being a player down after 12 minutes, took full responsibility for his team’s complete no show. A good man manager will take the flak in public and hammer the players in private. Mowbray seems to do the opposite.

Read my later post Stuart

[RTM08]

As I said before, the system invites the mistakes and has done for a long time. We take the lead and instead of going for the jugular we always sit back and let the pressure build. This will always lead to mistakes when we have such a shockingly poor defensive unit, which again is set up by the manager.

The players can take responsibility for the errors they committed sure, but the reasons they happen 2 or 3 times a game is down to the manager and he can't keep using it is an excuse.

[dingles staying down 4ever]

Just now, Stuart said:

Stop digging Ian! ?

There’s a reason managers have subs to call on. I can only assume yesterday’s FM game was in Athletic mode rather than Tactical.

We really shouldn’t be pointing at one moment as being irreversible or somehow irretrievable. If that one moment changed the entire match (as Mowbray seemed to suggest yesterday) then our problems run much deeper.

For someone so honourable he does seem to dig his players out pretty regularly and deflects any blame. Contrast with Hasenhuttl who, despite being a player down after 12 minutes, took full responsibility for his team’s complete no show. A good man manager will take the flak in public and hammer the players in private. Mowbray seems to do the opposite.

For a team so low confidence the of course one incident in a game can change things but youre right things appear much deeper. This is only going to end in two ways either Mowbray leaving or relegation

[Stuart]

Just now, Herbie6590 said:

Read my later post Stuart

I have. I still don’t agree. Mowbray is both accountable and responsible before, during and after games.

This really isn’t about one game though. It’s about a continued failure to approach and react (before, during and after) game after game after game.

He didn’t react in the Summer when he replaced our goalkeeper but kept the goalkeeping position just as poor as it had been. Same coach, same unchallenging understudy and yet made it a temporary role (probably as well).

He made one of our poorer players captain through long-service, social media presence and because he is a tryer. He moves other players around game after game to accommodate him.

He makes young players scapegoats for poor games and continues to have favourites on the field - game after game despite poor performances and results.

This is his team, playing his way. He is totally responsible. This is a mindset not the odd individual error.

As far as Mowbray seems to be concerned he has chalked this one down to Walton not claiming a poor cross that had gone just over him, and has already moved on to the next game. I wouldn’t be surprised if he picks Leutwiler to start the next game but then I wouldn’t be surprised if he didn’t. His team selections are so erratic that he has earned the nickname Tombola Tony. It’s embarrassing.

Something has to change or we will be relegated.

 

[Hasta]

Just now, Herbie6590 said:

However, once he has picked the team (for which he is accountable) the players have a degree of personal responsibility for their individual performances. Walton dropped a clanger. Bennett dropped a clanger. The players solely are responsible for those errors. They are experienced professionals who will know they cocked up.

The players are only responsible if the errors or performance are worse than normal. Or if they are not trying. If Mowbray decided to play Smallwood in goal yesterday, and Smallwood made errors, it's not Smallwoods fault because he simply isnt good enough. 

For all we know, Walton is playing to the top of his ability, but that level of ability includes mistakes which costs goals. That's as good as he is. He will do that throughout his career and if you play him in your side then that's the risk you are taking.

Bennett has now been at fault for 3 goals in 7 days. If you play him next week at full back and he is at fault again you have to say it's not him 'dropping a clanger'. It's just that he is defensively not good enough.

 

[Sparks Rover]

Just now, Hasta said:

The players are only responsible if the errors or performance are worse than normal. Or if they are not trying. If Mowbray decided to play Smallwood in goal yesterday, and Smallwood made errors, it's not Smallwoods fault because he simply isnt good enough. 

For all we know, Walton is playing to the top of his ability, but that level of ability includes mistakes which costs goals. That's as good as he is. He will do that throughout his career and if you play him in your side then that's the risk you are taking.

Bennett has now been at fault for 3 goals in 7 days. If you play him next week at full back and he is at fault again you have to say it's not him 'dropping a clanger'. It's just that he is defensively not good enough.

 

Spot on. Mowbray picks em irrespective of their performances, so he’s gotta go 

[OJRovers]

I said it a few games back, there's no doubt we are in a relegation battle this season.

A poor league one defence. Non scoring strikers and a manager tinkering with formation and tactics. All the ingredients are there.

Mowbray needs to resign.

[Herbie6590]

Just now, Stuart said:

I have. I still don’t agree. Mowbray is both accountable and responsible before, during and after games.

