Brentford (h) - the Mowbray love in!

[lraC]

As Bill Shankly used to say "That Dougie Dooins at full back is crap and so is their keeper, so we will have a field day with these lot, we are playing today". 

Let's stop worrying about who we are playing and go out and do the business. We have proven we can compete at this level, with the right players in their correct positions, so why complicate things?

[joey_big_nose]

58 minutes ago, arbitro said:

One minor incident summed him up last night. Late in the second half when we were under the cosh the ball was knocked wide about head height and a Brentford player behind him on the touchline. Most of our players would have headed it out and given possession to Brentford with a throw in. Downing went to head it, feigned and the ball went out for our throw. His experience shone through but that incident epitomised his game. We must have took a minute to retrieve the ball and get the ball back into play.

I'd be happy for him to become our first choice left back.

I don't know, I'll reserve judgement till he's up against a quality player. Hes a fantastic offensive weapon from left back, but need to see how he copes defensively with aerial diagonal balls into space around him, and against a pacy direct winger who turns him inside out. My suspicion is, like Bennett, he will really struggle. Full back is a very very different role to midfield.

 

[Miker]

20 points in 12 with Lenihan.

4 in 6 without.

[Amo]

Just now, OnePhilT said:

? Maybe, but the impression that I got is that Evans allowed Travis to act more freely around midfield, which is what I think Travis is best at. Whenever Travis has been playing in a deeper role, I'm not convinced that limiting him there is his strength. Evans plays that roll much better, and I think last night demonstrated that. 

Good point. Probably why the partnership with Holtby hasn't panned out.

Just now, OnePhilT said:

I don't want to wind up supporters any more than they already probably are, but to me, the above reads as though Bennett will be back in the starting XI on Saturday. The above says to me that Nyambe is the better right-back, but Bennett has to go into the starting XI somewhere - something that many have suspected on here for some time, but the above quote is directly from the horses mouth.

I actually think he'll keep the same back-line (injuries permitting) but it won't be long before Bennett's back in the fold.

[tomphil]

Just now, OnePhilT said:

Mogga is really confusing. Bennett is his preferred right-back, as evidenced by him being a regular in the starting XI. So, when we come up against one of the best wingers (or wide-forwards) in the division, we should... stick a better right-back on the pitch? How does that work out?

I don't want to wind up supporters any more than they already probably are, but to me, the above reads as though Bennett will be back in the starting XI on Saturday. The above says to me that Nyambe is the better right-back, but Bennett has to go into the starting XI somewhere - something that many have suspected on here for some time, but the above quote is directly from the horses mouth.

Without wanting to bash him after he got it right last night this is what we are up against with TM and it's terminal. He will forever try and justify his rotation policy with some kind of fear factor of the opposition.

[Bigdoggsteel]

Have to say Bennetts tweets after the game were great. Praise for the team, another singling Nyambe out for praise. Proper club captain stuff I must say. 

[Bigdoggsteel]

There will surely be changes alright. Hopefully not too off the wall, but I wouldn't bet on it! 

I would be happy if Armstrong is upfront for Graham and then Holtby fills in for Armstrong. 

[roversfan99]

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

There will surely be changes alright. Hopefully not too off the wall, but I wouldn't bet on it! 

I would be happy if Armstrong is upfront for Graham and then Holtby fills in for Armstrong. 

One personnel change there has caused two problems. Graham is critical like last night because hes the only player we can have who can hold it up. Armstrong was far better wide right after a shocking display on Saturday where he was repeatedly offside. He is a poor striker.

[Nelsonthedog]

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

There will surely be changes alright. Hopefully not too off the wall, but I wouldn't bet on it! 

I would be happy if Armstrong is upfront for Graham and then Holtby fills in for Armstrong. 

I don't think AA has the physiche to be the lone front man.. far better as a wide supporting forward.

[Gone to seed]

It's all a bit too 'hit and hope' for me. 

Why can't TM accept the notion that appears to work very well in other clubs, that a consistent and stable line up breeds success. The constant tinkering on the basis of trying to out-think the opposition has only demonstrated one thing, and that is that TM isn't very good at it. If it ain't broke, Tony, don't FFS try to fix it!

[Nelsonthedog]

Just now, WIR Second Coming said:

It's all a bit too 'hit and hope' for me. 

Why can't TM accept the notion that appears to work very well in other clubs, that a consistent and stable line up breeds success. The constant tinkering on the basis of trying to out-think the opposition has only demonstrated one thing, and that is that TM isn't very good at it. If it ain't broke, Tony, don't FFS try to fix it!

I'm pretty certain he won't play that line up away to Stoke.. I can't understand it, but I'm not a football manager.

[Bigdoggsteel]

Just now, OnePhilT said:

That's one of the last things I'd want! Arma simply can't play up front on his own, in my opinion. He's had a several opportunities there, and I've seen it work just twice: one time away at Carlisle in a League Cup match; one time away at a VERY lowly and out-of-confidence Hull in the league last season. Stoke aren't exactly firing on all cylinders, but I think the Arma lone-striker project surely has to be dead in the water. I don't know on what planet he could ever be seen as suitable for that role.

 

Just now, roversfan99 said:

One personnel change there has caused two problems. Graham is critical like last night because hes the only player we can have who can hold it up. Armstrong was far better wide right after a shocking display on Saturday where he was repeatedly offside. He is a poor striker.

 

Just now, Nelsonthedog said:

I don't think AA has the physiche to be the lone front man.. far better as a wide supporting forward.

