Bristol City v Rovers. Wed 9th Dec. 7.45pm

[Bigdoggsteel]

54 minutes ago, TheRoversReturn said:

Your first sentence makes a lot of sense as it certainly wasn't solely his fault but the second is irrelevant. We're talking about his performance against Bristol City, not previously. He has "Credit in the bank" of course...but what's that got to do with discussing his performance in this one game?

Armstrong being greedy is fine, he's our main striking outlet. But today he just wasted possession time and again with next to no chance of scoring, while his teammates had sprinted up to support the attack.

I don't recall ever seeing such a selfish display to be honest.

Does anyone else? 

[DE.]

1 minute ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

I don't recall ever seeing such a selfish display to be honest.

Does anyone else? 

Arma can be selfish but last night was way over the top. He was playing like his life literally depended on him netting. Very strange. 

[Ewood Ace]

16 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Some fair points, but Armstrong scores or passes one of his many chances last night and we are in the play off places

If's, buts and maybe's. You could equally turn it around and say if the ref against Millwall gives them just one of the three penalties they should have had then we may have lost or at best drawn that game. Also if Bristol City take one of the good chances that they had in the first half then maybe they win the game comfortably.

Edited December 10, 2020 by Ewood Ace

[Bigdoggsteel]

32 minutes ago, Ewood Ace said:

If's, buts and maybe's. You could equally turn it around and say if the ref against Millwall gives them just one of the three penalties they should have had then we may have lost or at best drawn that game. Also if Bristol City take one of the good chances that they had in the first half then maybe they win the game comfortably.

Don't care about what other teams or the ref do. Armstrongs greed is something that shouldn't happen to the level it did last night. It's not it's, buts and maybes to say he should have been less greedy and passed to players in better positions. It's fact, he should have. 

[Bigdoggsteel]

37 minutes ago, DE. said:

Arma can be selfish but last night was way over the top. He was playing like his life literally depended on him netting. Very strange. 

He wasn't even considering passing when he picked the ball up. He was going to shoot, no matter what. You wouldn't see Shearer do that and he would have had a far better chance to score! 

Gallagher and Elliott should have torn him a new one. Some of the lads from the 94/95 certainly would have. It was outrageous. 

As you say, he can always be greedy, but now he has taken to taking on shots that are next to impossible, with better options available. 

Edited December 10, 2020 by Bigdoggsteel

[Bigdoggsteel]

Also why do people keep saying Bristol had these amazing chances? We were well on top. O'Dowdas chance was harder then at least 2 Armstrong had. The one where he did the awful first touch and then when he ran straight into the keeper trying to go round him.

I would actually add the chance where he nearly hit the corner flag with the left foot shot, just after their defender slid in. Roll that to Gallagher and it's a far easier chance. 

Another then where he shot straight into a crowd of defenders instead of playing it on again for Elliott who was completely free. Loves a shot into a crowd of defenders so he does. Luckily it worked against Millwall , although that was bouncing so was a bit of elevation on it to start with 

Edited December 10, 2020 by Bigdoggsteel

[Ewood Ace]

5 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Don't care about what other teams or the ref do. Armstrongs greed is something that shouldn't happen to the level it did last night. It's not it's, buts and maybes to say he should have been less greedy and passed to players in better positions. It's fact, he should have. 

Of course its ifs and buts there is no guarantee that if Armstrong had passed in certain circumstances that we would have scored. I don't recall him shooting at the expense of playing someone in for a really good chance. The trouble is by your own admittance you only look at a game from one side you talk about chances that we didn't score but aren't interested in easier chances that they should have scored.

If the ref had denied us three penalties and we had lost the game, I suspect that you would have used that as an excuse for us losing but because it doesn't support your defence of Mowbray you don't care about it. 

[Bigdoggsteel]

2 minutes ago, Ewood Ace said:

Of course its ifs and buts there is no guarantee that if Armstrong had passed in certain circumstances that we would have scored. I don't recall him shooting at the expense of playing someone in for a really good chance. The trouble is by your own admittance you only look at a game from one side you talk about chances that we didn't score but aren't interested in easier chances that they should have scored.

If the ref had denied us three penalties and we had lost the game, I suspect that you would have used that as an excuse for us losing but because it doesn't support your defence of Mowbray you don't care about it. 

Obviously I would blame the ref if he denied us 3 clear penalties. Who in their right mind wouldn't? 

See above for examples where he should have passed. Do you wantch the games actually? 

I have no idea what you bringing Mowbray up for in this context 

Edited December 10, 2020 by Bigdoggsteel

[Ewood Ace]

1 minute ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Obviously I would blame the ref if he denied us 3 clear penalties. Who in their right mind wouldn't? 

So when things go for us you don't care about them but if they go against us it's something to blame for not winning.

[Bigdoggsteel]

Just now, Ewood Ace said:

So when things go for us you don't care about them but if they go against us it's something to blame for not winning.

You are tying yourself in knots. I don't actually know what you are trying to say. What has this got to do with Armstrong being overly greedy? 

[Bigdoggsteel]

Watched the highlights again. I will add the first shot it shows Armstrong taking to the list of one's he should have passed, Gallagher made a great run. The keeper made the shot look better by somehow fumbling it. 

Their goal, ya Douglas, Ayala and Williams not good. Johnson maybe too. Douglas probably the main culprit and Williams for not getting closer. 

 

Edited December 10, 2020 by Bigdoggsteel

[Ewood Ace]

6 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

You are tying yourself in knots. I don't actually know what you are trying to say. What has this got to do with Armstrong being overly greedy? 

