First Halves at Ewood

[JHRover]

Ok so after yet another non event first half at Ewood I have finally got round to doing something I've been thinking about for quite some time and have reviewed our home first half performances under Mowbray's management going back to the League One season. 

I've done this because I have formed a perception over the years that our home games will more often than not follow the same old route where we might start brightly and apply pressure for the first 10-15 minutes but then after that we regress into nothingness until half time. We seem to create very little, if anything, after the first ten minutes at home. 

As a season ticket holder at the Darwen End of the ground my experience is one of very few goals or excitement as we usually shoot towards that end first whenever possible. 

We only seem to click into gear later on in games often when it is either too late or the opposition have got the lead.

So I go back through the record books.

Since we went down to League One we've had 80 league games at Ewood. On only 33 of those 80 games have we scored in the first half. So in well over half our home games we've failed to score in the first half. 

Indeed in those 33 games we have only managed to score in the first half more than once on 8 occasions, and only scored more than twice on 1 occasion (this season with 3 vs Wycombe).

IN 80 HOME LEAGUE GAMES ACROSS 3.5 SEASONS WE HAVE SCORED 41 FIRST HALF HOME GOALS. 

Now, I get that games are 90 minutes, not 45. I get that you're of course only looking at one side of the bargain here and not factoring in clean sheets or second half goals. But it shows that over a long time now we have proven ourselves to be ineffective, blunt, and altogether not good enough at doing the business in the first half of games. The majority of the time we are abysmal, creating next to nothing and allowing the game to pass by without doing enough. 

It is therefore no wonder when the likes of Sheff Wednesday turn up, limit us and keep us at arms length for so long. Time after time we fall behind to next to nothing pressure wise and end up clicking into gear in the last 20 minutes when it is too late. 

 

 

 

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

I wasn't impressed with the way we only seemed to play for 30 minutes ( 40 minutes max ) per game in our promotion season.  Most of the time we were poor starters then also. That was usually good enough to get a result at that level but obviously it's nowhere near good enough at this level. I've said before that I would have been actively looking for another manager at the end of that season, I've never had much regard for our current manager.

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

8 hours ago, JHRover said:

Ok so after yet another non event first half at Ewood I have finally got round to doing something I've been thinking about for quite some time and have reviewed our home first half performances under Mowbray's management going back to the League One season. 

I've done this because I have formed a perception over the years that our home games will more often than not follow the same old route where we might start brightly and apply pressure for the first 10-15 minutes but then after that we regress into nothingness until half time. We seem to create very little, if anything, after the first ten minutes at home. 

As a season ticket holder at the Darwen End of the ground my experience is one of very few goals or excitement as we usually shoot towards that end first whenever possible. 

We only seem to click into gear later on in games often when it is either too late or the opposition have got the lead.

So I go back through the record books.

Since we went down to League One we've had 80 league games at Ewood. On only 33 of those 80 games have we scored in the first half. So in well over half our home games we've failed to score in the first half. 

Indeed in those 33 games we have only managed to score in the first half more than once on 8 occasions, and only scored more than twice on 1 occasion (this season with 3 vs Wycombe).

IN 80 HOME LEAGUE GAMES ACROSS 3.5 SEASONS WE HAVE SCORED 41 FIRST HALF HOME GOALS. 

Now, I get that games are 90 minutes, not 45. I get that you're of course only looking at one side of the bargain here and not factoring in clean sheets or second half goals. But it shows that over a long time now we have proven ourselves to be ineffective, blunt, and altogether not good enough at doing the business in the first half of games. The majority of the time we are abysmal, creating next to nothing and allowing the game to pass by without doing enough. 

It is therefore no wonder when the likes of Sheff Wednesday turn up, limit us and keep us at arms length for so long. Time after time we fall behind to next to nothing pressure wise and end up clicking into gear in the last 20 minutes when it is too late. 

 

 

 

It was what made his 'we always start on the front foot' spiel of the last two seasons so laughable. Mowbray starts with the intention not to lose games, he doesn't start with the intention to win them. Hence the shitty 1st half performances. He's a reactive manager - safety first, men behind the ball, and only change if its going wrong. His plan B is to allow a couple more to get forward. 

This season we looked like we actually would get on the 'front foot' and attack teams from the off. Maybe the loss of Travis has been a bigger blow than anyone imagines so looking forward to pressing teams high up the pitch again when he's back. 

[DaveyB]

24 minutes ago, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

It was what made his 'we always start on the front foot' spiel of the last two seasons so laughable. Mowbray starts with the intention not to lose games, he doesn't start with the intention to win them. Hence the shitty 1st half performances. He's a reactive manager - safety first, men behind the ball, and only change if its going wrong. His plan B is to allow a couple more to get forward. 