This really isn’t about one game though. It’s about a continued failure to approach and react (before, during and after) game after game after game.

He didn’t react in the Summer when he replaced our goalkeeper but kept the goalkeeping position just as poor as it had been. Same coach, same unchallenging understudy and yet made it a temporary role (probably as well).

He made one of our poorer players captain through long-service, social media presence and because he is a tryer. He moves other players around game after game to accommodate him.

He makes young players scapegoats for poor games and continues to have favourites on the field - game after game despite poor performances and results.

This is his team, playing his way. He is totally responsible. This is a mindset not the odd individual error.

As far as Mowbray seems to be concerned he has chalked this one down to Walton not claiming a poor cross that had gone just over him, and has already moved on to the next game. I wouldn’t be surprised if he picks Leutwiler to start the next game but then I wouldn’t be surprised if he didn’t. His team selections are so erratic that he has earned the nickname Tombola Tony. It’s embarrassing.

Something has to change or we will be relegated.

 

OK, I’ll have one more go at explaining what I mean via an analogy...bear with...?

i have a leaking kitchen tap. I conduct due diligence & select a plumber who is suitably qualified & so seems capable of doing the job. He comes in, starts work but accidentally drills through the pipe causing a leak. The plumber is Responsible for the mistake, I am Accountable for choosing the plumber & therefore ultimately, the leak & the damage caused.

if I KEEP using that plumber for all my requirements & accepting risk of further collateral damage then my accountability for the performance of my kitchen tap might suffer & Mrs H might decide that in future, somebody else might be better placed to choose which plumber we use.

Ultimately the buck stops with me (until MRS H intervenes) but it doesn’t give the chosen plumber carte blanche to go nuts knackering my pipe work, he has a duty of care....that’s the difference between responsibility & accountability in this instance... 

*retires to drawing room, pours glass of scotch, slumps back in easy chair* ?

 

[chaddyrovers]

55 minutes ago, Mercer said:

I think we need hungry, dynamic and innovative personnel in our key posts starting with a CEO who feckin knows what he is doing.

Is that Venkys want really? 

55 minutes ago, Mercer said:

IMO, that again is down to Mowbray and his support team.

I've long argued on here that the club's dumbing down from top to bottom

Yes but you arent yet to suggest who this young manager. Wonder why? 

Just banging on about Cowley. He aint our manager so just move on pal

[tomphil]

It's ok saying about him doing the honourable thing like he did at Coventry but i'd assume he was on peanuts there compared to here. 2.5 or 5 years left depending on what you believe is a hell of a lot to walk away from.

As always it is down to the ownership or if he has had enough then his reps to approach them for some mutual agreement terms.  You never know they might send another Shebby or Senior to make his life uncomfortable and give him a little nudge. Then again he's just angled his mate Venus into that position hasn't he ?

They've got the inside of the club nicely tucked up that's probably why he's so blaze' about it all.

[Hasta]

Just now, Herbie6590 said:

OK, I’ll have one more go at explaining what I mean via an analogy...bear with...?

i have a leaking kitchen tap. I conduct due diligence & select a plumber who is suitably qualified & so seems capable of doing the job. He comes in, starts work but accidentally drills through the pipe causing a leak. The plumber is Responsible for the mistake, I am Accountable for choosing the plumber & therefore ultimately, the leak & the damage caused.

if I KEEP using that plumber for all my requirements & accepting risk of further collateral damage then my accountability for the performance of my kitchen tap might suffer & Mrs H might decide that in future, somebody else might be better placed to choose which plumber we use.

Ultimately the buck stops with me (until MRS H intervenes) but it doesn’t give the chosen plumber carte blanche to go nuts knackering my pipe work, he has a duty of care....that’s the difference between responsibility & accountability in this instance... 

*retires to drawing room, pours glass of scotch, slumps back in easy chair* ?

 

But what if that plumber isn't suitably qualified to work on that type of tap,  because it's more complicated than what he is used to working on. (Walton).

Or what if you get a electrician to do a plumbers job (Bennett) ?

Wigan fans told us that Walton was a good shot stopper but dodgy on crosses. It's not unexpected. The problem is he isn't as good a shot stopper as Raya.

