Stoke City home

[bluebruce]

Just now, DE. said:

Personally I would have started Armstrong out wide tonight. I know he's been scoring goals playing as a striker but if we're going to play Gallagher (and I hasten to add I would not) then he needs to be playing up top. He's useless when out on the right, and when we switched to 4-4-2 tonight when attacking we were left exposed on the right as Rothwell was not covering the position Gallagher was leaving open. Arma can score goals from the flank anyway, and a lot of his goals come from outside of the box. He would have been much more of a threat on the wing tonight than Gallagher. Ideally Downing would have started centrally from the beginning (much more effective there in the second half) with Rothwell on the right, AA on the left and SG up top. It may still have ended goalless but I think we would have been more of a threat lining up this way than how we set out. 

I think we would have had more joy with Arma down the flanks tonight too. There was more space there, especially on the transition. By the time we got it near him up top, space was frequently more limited, because we took too long plodding out. Arma could have got us up the pitch quicker tonight. He can be very good in either position, and we need to know when to use him in each.

I dont see Gally ever becoming a handy player out there.

[Herbie6590]

21 minutes ago, Steptoe87 said:

Shocking performance all round. Subs didn’t impact the game. Stupid changes to the starting 11 and no creativity on the bench. Really poor

Who should have been on the bench ?

[DE.]

Just now, bluebruce said:

I think we would have had more joy with Arma down the flanks tonight too. There was more space there, especially on the transition. By the time we got it near him up top, space was frequently more limited, because we took too long plodding out. Arma could have got us up the pitch quicker tonight. He can be very good in either position, and we need to know when to use him in each.

I dont see Gally ever becoming a handy player out there.

Agreed, Gallagher doesn't have the attributes to play out wide - dem diagonal aerial headers aside. He's slow, cumbersome on the ball, can't cross and can't beat a man. Putting him in that position is just nonsense, but Mowbray keeps doing it so at this point I'm beyond hoping the penny will drop.

[MarkBRFC]

Gallagher at right wing is becoming the new Bennett at right back. Why we insist on having one rediculous out of position player in the side is beyond me.

[roverandout]

4 minutes ago, Wood26 said:

Surely you seen enough championship by now to not want our manager out for a draw at home? Stoke have spent over £60 million since relegation, compare that to our team and how we are still well in the play off chase? Why would someone else be so much better?

Man utd spent 200 million since fergie left. Doesnt mean that u guaranteed to be a good side

[joey_big_nose]

We should have easily won that on balance of play. Got into a lot of good positions, but our crossing was poor and we couldn't find any space through the middle. We get the majority of goals from Armstrong finding space, but he had none today. And the rest of the attacking players offer very very little goal threat.

A full back with a good cross could have made a big difference today. I suppose we could have dropped Downing in there. 

We do seem to end up drawing a lot of games where on balance we should win

[oozy]

Team for Saturday (though no point second guessing Tony!)

Walton

Nyambe   Tosin    Williams/Mulgrew  Bell

Travis Downing

Samuel Buckley JRC/Rothwell  

Arma

Mulgrew possibly instead of Williams (if he is even fit). I understand his issues defensively, but set pieces were dire today.

So desperately need creativity, and Swansea are not the bruising side Stoke are. Johnson was pretty poor today anyway.

 

[RevidgeBlue]

Wigan all over again. Not as bad a performance but as soon as this lot look like they might be in with a chance of doing something they fail to perform and let us down.

Subs made way too late from the 78th minute onwards.Very odd with the game at 0-0 and us needing the 3 points. Even odder considering Tombola Tony normally chucks on a random array of subs around the 63rd minute mark.

It is difficult to do justice to how bad Gallagher is, he is absolutely dreadful. How he survived 78 mins tonight without being hooked is anyone's guess. We also played really well in his absence through injury against Hull therefore I've no idea what he's shown to the manager this season that warraned his automatic recall once fit again.

So on to Swansea, we may win, we may not, but you can more or less guarantee that if we win on Saturday we'll contrive to throw in some poor performances thereafter to keep us a "safe" distance out of the play off spots.

It's really difficult to maintai much enthusiasm for proceedings knowing we'll never do anything under this manager.

[Miller11]

4 minutes ago, Wood26 said:

Who you dropping to bring Mulgrew on? He’s done his bit for us but set pieces alone don’t warrant him in our team.

I’m glad he’s nowhere near the starting 11, but with defenders as thin on the ground as they are surely he’s worthy of a spot on the bench instead of one of the three strikers.

As the game went on it became more and more apparent that the only likely source of a goal would have been a bit of individual magic... something like a Mulgrew free kick.

[Stuart]

Tonight just proves what we already know from countless examples: when it comes to the crunch, Mowbray does not have the edge.

[Wing Wizard Windy Miller]

9 minutes ago, Wood26 said:

Who you dropping to bring Mulgrew on? He’s done his bit for us but set pieces alone don’t warrant him in our team.

I'm saying he should be on the bench.  Last 10 mins worth throwing on. 

[Leonard Venkhater]

26 minutes ago, Elvis Biro said:

Let's get real -can you see this outfit being capable of playing in the Premier League?

Well that matters not a jot. The point is to get there.

[Wood26]

1 minute ago, Wing Wizard Windy Miller said:

I'm saying he should be on the bench.  Last 10 mins worth throwing on. 

