98/99 Relegation?

[Amo]

IIRC, Jimmy Corbett broke his ankle in pre-season and never really recovered after that. Don’t think he made a single league appearance for us?

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

5 hours ago, oldjamfan1 said:

I agree there Tyrone. It was interesting to note that he barely featured when he was first signed, Cowans was twice the player Sherwood ever was. 

Players come in all sorts of mentalities. The two main groups are the guys that will get you on top in the game and the guys that will start to play when the first group have got on top in the game. You have your Shearer's, Batty's, Hendry's, Moran's, Flitty etc and then you have the Sherwood's, Bohinen's, Frandsen's, Gillespie's etc.

[Blue blood]

18 minutes ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

Players come in all sorts of mentalities. The two main groups are the guys that will get you on top in the game and the guys that will start to play when the first group have got on top in the game. You have your Shearer's, Batty's, Hendry's, Moran's, Flitty etc and then you have the Sherwood's, Bohinen's, Frandsen's, Gillespie's etc.

I think the most blatant and recent example of the latter category is Scott Dann. When on top he looked imperious, when we were struggling Bambi on ice. Another player who'd gonl in that category for me is Evans. 

[Amo]

21 hours ago, Blue blood said:

What didn't go wrong? 

For starters breaking up GAS - Gally and Sutton was a bad start. It only lasted a few games with Davis instead of Gally, before the swap came back in, but it set the tone for a hard season. A ton of injuries, especially to these two, also massively didn't help. I think losing Flitty for most of the campaign was a huge blow. 

If the season before petered out because the squad was too thin, the opposite was in effect this season. We had far too many players, which resulted in little consistency whatsoever. For example we had 6 strikers on the books, which back then was huge. I think manure only had 4 recognised strikers for example back then. We had a squad of 30+ which, even with a huge injury list, didn't really allow for much continuity or for us to have a proper style. Take the striker situation - Gally and Jansen play very differently to Sutton, who plays differently to Ward and Blake, who was different to Davis. Between the volume of personnel, and the injuries it was very hard to get a style of play, to have a plan A or B, or any kind of continuity or other marginal gains that comes from a settled squad. 

It also started badly as Hodgeson's two big signings didn't work out Perez and Davis. One didn't settle, the other wasn't mature enough to deal with the big price tag, and apply himself properly. I also wonder with Perez whether he was a bit too different from the traditional wingers of Ripley, Wilcox and Duff which gave us the success of before. There was a notable drop in quality at the back. Peacock and Dally weren't Hendry's quality, or necessary quality whatsoever. Another clanger was that Dailly, brought as a centre back spent the first half of the season rotating between different full back positions, which can't have helped him or the team. Sure, Kidd was hopeless, but Hodgeson gave him a heck of a bad start, with a ton of failed signings and breaking what was fixed rather than building upon it. The last minute signings of his reign, Blake, Marcolin and Konde, added nothing but expense. All in all, it was a poor situation to hand over. 

I can't remember at what point Sherwood left in the season but between his leaving and Flitty's injury, there was a huge loss of leadership. Throw in no Hendry in their too and that's a lot of leaders and maturity to lose from a squad.  

Kidd did pretty badly too. Whilst he had an eye for a player - most of his signings were solid - I do think it was too many, and tactically and his man management was pretty inept. The number of games we lost or didn't win was poor, and even now I can recall there seemed to be an it's ok we can fix it next week sort of atmosphere about the place. Certainly I recall that being the vibe of the interviews on Radio Rovers (which I miss, even if they do make certain posters on here seem unbiased) from that season. As for tactics they also seemed way off. That fateful Forest game I remember us whacking it long to Jansen and Gally, and wondering who on earth thought that was a good idea. If the long balls to Rhodes vs Millwall was a stupid idea in the FA Cup, this was its predecessor. Clueless. 

The more I think on it the more I do wonder about the injury situation. Really Flitty, Gally, McKinlay, Sutton and Flowers all missing for huge chunks. (Although with Flowers we got an upgrade in the performances of his lifetime from Filan, but still.) I find it hard to imagine that so many key players were out for so long. Did having another 25+ players to compete with or the club culture make a difference to how quickly we got them back? Was there thoughts, it's ok, we'll just buy our way out of trouble rather than improve what we had? 