This season we looked like we actually would get on the 'front foot' and attack teams from the off. Maybe the loss of Travis has been a bigger blow than anyone imagines so looking forward to pressing teams high up the pitch again when he's back. 

That’s just bollocks

Last season we scored 15 goals in the first 15 minutes of games (I don’t know how that stacks up against other teams in the end, but I remember against Brentford the commentator on Sky saying that it the most in the championship at that point) and this season, so far, we have 5 inside the first 15 minutes. 
So the idea that we only start playing after we go behind is just not backed up by the stats. 
 

And the idea that we play for a draw, camped with men behind the ball - do you even watch our games?
If anything our problem is that we commit too many players forward and get caught on the break - see the goals conceded yesterday, at Watford, at Bournemouth, against Reading... to name just a few

[Stuart]

28 minutes ago, DaveyB said:

That’s just bollocks

Last season we scored 15 goals in the first 15 minutes of games (I don’t know how that stacks up against other teams in the end, but I remember against Brentford the commentator on Sky saying that it the most in the championship at that point) and this season, so far, we have 5 inside the first 15 minutes. 
So the idea that we only start playing after we go behind is just not backed up by the stats. 
 

And the idea that we play for a draw, camped with men behind the ball - do you even watch our games?
If anything our problem is that we commit too many players forward and get caught on the break - see the goals conceded yesterday, at Watford, at Bournemouth, against Reading... to name just a few

Slightly conflating different things there.

Mowbray isn’t responsible for when goals are scored. Goals happen for a variety of reasons, often mistakes by the opposition.

What Mowbray does do is select eleven players and assigns them a position. You can get a feel for the game plan by looking at the personnel selected and those on the bench.

With very few exceptions (the ones that generate excitement from fans and often result in winning games) Mowbray sets up to keep things tight and to play football later on the game. This happens time and again. If it’s 0-0 then that later attacking approach sees us “going for a win” until the last few minutes when we tend to stick but too often we are chasing a point. Yesterday was notable that once we got the equaliser we didn’t go all out for a winner. Tapping the ball about until the clock eventually ran out with us having the ball in the middle of the park. This was the Pulis effect. (Big Sam would have been furious yesterday).

Where Mowbray compounds matters is his awful approach to substitutions. Every once in a while he gets it right but it seems that these are flukes given how often his subs are too little and too late. The EFL have allowed five subs - due to fixture congestion and injuries, yet Mowbray doesn’t maximise them and yet we still have regular injuries. Giving Mowbray more options is exactly the wrong thing for Rovers. He has always been at his best when he has had to galvanise his ‘few good men’, forced into a level of consistency that a fully fit squad doesn’t. Too many changes, too much overthinking what an opposition manager will do. Playing the opposition on paper and on reputation instead of on the grass and on the day.

[davulsukur]

1 hour ago, DaveyB said:

That’s just bollocks

Last season we scored 15 goals in the first 15 minutes of games (I don’t know how that stacks up against other teams in the end, but I remember against Brentford the commentator on Sky saying that it the most in the championship at that point) and this season, so far, we have 5 inside the first 15 minutes. 
So the idea that we only start playing after we go behind is just not backed up by the stats. 
 

And the idea that we play for a draw, camped with men behind the ball - do you even watch our games?
If anything our problem is that we commit too many players forward and get caught on the break - see the goals conceded yesterday, at Watford, at Bournemouth, against Reading... to name just a few

We weren't hit on the break yesterday, we should have been fully in control of that situation but yet another piece of abysmal defending let us down, albeit the goal scored was a superb strike.

Still Douglas shouldn’t have headed the ball into Ayala in the first place. Poor Communication or just a lapse in concentration, either way, unacceptable.

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

1 hour ago, DaveyB said:

If anything our problem is that we commit too many players forward and get caught on the break - see the goals conceded yesterday

That's just not true is it. A hoof forward to the chuckle brothers (to me- to you), who inevitably mess it up, is not being hit on the break.

 

1 hour ago, DaveyB said:

do you even watch our games?

right back atcha. 

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

In all league games we've scored 14 goals in the 1st half this season.

6 of those came against Wycombe and Derby. 

That makes it 8 first-half goals in the other 19 games. 

Hardly 'front-foot'. 

[DaveyB]

1 hour ago, Stuart said:

Slightly conflating different things there.

Mowbray isn’t responsible for when goals are scored. Goals happen for a variety of reasons, often mistakes by the opposition.

What Mowbray does do is select eleven players and assigns them a position. You can get a feel for the game plan by looking at the personnel selected and those on the bench.

With very few exceptions (the ones that generate excitement from fans and often result in winning games) Mowbray sets up to keep things tight and to play football later on the game. This happens time and again. If it’s 0-0 then that later attacking approach sees us “going for a win” until the last few minutes when we tend to stick but too often we are chasing a point. Yesterday was notable that once we got the equaliser we didn’t go all out for a winner. Tapping the ball about until the clock eventually ran out with us having the ball in the middle of the park. 