Imagine the outrage 10 minutes to go tonight and we put a CB on.

[RevidgeBlue]

5 minutes ago, MarkBRFC said:

Gallagher at right wing is becoming the new Bennett at right back. Why we insist on having one rediculous out of position player in the side is beyond me.

Exactly what I was thinking.

[Wood26]

5 minutes ago, roverandout said:

Man utd spent 200 million since fergie left. Doesnt mean that u guaranteed to be a good side

No it doesn’t your right. It was more in defence of the manager and the budget he has.

Imagine Mowbray had 50 million....think of the strikers we could have on the wing

[Inglorious basturk]

13 minutes ago, Wood26 said:

Surely you seen enough championship by now to not want our manager out for a draw at home? Stoke have spent over £60 million since relegation, compare that to our team and how we are still well in the play off chase? Why would someone else be so much better?

Because this has happened several times before . We have to go with something fresh . Mowbray is in a loop . There have been some wise imaginative appointments that have got teams out of this league , also he has spent a good amount of Money with little result 

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

Just now, Wood26 said:

Imagine the outrage 10 minutes to go tonight and we put a CB on.

Put Tosin or Lenihan up front and a CB on at the back ?

[bluebruce]

7 minutes ago, DE. said:

Agreed, Gallagher doesn't have the attributes to play out wide - dem diagonal aerial headers aside. He's slow, cumbersome on the ball, can't cross and can't beat a man. Putting him in that position is just nonsense, but Mowbray keeps doing it so at this point I'm beyond hoping the penny will drop.

I actually don't agree he is slow, I think he is fairly quick. Not for a winger though. Agree he is cumbersome at times, can't cross and can't consistently beat a man though. He also doesn't really understand how to play in that area, but even if he did he doesn't have the attributes.

Mowbray has been insisting on strikers wide, whether suited to it (Arma, Antonsson) or not (Samuel, Brereton, Gally) since he arrived. I don't think the penny is going to drop, I think he believes it works.

[Dan]

2 minutes ago, Wood26 said:

Imagine the outrage 10 minutes to go tonight and we put a CB on.

You could play him out wide in Gallaghers position. He wouldn’t be any worse or less effective and would at least be able to put a decent corner or free kick in the box. 

[DE.]

3 minutes ago, bluebruce said:

I actually don't agree he is slow, I think he is fairly quick. Not for a winger though. Agree he is cumbersome at times, can't cross and can't consistently beat a man though. He also doesn't really understand how to play in that area, but even if he did he doesn't have the attributes.

Mowbray has been insisting on strikers wide, whether suited to it (Arma, Antonsson) or not (Samuel, Brereton, Gally) since he arrived. I don't think the penny is going to drop, I think he believes it works.

Yeah I meant slow for a wide man, probably should have made the distinction. Compared to the likes of Arma, Nyambe or even Chapman he's pretty sluggish when running with the ball. I'm not sure I've ever seen him beat a man to be honest. He tried a few times tonight and it was embarrassing, he usually just ran straight into them and instantly lost the ball. It's just not one of his strengths in any way, shape or form. 

Some aspects of his play on the wing must be pleasing Mowbray as he continues selecting him there, but I'm lost as to what those are. Yes he wins headers pumped up to him in that position, but 99% of the time those headers bounce to an opposition player so what is the point? It's not like we even set up to try and take advantage of it. I would like to understand what the manager is thinking but I just can't.

Edited February 26, 2020 by DE.

[Pedro]

8 minutes ago, MarkBRFC said:

Gallagher at right wing is becoming the new Bennett at right back. Why we insist on having one rediculous out of position player in the side is beyond me.

Mowbray must simply be an idiot. He won't ever win me over. Familiar, slow, gutless approach, too long to make changes to a huffing and puffing side, Gallagher out wide is just an utterly crap idea - so we get ANOTHER predictable result against another poor team. In my view, he bottled it yet again because he was more concerned with simply not losing. I'd rather have lost that game through having a real go at Stoke.  Instead, we ran the clock down for them.

 

 

...and don't get me started on the passing and Amari Bell!!!

[tomphil]

We will never ever start breaking down stubborn teams regularly with (poor) strikers on the wing.

There's such a repetitive naivety about it that you can only think they gamble on stuck clock syndrome or law of averages, call it what you want 

A predictable dull evening.

[LDRover]

The Gallagher 'thing' just feels like stubbornness on Mowbray's part now. The lad contributes literally nothing whenever he plays.

[rigger]

19 minutes ago, Wood26 said:

Who you dropping to bring Mulgrew on? He’s done his bit for us but set pieces alone don’t warrant him in our team.

I am not saying Mulgrew should be picked, I would play three at the back, dropping Bell. They had an extra man at the back because they realised they did not have to mark Bell, so gave him the freedom of the left wing in the second half and still he produced nothing. He is not good enough at championship level.   

[bluebruce]

13 minutes ago, Miller11 said:

I’m glad he’s nowhere near the starting 11, but with defenders as thin on the ground as they are surely he’s worthy of a spot on the bench instead of one of the three strikers.

As the game went on it became more and more apparent that the only likely source of a goal would have been a bit of individual magic... something like a Mulgrew free kick.

Or a Mulgrew oil-tanker-turn/way-out-of-position special, to be fair.

He'd have been on my bench, but only in case of defensive injury.