Edited October 27, 2019 by Hasta

[Stuart]

Just now, Herbie6590 said:

OK, I’ll have one more go at explaining what I mean via an analogy...bear with...?

i have a leaking kitchen tap. I conduct due diligence & select a plumber who is suitably qualified & so seems capable of doing the job. He comes in, starts work but accidentally drills through the pipe causing a leak. The plumber is Responsible for the mistake, I am Accountable for choosing the plumber & therefore ultimately, the leak & the damage caused.

if I KEEP using that plumber for all my requirements & accepting risk of further collateral damage then my accountability for the performance of my kitchen tap might suffer & Mrs H might decide that in future, somebody else might be better placed to choose which plumber we use.

Ultimately the buck stops with me (until MRS H intervenes) but it doesn’t give the chosen plumber carte blanche to go nuts knackering my pipe work, he has a duty of care....that’s the difference between responsibility & accountability in this instance... 

*retires to drawing room, pours glass of scotch, slumps back in easy chair* ?

 

It’s not the same though, Ian. (Analogies are always risky).

In your analogy, you (aka Mowbray) are not the home owner, you are the owner of the plumbing company with these plumbers working for you.

Then one day you get calls from several customers complaining about the workmanship and other problems.

You respond to these complaints saying “yeah, my guy made a mistake there, he has let the company down”.

Then...

You don’t deal with the plumbers you just keep sending them out on more jobs - especially the ones you get on with.

You blame the apprentices.

You don’t even apologise or accept responsibility.

So would you really expect this to be sustainable? Bear in mind your customer base is the same locals who talk to each other and you cannot go and get new customers because the all have their own plumbers.

[chaddyrovers]

Still angry about yesterday second half horror show. 

 

[booth]

55 minutes ago, Herbie6590 said:

No, I’m pointing out the difference between responsibility & accountability as we all seem to keep mixing up the two.

Mowbray is ultimately accountable, end of, we all agree on this. However, once he has picked the team (for which he is accountable) the players have a degree of personal responsibility for their individual performances. Walton dropped a clanger. Bennett dropped a clanger. The players solely are responsible for those errors. They are experienced professionals who will know they cocked up.

Mowbray now must decide how to react to those mistakes & for that reaction he is responsible but he can only react post-event, the players react on the field, real time.

Mowbray buys, sells, trains & sets them up - in game, the players need to stand up & take some share of the blame for what’s going on IMHO. Tommy Spurr said as much on the Radio Lancs preview on Friday. He said the players need to ask themselves some searching questions.

Nobody comes out of yesterday covered in glory save for Gallagher who seemed to discover himself at least for 45 minutes.

You do seem to be arguing over how many shades of shite there are here.

[Tom]

At any point in his time here has Mowbray (like Bowyer) ever made a game changing change like Neill did yesterday?

The subs aren’t always woeful or simply like for like 

Nice man, dinosaur though 

[OldEwoodBlue]

Just now, booth said:

You do seem to be arguing over how many shades of shite there are here.

You only get out, what you put in....

[Wegerleswiggle]

22 minutes ago, Hasta said:

But what if that plumber isn't suitably qualified to work on that type of tap,  because it's more complicated than what he is used to working on. (Walton).

Or what if you get a electrician to do a plumbers job (Bennett) ?

Wigan fans told us that Walton was a good shot stopper but dodgy on crosses. It's not unexpected. The problem is he isn't as good a shot stopper as Raya.

Bring back Paul Caddis!! He could be the answer.

[DE.]

If he is then I really don't want to know what the question is 

[4000Holes]

Just now, chaddyrovers said:

Still angry about yesterday second half horror show. 

 

Be angry with Mowbray Chaddy.  He has proved that he has a total inability to affect and read games as they are occurring ie he just appears incapable or unable to react to situations until it’s too late.

Yesterday, the game changed more or less at the beginning of the second half, directly as a result of what the PNE manager did.  Did we react?  No.  Was it inevitable they would score? Yes.  By that time our momentum had gone.  He was going to react just before they scored their second but again too late.  As they got that equaliser, you could see by the body language in our lot that we would be leaving with nil points.

Due to poor or non existent recruitment during the last 2 windows, we are not equipped to compete.

My view is we will be relegated unless Mowbray is replaced before the next window.

As I said Chaddy, be angry with Mowbray, he is a dinosaur.

[BlackburnEnd75]

2 hours ago, Mattyblue said:

I’d had a few pints but unless I was mistaken I so ZERO subs warming up second half.

I noticed this too. Travis was warming up for a bit after they decided not to bring him on but I didn’t see a single other rovers player warming up not even graham who came on as a sub

[AAK]

I am still absolutley astounded as to why bennett and evans were picked above travis. Any explanations for that anyone? Its a truly astounding decision