Speaking of culture that seemed to be very different too. The 97-98 Rovers team were the original in your face Mark Hughes type Rovers. The defence, midfield and strike force was all up for a good battle. We weren't thugs on the pitch but the team could mix it. I remember in beating Arsenal away in 97-98 Gally was badly fouled and half the Rovers team came steaming into the confrontation. That up for the fight and togetherness just wasn't there the following year. Perhaps changes to personnel or change in management and culture,(or probably both) but that gritty togetherness and up for a scrap attitude was badly missing.  

Realistically there is no way we should have gone down. We had a ton of money, a good core team, a bunch of promising youngsters coming through - the best bunch in mu lifetime. We even managed to buy some good players too, well under Kidd anyway. So it seems like, even with unlucky injuries it should not have gone wrong. That suggests to me terrible man management, tactics and culture. 

Even looking back now it's hard to see it all as one full season such was the turnover in players. The season before was one of my favourites, and yet it seemed a lifetime ago at the end of the 99 relegation. It seems a huge transition from the hardy and spirited team of 97-98 into the promotion team of Souness only a couple of seasons later, which suggests far too much change was going on for Rovers good. 

Just a few thoughts from the perspective of a (then) 16 year old lad as to what went wrong.    

 

Fantastic summary. Thanks! 

[JPTSwindon]

I went to quite a few games that stood out during this rapid downward trajectory. 

Firstly the 2nd half of the 97/98 as we were tumbling down the table, I remember the 3-0 home defeat to a dreadful (Christian Gross) Spurs. I’d travelled up with my Spurs mate who phoned 606 on the way home to explain how shocked we were.

I went with the same mate to the Wimbledon (Selhurst Park) match in Sep/Oct? We’d just signed Blake for £4m (I am sure he was a panic buy as we’d missed out on someone else) and he gave it all, but was woeful. We drew 1-1. Absolutely tipped it down, my mate was drenched and had to meet his new girlfriends parents for the first time in some swanky holiday - they were appalled.

Finally the fateful Southampton 3-3 game with a few matches to go. Not only had we thrown away a 3-1 lead but were clinging on to the point in the end. Walking back after the match, it was the first time I (and seemingly many others around me) realised relegation was not just possible, but a very real threat. Thank God we still had Forest to play.

 

I agree with many of the comments already made. We spent heavily, but mostly dross (panic buys), we had too many players, no leaders and no-one seemed to have twigged that Ashley Ward relegated everyone he played for.

But for Filan it could have been much, much worse.

 

[Oldgregg86]

This was the year I got my very first season ticket ?

[MarkBRFC]

3 hours ago, JPTSwindon said:

I went to quite a few games that stood out during this rapid downward trajectory. 

Firstly the 2nd half of the 97/98 as we were tumbling down the table, I remember the 3-0 home defeat to a dreadful (Christian Gross) Spurs. I’d travelled up with my Spurs mate who phoned 606 on the way home to explain how shocked we were.

I went with the same mate to the Wimbledon (Selhurst Park) match in Sep/Oct? We’d just signed Blake for £4m (I am sure he was a panic buy as we’d missed out on someone else) and he gave it all, but was woeful. We drew 1-1. Absolutely tipped it down, my mate was drenched and had to meet his new girlfriends parents for the first time in some swanky holiday - they were appalled.

Finally the fateful Southampton 3-3 game with a few matches to go. Not only had we thrown away a 3-1 lead but were clinging on to the point in the end. Walking back after the match, it was the first time I (and seemingly many others around me) realised relegation was not just possible, but a very real threat. Thank God we still had Forest to play.

 

I agree with many of the comments already made. We spent heavily, but mostly dross (panic buys), we had too many players, no leaders and no-one seemed to have twigged that Ashley Ward relegated everyone he played for.

But for Filan it could have been much, much worse.

 

That was Dion Dublin, had bid accepted but he had no interest of coming here and went Villa instead.

[Amo]

2 hours ago, MarkBRFC said:

That was Dion Dublin, had bid accepted but he had no interest of coming here and went Villa instead.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sport/football/fa_carling_premiership/204011.stm

[LeftWinger]

13 hours ago, Amo said:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sport/football/fa_carling_premiership/204011.stm

Marshall told BBC News 24: "I feel that we have a clause that says if anyone offers £5m they can speak to the player.

"We were given permission to speak to Blackburn Rovers on Monday at apparantly a price of £6.75m.

I'm absolutely staggered at that. Obviously his agent knew this clause existed, why didn't we? Unless it was a deliberate ploy to try and price him out of moves to Villa or Newcastle.