Stoke City v Rovers (a) Sat. 19th Dec. 3pm

[Paul Mellelieu]

26 minutes ago, matt83 said:

If Stoke playing their way and get promoted and we finish 10th playing our way would you feel differently?

They won't.  I had enough of that kind of football under Sam. 

[Mercer]

39 minutes ago, Paul Mellelieu said:

If you want our team to play like Stoke, fine.  I don't.

We all want attractive football, however...............................

• Both Stoke and M'boro were in acute danger of relegation last season.
• O'Neill and Warnock kept them up - something Mowbray failed to do when appointed Rovers' manager
• O'Neill and Warnock have been in charge of their respective clubs for less than 12 months and after saving them from relegation, they have made them harder to beat and are both 5 points better off than Rovers. 
• Mowbray has had 4 years at it with Rovers and in less than a quarter of that time, O'Neill and Warnock have got their clubs into better positions and, IMO, are more likely to get into the play offs. 
• Like Mark Hughes did with us, O'Neill and Warnock are first making their teams difficult to beat and then with better players (remember our progression to the likes of Bentley, Bellamy, Santa Cruz etc) the style will come as well as the results - that is evolution whereas Mowbray's evolution, IMO, is just bullsh1t for the owners and about self preservation.
• And, let us not forget, IMO, Mowbray's teams have served up some of the most dire football I've seen with Rovers over his 4 years in charge.

I would take O'Neill and Warnock every day of the week over Mowbray as would, I suspect, the majority of Rovers' fans.  I think the 'happy clappers' will be playing the same tune in years to come as Mowbray consolidates us as a mid table Championship team at best.

 

 

Edited December 19, 2020 by Mercer

[Paul Mellelieu]

Well we have our views, but I'd rather walk the dog than watch teams led by Warnock and O'Neil.  And I don't have a dog.

[roversfan99]

Im not even convinced how attractive our football is. Quite a few games in recent weeks we have played boring football. None moreso than on Wednesday, after the game I was made up because we won. End of. Anyone who couldnt enjoy us winning even if the football was more pragmatic has got their priorities wrong.

[JacknOry]

8 hours ago, darrenrover said:

So they've just sat at home with their feet up since Wednesday chaddy, have they? and if so would you find that acceptable?

They don't have to be running their bollocks off doing laps round the pitches and pull ups on the crossbars, for it to constitute using the word "work"!

"Work" is an all encompassing word, which could include any of the above: like sitting down as a group and discussing what's going wrong recently and how we could improve, to what tactics should we use today based upon Stoke specifically and looking to exploit their weaknesses etc, etc,  etc.

At times, you've a lot to contribute and I enjoy your insights into football generally and statistical analyses etc but on occasions, increasingly so recently, you just want to dismiss anyone else's opinions as if they're stupid and are argumentative for arguings sake. To be frank, you really piss me off on occasions, this being one of them.

Please don't come back with a childish response like "put me on ignore then".

Now I've got that off my chest: COYB!!!👌

love it

[Mercer]

2 minutes ago, Paul Mellelieu said:

Well we have our views, but I'd rather walk the dog than watch teams led by Warnock and O'Neil.  And I don't have a dog.

Well you should be very fit as our performance against Rotherham, IMO, absolutely stunk!

Happy dog walking then.

[ben_the_beast]

24 minutes ago, matt83 said:

 

 

I’m hope you lads think being sincere here. I genuinely respect alternative view points even if I disagree with them. But I’ve often wondered what the pro Mowbray fans are seeing that I’m not. So I appreciate the replies or posts in as much as some of the more pro Mowbray advocates I think I finally understand what it is. Am I right in saying it’s not about results it’s about style.

So result oriented fans are tearing their hair out at stagnation or regression. And performance orientated fans aren’t overly concerned with positions so long as they’re entertained.

Didn't say I was a fan of Mowbrays tactics. Just said Stoke were and are crap. And I'm right 

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

21 minutes ago, Tugayisgod said:

All I know is that if we played week in, week out the way Stoke played today, ie sticking 10 men behind the ball and say "break us down" (and that's at home!), then this message board would go into meltdown even more than normsl

Not if it got us in the Play Offs. 

[JacknOry]

4 hours ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Souttor playing CB for them today. Weren't loads on here saying he was shite when linked with us?

yeah i suggested him...

 

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

6 minutes ago, Paul Mellelieu said:

Well we have our views, but I'd rather walk the dog than watch teams led by Warnock and O'Neil.  And I don't have a dog.

Theres more chance of you walking the dog you don't have than watching Rovers make the PO's under Mowbray. 

[JacknOry]

3 hours ago, DE. said:

Only 5 points off the playoffs lads. Can't beat a team above us or sustain a consistent run of form, but it's only 5 points. Once Dack comes back from over a year out with a serious injury and Trav returns from months out we'll be unstoppable.

 

Thats what they will say - drives me crazy! 

[Ewood Ace]

18 minutes ago, Paul Mellelieu said:

I had enough of that kind of football under Sam. 

And it was playing that sort of football under Big Sam that we were last successful. A solid defence and top half of the Premiership. The day Allardyce was sacked is without doubt one of the most disastrous days in this clubs history. How people can still criticise and moan about Sam's football after what has happened in the decade since really does beggars belief.