You’re right - it’s just pure coincidence and dumb luck that we score more than most inside the first 15 minutes and absolutely nothing to do with us attacking teams from the start of games. 
 

And yesterday, after the equaliser, we had 3 decent chances to score and were camped in their half for the majority of injury time. 
You’re confusing going all out for a win with launching the ball into the box (which given the height of our team compared to theirs would probably not have yielded much success)

[RevidgeBlue]

1 hour ago, DaveyB said:

That’s just bollocks

Last season we scored 15 goals in the first 15 minutes of games (I don’t know how that stacks up against other teams in the end, but I remember against Brentford the commentator on Sky saying that it the most in the championship at that point) and this season, so far, we have 5 inside the first 15 minutes. 
So the idea that we only start playing after we go behind is just not backed up by the stats. 
 

And the idea that we play for a draw, camped with men behind the ball - do you even watch our games?
If anything our problem is that we commit too many players forward and get caught on the break - see the goals conceded yesterday, at Watford, at Bournemouth, against Reading... to name just a few

It really isn't.

Of our five goals in the first 15 mins this season three of them came in the same game against Derby!. One of the others was a pen against Coventry after they'd had a man sent off and the other one was an equaliser in the third minute against Reading!

When Mowbray first came I'm sure he said his aim was to stay in games until half time and then take it from there second half. He's probably twigged that isn't a very popular point of view so he hasn't mentioned it recently but home games were exactly the same under Gary Bowyer. It almost wasn't worth turning up until 4p.m.

To me this is no good at all. Its hard enough to win games over 90 mins let alone 45.

[DaveyB]

10 minutes ago, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

That's just not true is it. A hoof forward to the chuckle brothers (to me- to you), who inevitably mess it up, is not being hit on the break.

A hoof forward to a lone attacker, over the majority of our team (who were in their half, which turned our fullback and caused a mistake in communication.  
Maybe not ‘hit on the break’ as such, certainly not good defending (not even close) but also not exactly evidence of a team camped in with 10 men behind the ball

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

1 minute ago, DaveyB said:

You’re right - it’s just pure coincidence and dumb luck that we score more than most inside the first 15 minutes and absolutely nothing to do with us attacking teams from the start of games. 

You're right - we've scored in the first 15 minutes in a massive 3 games this season. 

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

Just now, DaveyB said:

A hoof forward to a lone attacker, over the majority of our team (who were in their half, which turned our fullback and caused a mistake in communication.  
Maybe not ‘hit on the break’ as such, certainly not good defending (not even close) but also not exactly evidence of a team camped in with 10 men behind the ball

Watch the games in future and see how many men we get in the box. Invariably the ball goes back to the full-backs from Elliot/BB/ etc because there's just AA in the box so there's no point crossing it in. 

And we were discussing getting hit on the break - a hoof forward is not that. It also doesn't prove we're putting them under pressure at the other end. 

[Stuart]

1 minute ago, DaveyB said:

You’re right - it’s just pure coincidence and dumb luck that we score more than most inside the first 15 minutes and absolutely nothing to do with us attacking teams from the start of games. 
 

And yesterday, after the equaliser, we had 3 decent chances to score and were camped in their half for the majority of injury time. 
You’re confusing going all out for a win with launching the ball into the box (which given the height of our team compared to theirs would probably not have yielded much success)

Hmm. Sarcasm. Doesn’t really add a lot to this particular debate and ignores the system issues I mentioned.

Interesting to see Rev’s post about the early goal circumstances. I hadn’t researched it that deeply but it backs up what I have seen with my own eyes - for most of the last 3.5 years.

I thought we had turned a corner this season but it seems our early free-scoring form was against the divisions dummies but that didn’t continue yesterday. Maybe another coincidence that we played some poor teams at just the right time.

We will be a WDL (61 point) team ad infinitum under TM, well, for as long as Venkys continue to bankroll ‘project midtable pension pots’.

That ‘D’ is a big problem two points dropped every three games. From where we are today to where we need to be, we need to turn half of those D’s into W’s. Those 12 or 14 points (6 or 7 of the 12 or 13 draws) would turn 61 into 73-75 and really make us top six contenders.

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

In their last 13 matches, Rovers have now managed just two goals in the opening half an hour, before a fifth consecutive first half passed them by without a goal.

On Dack's day, were Rovers shown respect or been worked out? | Lancashire Telegraph

[Sparks Rover]

10 hours ago, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

In their last 13 matches, Rovers have now managed just two goals in the opening half an hour, before a fifth consecutive first half passed them by without a goal.

On Dack's day, were Rovers shown respect or been worked out? | Lancashire Telegraph

I believe that the forwards have lost confidence/faith in the system.  They've scored loads, played some of the best football early season and scored some of the  best goals....never been anywhere but mid table. 

