Stoke City home

[Mattyblue]

The Stats have spoken.

End of discussion.

[Gary C]

Looking forward to the upcoming games at Ewood this week. Stoke have improved under O Neill and it wont be an easy game but I'm backing us for a narrow victory.

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Seriously man, stats are no way to prove that 2 players are similar. 

Like how would the amount of times a player is dispossessed show they are similar, or literally any of those other criteria? 

I could pick 2 players, who could not be more different and there stats could be the same. It doesn't mean anything! 

I think they're similar, my opinion, and stats show they're similar, not my opinion. What more do I have to do to justify my opinion? Oh wait.. not much else I can do... End of really.

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

The Stats have spoken.

End of discussion.

I gave an opinion, somebody rubbished it (which is fine), so I provided stats to back up my opinion.

It's not the end of a discussion, but it is the end of my justification for my opinion. 

[booth]

34 minutes ago, Sparks Rover said:

Give over. Totally different.  Rothwell has that Utd education and you can see it with his close control and ability to beat a man.  Buckley, very average and I genuinely don't get it with him.  I know better youth players all over.

I thought we went to pot when Buckley went off on Saturday. That could have been more to do with who his replacement was, or Tony changing things too much, but still I thought he did a job while he was on the pitch. When he went the entire midfield seemed to go with him.

[toogs]

26 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

The Stats have spoken.

End of discussion.

Is that a Mandalorian reference? ?

If that means nothing to you, just ignore me!

[Bigdoggsteel]

22 minutes ago, JoeH said:

I think they're similar, my opinion, and stats show they're similar, not my opinion. What more do I have to do to justify my opinion? Oh wait.. not much else I can do... End of really.

No,it shows they have similar stats, it doesn't in anyway prove they are similar players. You only need your eyes to see that they aren't! 

[MarkBRFC]

30 minutes ago, JoeH said:

I gave an opinion, somebody rubbished it (which is fine), so I provided stats to back up my opinion.

It's not the end of a discussion, but it is the end of my justification for my opinion. 

Sorry Joe, but I don't think they are similar players at all.

Buckley to me, seems to be someone that will float about in the "number 10 role" keeping the ball in tight situations, looking for a killer pass, and pretty much being someone who will retain the ball, and maybe look to get the odd goal.He doesn't strike me as someone who will beat a man and get away from him, and looks like he's quite slow. I think he's a younger version and probably a lot more similar to Holtby than Rothwell.

Rothwell to me is a bit of an outlet, you can give him the ball in your own half and he has the ability to carry it to the oppositions box beating a few along the way, he's very quick and could probably operate on either flank. ideal for a counter attacking game away from home.

The stats thing you posted doesn't really add up either.

I could say that Smallwood & Rothwell have scored the exact same amount of goals in Rovers colours, so it must mean they are quite similar players.

They aren't.

[Sparks Rover]

28 minutes ago, booth said:

I thought we went to pot when Buckley went off on Saturday. That could have been more to do with who his replacement was, or Tony changing things too much, but still I thought he did a job while he was on the pitch. When he went the entire midfield seemed to go with him.

More to do with his replacement 

[Guest]

26 minutes ago, MarkBRFC said:

Sorry Joe, but I don't think they are similar players at all.

That's fine, I disagree.

[Guest]

39 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

You only need your eyes to see that they aren't! 

I have my eyes, and they show me they are. It's okay that you see it differently.

[RoverKyle]

I think what everyone is trying to point out is that they have completely different attributes, which make them different types of player. 

What you're almost arguing is that they're similar in terms of their form/output, which is fair enough. That doesn't make them the same type of player though. It's like saying an apple and a pear are the same as you're as likely to choke on the pips of either.

[JacknOry]

[Bigdoggsteel]

10 minutes ago, JoeH said:

I have my eyes, and they show me they are. It's okay that you see it differently.

Ya and many others see it differently from you too, but indeed, that's a good thing about football- everyone is entitled to their opinion(even if it's wrong ?)

[Fraserkirky]

5 hours ago, rigger said:

If someone is scoring regularly you don't replace them until they are not .

Not sure how you came to that conclusion from my post. I suggested playing both Brereton and Armstrong.

[Gone to seed]

The next two games are the 'acid test' of our playoff credentials and desire. As with anything else in life, we can't let whatever is happening with rivals be of any consequence, and we need to demonstrate for our own good that we have what it takes. 

What I want to see is desire, belief, energy and commitment from the team, from selection (TM's input) to quality and hard graft on the pitch. I think we have somehow stumbled onto an effective formula, but am conscious that the word 'stumble' is unfortunately too often associated with the boys in blue and white, particularly when the pressure is on. I'd love to be proven wrong, and have been here many times (since the days of Jim Iley, Bobby Saxton, Howard Kendall and so on) so understand the feeling of being close but not close enough!!

COYB!

Edited February 25, 2020 by WIR Second Coming

[rigger]

5 hours ago, JoeH said:

At home, with a win needed, against Stoke... you don't play out of form and out of favour WINGER Harry Chapman as a full back. You just don't.

Where have I said I would? Don’t let the truth get in the way of a sarcastic quip.

[rigger]

3 hours ago, Fraserkirky said:

Not sure how you came to that conclusion from my post. I suggested playing both Brereton and Armstrong.

So why didn’t you just say that?

[Fraserkirky]

14 minutes ago, rigger said:

So why didn’t you just say that?

I did two posts above it in my team selection. 
I said it would be nice to have someone else scoring regularly apart from Armstrong. I didn’t say play Brereton instead of Armstrong.

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, rigger said:

Where have I said I would? Don’t let the truth get in the way of a sarcastic quip.

Right about here...

22 hours ago, rigger said:

I’d go

                      Walton

     Nyambe.     Tosin.    Lenahan

Chapman.                        Downing 

             Travis.        Johnson

  Rothwell.   Graham. Armstrong 

 

[roversfan99]

Think I would personally go:

Walton

Nyambe Lenihan Adarabioyo Bell

Downing Travis Johnson Rothwell

Brereton Armstrong

Subs: Hilton, Samuel, Chapman, Buckley, Davenport, Bennett, Graham.

Samuel and Brereton was a judgement call, just thought Brereton could do with a go, Samuel was impressive v Hull, impressive v Charlton and more ineffective often found in a wide role at the weekend.

If Rothwell cant start, in the absence of much in the way of width, I would go with Brereton and Samuel up top and Armstrong wide.

[OldEwoodBlue]

4 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

, just thought Brereton could do with a go,

You sound like Mowbray.

This is a MUST WIN game. 

[chaddyrovers]

Rothwell wont be starting tomorrow. On bench at best. 

Why anyone would put your best strikers in terms of goals and assists wide is just plain daft. Armstrong is a striker so play him up front which he is best form of his Rovers career

[Neal]

6 hours ago, toogs said:

Is that a Mandalorian reference? ?

If that means nothing to you, just ignore me!

This is the way. 

[Bigdoggsteel]

49 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Rothwell wont be starting tomorrow. On bench at best. 

Why anyone would put your best strikers in terms of goals and assists wide is just plain daft. Armstrong is a striker so play him up front which he is best form of his Rovers career

Wasn't he wide left in a game recently though? Pretty sure he was. Are you saying TM is daft. Very harsh, very, very harsh Chaddy