 

 

[chaddyrovers]

27 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

I dont want my team to necessarily play as Stoke do. I want my team to win as many games as possible to realise their ambitions, style is not important.

We played direct football in League 1 and got promoted and I suspect that your lust for playing "attractive positive possession" based football wasnt prevalent then.

Mowbray change his tactics in the league 1 season cos his original plan wasnt to play direct style. 

So with our current squad, how would set us up in terms of style, formation wide and tactical then please? 

[chaddyrovers]

25 minutes ago, Mercer said:

O'Neill have been in charge of their respective clubs for less than 12 months

O'Neill has been at Stoke for over 13 months now and joined them on 8th November 2019

[JacknOry]

59 minutes ago, Paul Mellelieu said:

If you want our team to play like Stoke, fine.  I don't.

And if Stoke get promoted and we dont?

[roversfan99]

3 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Mowbray change his tactics in the league 1 season cos his original plan wasnt to play direct style. 

So with our current squad, how would set us up in terms of style, formation wide and tactical then please? 

The point was that when we played with a pragmatic style and got results, in your head only the results were important. Now we are supposedly playing "attractive football yet its breeding further inconsistency and we are not progressing, its the style that matters. As ever, your points are riddled with inconsistencies and hypocrisy.

[Wood26]

Can’t believe Watford sacked their manager.

On the game, that’s how to beat us. We really struggle when teams sit like that, hopefully Dack can be the difference.

Even when Preston gave up, we struggled to really get in behind them despite the score.

[chaddyrovers]

2 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

The point was that when we played with a pragmatic style and got results, in your head only the results were important. Now we are supposedly playing "attractive football yet its breeding further inconsistency and we are not progressing, its the style that matters. As ever, your points are riddled with inconsistencies and hypocrisy.

So with our current squad, how would set us up in terms of style, formation wise and tactical then please? 

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

1 minute ago, chaddyrovers said:

So with our current squad, how would set us up in terms of style, formation wise and tactical then please? 

What matters most, results or performances please? 

[Doogs]

1 hour ago, Gavlar Somerset Rover! said:

Little something called organisation goes a hell of a long way! 6 shut outs in 7 for Stoke. O’Neill would seem to be doing a Hughes with them - not pretty to watch but starting from the back and getting results. 

Just what we should be doing.. 

[Doogs]

Just now, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

What matters most, results or performances please? 

Results

[JHRover]

36 minutes ago, Mercer said:

We all want attractive football, however...............................

• Both Stoke and M'boro were in acute danger of relegation last season.
• O'Neill and Warnock kept them up - something Mowbray failed to do when appointed Rovers' manager
• O'Neill and Warnock have been in charge of their respective clubs for less than 12 months and after saving them from relegation, they have made them harder to beat and are both 5 points better off than Rovers. 
• Mowbray has had 4 years at it with Rovers and in less than a quarter of that time, O'Neill and Warnock have got their clubs into better positions and, IMO, are more likely to get into the play offs. 
• Like Mark Hughes did with us, O'Neill and Warnock are first making their teams difficult to beat and then with better players (remember our progression to the likes of Bentley, Bellamy, Santa Cruz etc) the style will come as well as the results - that is evolution whereas Mowbray's evolution, IMO, is just bullsh1t for the owners and about self preservation.
• And, let us not forget, IMO, Mowbray's teams have served up some of the most dire football I've seen with Rovers over his 4 years in charge.

I would take O'Neill and Warnock every day of the week over Mowbray as would, I suspect, the majority of Rovers' fans.  I think the 'happy clappers' will be playing the same tune in years to come as Mowbray consolidates us as a mid table Championship team at best.

 

 

Post of the week

[JacknOry]

2 minutes ago, Doogs said:

Results

Chaddy is an Ipswich fan - prfers style over results.

[JacknOry]

39 minutes ago, Mercer said:

We all want attractive football, however...............................

• Both Stoke and M'boro were in acute danger of relegation last season.
• O'Neill and Warnock kept them up - something Mowbray failed to do when appointed Rovers' manager
• O'Neill and Warnock have been in charge of their respective clubs for less than 12 months and after saving them from relegation, they have made them harder to beat and are both 5 points better off than Rovers. 
• Mowbray has had 4 years at it with Rovers and in less than a quarter of that time, O'Neill and Warnock have got their clubs into better positions and, IMO, are more likely to get into the play offs. 
• Like Mark Hughes did with us, O'Neill and Warnock are first making their teams difficult to beat and then with better players (remember our progression to the likes of Bentley, Bellamy, Santa Cruz etc) the style will come as well as the results - that is evolution whereas Mowbray's evolution, IMO, is just bullsh1t for the owners and about self preservation.
• And, let us not forget, IMO, Mowbray's teams have served up some of the most dire football I've seen with Rovers over his 4 years in charge.

I would take O'Neill and Warnock every day of the week over Mowbray as would, I suspect, the majority of Rovers' fans.  I think the 'happy clappers' will be playing the same tune in years to come as Mowbray consolidates us as a mid table Championship team at best.

 

 

Mercer might like his wine but it is hard to argue against this.

[Blue blood]

13 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

O'Neill has been at Stoke for over 13 months now and joined them on 8th November 2019

13 months Vs 3 years - the point still stands. 

It's bad when you try defending TM by quibbling over whether another manager has had 12 or 13 months...