I don't want Graham dropped, but if he is I would prefer a minor tweak to last night as opposed to something wholesale. I agree about Armstrong, I have huge reservations too, but at least he has a bit of pace. I just hope it's not Gallagher on the wing....

[Nelsonthedog]

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

 

 

I don't want Graham dropped, but if he is I would prefer a minor tweak to last night as opposed to something wholesale. I agree about Armstrong, I have huge reservations too, but at least he has a bit of pace. I just hope it's not Gallagher on the wing....

SG is a big physical unit.. Stoke are a big physical team.. hmm, you could be upset..!

[Bigdoggsteel]

Just now, Nelsonthedog said:

SG is a big physical unit.. Stoke are a big physical team.. hmm, you could be upset..!

Upset, why? 

Gallagher is big, but i wouldn't say he uses his size very well. Yet anyway 

Edited November 28, 2019 by Bigdoggsteel

[Stuart]

5 hours ago, Paul said:

Which only proves what nonsense stats are. Having been at Ewood last night I'd have put poessesion at 50/50 or perhaps 45/55. Brentford as far as I can recall had four shots on target - one hit crossbar, one very close to the top corner with Walton beaten, one saved by Walton, one kicked off the line. Equally Rovers had four chances and scored with the best move of the game - our best goal in a very long time.

An excellent and absorbing game in which both sides played very well. In truth I didn't want to go but last night proved, again, a simple truth I've always known - as a fan you just have to keep turning up. It's impossible to predict when your team will be awful and when they will be very good.

We were deservedly the better side last night against a very good Brentford side.

I think it’s more that ‘possession’ as a stat is nonsense. Teams have been more than happy to let us play keepball for weeks as long as we do nothing useful with it.

Let’s hope Mowbray has turned a corner.

[den9112]

I realy enjoyed last nights game ,we looked balanced and organised..Football can be a simple game with good results when players are in their natural positions ..

Great reception for Raya and it did look like it meant a lot to him..

[tonygreenbank]

5 hours ago, Stuart said:

You really are so far removed from the reality of Rovers, it’s unreal. No way can you be a regular attendee - if you go at all.

Your “extremely condescending comments” that “he and his staff plan each game using strengths and weakness of the opposition” is a very poor defence and a damning with feint praise. The worst part is you are probably right. Such a shame that he doesn’t plan using the strengths and weaknesses of Rovers or we might be where we need to be in the table instead of inconsistently bouncing around the bottom half.

Having been largely united around Mowbray taken us as far as we can, a couple of wins and once again all is forgiven for some.

Funny though, isn’t it. We play with the right personnel, the way “I want” as you so cleverly put it, and we win. But of course that’s a bad thing! WTAF? Sounds like you would rather we lost by picking the wrong players each week just so that you can live in a world where I’m never right? What a stupid opinion to take where your distain for me is more important than wanting Rovers to win football matches.

Blimey such venom and vitriol in your post and at 640 in the morning!

You managed to insult me 3 times! I am out of touch with reality, my opinion is stupid even though I thought the mantra on here is to respect differences and bizarrely that I am disdainful of you. I have never met you Stuart so how can you say that? Not to mention the criticism from the other day that I pontificated to a fellow poster!

 

A lifetime of teaching history has made me immune to insults and indifference!

I am aware of your opinions about Tony Mowbray. My opinion is a slightly different one.

But we can both agree that we want Rovers to be a successful football club once again.

I will not comment again on your posts, Stuart, as I clearly seem to wind you up.

 

 

[Nelsonthedog]

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

Upset, why? 

Gallagher is big, but i wouldn't say he uses his size very well. Yet anyway 

Upset cos he may start if fit.

[Nelsonthedog]

Just now, OnePhilT said:

If Arma does get put up front on his own, then it almost certainly would be Gallagher on the wing. 

Once again, it's not 'the wing', as we don't play with wingers. If SG plays there, it's as a supporting forward from wide.

[Amo]

If Graham's not up to it, then it has to be Gallagher up top. What's the sense playing him and Arma in the wrong positions?

[Nelsonthedog]

Just now, Amo said:

If Graham's not up to it, then it has to be Gallagher up top. What's the sense playing him and Arma in the wrong positions?

SG is never gonna be Graham's replacement without getting the chance. We have to keep putting him in there.

[JacknOry]

The 'wing' police strikes for the second time today.

[tomphil]

I'd honestly stick Samuel up top on his own before Armstrong that's another thing that rarely works in our setup he looks like a lost child.

Logical choice is keep playing Graham until he can't run no more but if not it has to be Gallagher and try and whip some crosses in front of him from wide positions. He'll at least graft and try and make his presence felt unlike Armstrong, being dropped for a game won't do him any harm either.

[Nelsonthedog]

Just now, JacknOry said:

The 'wing' police strikes for the second time today.

Sorry..

[Nelsonthedog]

Just now, OnePhilT said:

And all the while, the difference that Graham makes to the team in comparison to Gallagher is there for all to see. I'm not a fan of the idea of forcing a younger striker in there for a learning curve when we have a far superior option for the remainder of this season - even if Graham is getting on a bit, he is STILL our best and most reliable lone-striker by some distance. Gallagher can't complain at the lack of chances he's had this season, but I think we should stop thinking about the team we want in a year's time, and go with what will get us results this season. There is surely no harm in starting with Graham whenever we can and bringing on Gally when Graham gets tired. I think that's the best way to do it until Graham hangs up his Rovers boots or becomes incapable (whichever comes first).

SG ain't that young.. to me, he just is lacking confidence, and you only build that up from playing games.