The attackers will be disheartened as they probably don't see the value.  

We have to change the manager right now with a window coming.  Pearson please.

 

[HowieFive0]

 For the 2019/20 season 1st Half Only Table (ie taking the 1st Half as the final result) has us in 10 th position 5pts off 6th 

2nd Half Only Table  we finished 15th but were 15pts off 6th.!!

Yes first half goals may not be overflowing but position wise we were better off with our 1stHalf results than our 2nd. Maybe the myth we only turn up in the 2nd half may not be completely true!

[RevidgeBlue]

3 minutes ago, HowieFive0 said:

Maybe the myth we only turn up in the 2nd half may not be completely true!

Last season was last season.

Nevertheless, with half the season gone this time round, we'very only scored once at home in the first 15 mins and that was an equaliser!

That would very much tend to support JH's original assertion that we don't blow sides away at home.

[HowieFive0]

1 minute ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Last season was last season.

Nevertheless, with half the season gone this time round, we'very only scored once at home in the first 15 mins and that was an equaliser!

That would very much tend to support JH's original assertion that we don't blow sides away at home.

Yep it was last season ..agree with you there but JH did quote over the last three seasons This season we re 13th in blowing away sides in the 1st half hardly ground breaking i know ...but hardly pi55 poor.

Anyway its the result that matters ..we could be 4 up at HT but if we concede 5 in the 2nd Half its pretty pointless!

We can go all season not scoring in the 1st half for me but if we end up winning ..job done! (plus im in the BBE so will get to see a few goals first hand!)

 

[Bigdoggsteel]

I think Mowbray was actually using the 5 subs better at the end of last season. He seems to have muddled himself up. I can only assume it's stress and pressure(not excusing it before someone accuses me of that). I know some don't think it,but I believe if he doesn't get into the play offs this year he knows he is gone. The Venkys might not be football experts ,but they don't seem to be idiots when it comes to money (initial purchase of Rovers and subsequent losses aside). They surely expect some progress. 

I think what's killing us is simply a combination of not taking chances and then being prone to cataclysmic individual errors at the back far too often. We are on top in so many games and we seem to miss a lot of chances. Next thing the opposition get a chance , more difficult than anything we have fashioned and bang,it's a goal. Less so in the last few games as it seems teams know to defend deep and pack the defence as we don't have the trickery a la Dack to unlock a defence or the physicality to get the ball into the box from decent crossing positions. 

Mowbray clearly doesn't have the confidence or whatever you call it to change formations and tactics in game. His tactic is bring on more attackers and let them do what they want. The problem is we are still predictable doing that and the likes of Holtby doesn't do enough. Dack did more the other day offensively than Holtby had in 5 game I would say. Rothwell can do it, but not often enough. Our attackers are all very similar too, small and fast. I don't know what to say about Gallagher other than I feel sorry for him. 

I'm very interested to see how we go with our best players on the field. 

Edited December 28, 2020 by Bigdoggsteel

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

5 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

I believe if he doesn't get into the play offs this year he knows he is gone. The Venkys might not be football experts ,but they don't seem to be idiots when it comes to money (initial purchase of Rovers and subsequent losses aside). They surely expect some progress. 

That's the great unknown really. You'd think at some point they'd realise it's just not going to happen with Mowbray, but it really depends on their ambition. Owning a club, having a nice bloke running the show and not being fleeced by dodgy geezers might be all they aspire to. Who knows?

[Bigdoggsteel]

21 minutes ago, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

That's the great unknown really. You'd think at some point they'd realise it's just not going to happen with Mowbray, but it really depends on their ambition. Owning a club, having a nice bloke running the show and not being fleeced by dodgy geezers might be all they aspire to. Who knows?

Ya, for sure it's the great unknown,but surely they see the Premier League as the only way to recoup their losses? Otherwise why would they even care what division we are in? To be fair they have supported him and kept the academy going, so I would think(and hope) they have some ambition to push on. 

The issue is they don't know football and it's nuances, particularly being so far away, so these type of decisions are left to "football people" and they don't have a great track record with them. 

Like I think it's clear they aren't "bad" like some owners out to make a buck and get out. They have been fleeced by sharks, but do appear to be here for the long haul. At a certain point they deserve a bit of success , but ultimately that's in their hands and as I said, they just don't really get football. A managerial appointment of any actual intent has yet to happen under them. If Mowbray does go this year and with Dack now signed for a couple of more years, some good young players around, they need to make an appointment to get people excited and encourage players to stick around. I think that's why I don't even really get in discussions about "Mowbray out" ,it's pointless. I got way too invested in the Kean saga and it's just not good. They will do what they want and to this point, managerial appointments in particular,nobody has any idea what they will do. 

Edited December 28, 2020 by Bigdoggsteel