Because if things go in our favour you are not interested and if they don't work out for us you use it as an excuse. You said if but Armstrong scores or passes one of his many chances last night and we are in the play off places but that is a one sided view and it's full off buts and maybe's. I was saying that you if you want to go down the if but's and maybe route you could equally turn it around and say if the ref against Millwall gives them just one of the three penalties they should have had then we may have lost or at best drawn that game. Also if Bristol City take one of the good chances that they had in the first half then maybe they win the game comfortably. But you 'don't care' about that presumably because it doesn't fit the Rovers hard by narrative.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

3 hours ago, Yoogo said:

This season, we've averaged 1.75 points per home game, and just over 1.2 points per away game, so I don't know how you come to that conclusion.

I'm considering the quality of the opposition. Lets not get carried away with the games against 10 men.

[tomphil]

3 hours ago, TheRoversReturn said:

Your first sentence makes a lot of sense as it certainly wasn't solely his fault but the second is irrelevant. We're talking about his performance against Bristol City, not previously. He has "Credit in the bank" of course...but what's that got to do with discussing his performance in this one game?

Armstrong being greedy is fine, he's our main striking outlet. But today he just wasted possession time and again with next to no chance of scoring, while his teammates had sprinted up to support the attack.

The leadership on the pitch should be having a word in cases like that. The captain should be telling him to get his head up.

[ben_the_beast]

2 hours ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Don't care about what other teams or the ref do. Armstrongs greed is something that shouldn't happen to the level it did last night. It's not it's, buts and maybes to say he should have been less greedy and passed to players in better positions. It's fact, he should have. 

100% agree. It was that bad that I'm pretty sure any clubs monitoring him will have watched that with concern. There may be people sniffing around him in January. But I'm certain the mentality he showed yesterday has the potential to put a David Moyes off signing him. Simply because it was a mentality issue. Putting himself ahead of the team rather than just him having a poor performance. 

And to be honest. He really pissed me off. 

[4000Holes]

7 hours ago, jim mk2 said:

Would he ?

Better than Gallagher but neither of them are goalscorers

The way he has been playing recently Jim, it would have been his presence in the box.  He has become a real handful and I think it would have created opportunities nearer the goal.  I accept that he is not a natural goal scorer but that is not the full story.

[Stuart]

10 hours ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

Let's be fair Stuart, under normal circumstances he wouldn't have played last night. He must have put his hand up to play knowing he wasn't 100% fit. I can't criticise him for that.

How does that contradict anything I said?

He wasn’t good enough and wouldn’t have played if Lenihan had been available.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

1 hour ago, Stuart said:

How does that contradict anything I said?

He wasn’t good enough and wouldn’t have played if Lenihan had been available.

You're a hard man Stuart. When did he play last ? No run outs with the stiffs. Straight in at the deep end. I'd cut him some slack for that.

Edited December 10, 2020 by Tyrone Shoelaces

[Blue blood]

It might also be seen as the managers fault for having so many injury prone defenders. It's not just the games they miss which is the problem but the ones getting up to speed as well. 

[slowmo]

7 hours ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

I don't recall ever seeing such a selfish display to be honest.

Does anyone else? 

I agree and if it happens for a couple of games I would be pissed off as a team mate. It's a team game and if it was not his day he should have supported the team more . On the flip , every attempt he took, previously he has scored a similar.

Bit like a greedy/ selfish girlfriend who is top of the league for looks, so longs you keep scoring , you don't care about the personality

[47er]

 

10 hours ago, booth said:

He doesn't score but he is a nuisance which gives defenders something to think about. We missed that last night.

What we missed last night was some big bloke who could mix it with their central defence and give them something to worry about.We have no presence in the air up front .

There isn't anyone in the club like this Samual was the last one.. Whose fault is that?

They had it for the last few minutes and won the game.

 The basics are under-rated by TM.

[47er]

9 hours ago, speeeeeeedie said:

The story of Mowbray's Rovers. A defence that leaks like a sieve. Halfway improve that will add enough points to have the team knocking on the playoff door. 

As I keep saying, if the defence had been perfect, we would have drawn nil-nil.

Unlike previous losses where we are lamenting missed chances, we didn't miss any clear chances yesterday.

There simply weren't any.

[chaddyrovers]

15 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

Its not a particularly good sign that we have scored the most goals yet are only 10th. Not the hallmarks of an efficient side.

3 or 4 nil? I dont really remember any chances where I was shocked that we didnt score, most of our chances were speculative at best.

Armstrong's one on one chance

Ayala header. 

There is 2 clear cut chances for you. 

 

[Stuart]

15 hours ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

You're a hard man Stuart. When did he play last ? No run outs with the stiffs. Straight in at the deep end. I'd cut him some slack for that.

If he was a young lad then I’d agree. A seasoned player and international really shouldn’t be so far off the standard, never mind the pace.

If he was carrying an injury that affected his performance then Mowbray should have played a youngster. Our lack of depth in that position (at the club) continues to haunt us. It’s no use selling the likes of Matty Platt and then bemoaning having no options. Where was Annesley?

If he wasn’t injured then there’s no excuse. Mowbray just doesn’t trust young players.

[oldjamfan1]

6 minutes ago, Stuart said:

If he was a young lad then I’d agree. A seasoned player and international really shouldn’t be so far off the standard, never mind the pace.

If he was carrying an injury that affected his performance then Mowbray should have played a youngster. Our lack of depth in that position (at the club) continues to haunt us. It’s no use selling the likes of Matty Platt and then bemoaning having no options. Where was Annesley?

If he wasn’t injured then there’s no excuse. Mowbray just doesn’t trust young players.

Agree with you on Williams Stuart but I think Mowbray has played enough young players in his time - perhaps more than any other manager I've seen at Ewood. There were two 17 year olds on the pitch for us on Wednesday night, just for example.