Rovers v Watford Wed 24th Feb 19:45

[47er]

Expecting a big loss.

[Hoochie Bloochie Mama]

6 minutes ago, 47er said:

Expecting a big loss.

Yep, at least half a training ground. 

 

[Bigdoggsteel]

1 hour ago, Roverall said:

Thanks for that. I had thought the video-feed was only available to season ticket holders.

It's a form of masochism stumping up for Tony's dross, but I am drawn nonetheless, moth to a flame.

No, it's actually better this way cos you can pick and choose what games to watch. Last weekend was the first game this season I couldn't watch. So clearly I too am a masochist 

[Bigdoggsteel]

I never want us to lose, but a win here really serves no purpose other than give Tony more tripe to reel off about how "good we are"

Performance focused manager when we lose, result focused manager when we win. The problem is the performances are shite too. More spin from this lad than a politician. He is doing my head in. I think the game is up now though. 

 

[G Somerset Rover]

I can't see the death roll ending here. We'll get done by Watford; they'll have far too much for us. Out of form, sh*te at Ewood, can't defend, can't score. I do think it'll be by the odd goal or two, max, though.

What will happen though is we'll (somehow) beat Coventry at the weekend and the Mowbray brigade will be back out in full force heralding our 'improved performances over the past three matches despite not the best results.'

[roversfan99]

Nothing can be gained from us losing, it will not accelerate the managers departure and if it means Mowbray saying "how good we are" afterwards then so be it.

[Mercer]

33 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

I never want us to lose, but a win here really serves no purpose other than give Tony more tripe to reel off about how "good we are"

Performance focused manager when we lose, result focused manager when we win. The problem is the performances are shite too. More spin from this lad than a politician. He is doing my head in. I think the game is up now though. 

 

You are right.

We need to get smashed in a few games.

I think we need 'Maggott', Mowbray and Venus out of our club asap.

Kean and Coyle were vilified, however, at least they didn't try to downgrade our magnificent Brockhall complex which is still the envy of many, many football clubs which is what I suspect the 'Coventry three' are very much part of.

[Colt Seavers]

8 hours ago, perthblue02 said:

Was it Watford who turned up at Ewood once, really late (motorway delay?)  and played the game in Rovers away kit?, maybe late seventies / early eighties (they seem to meld into one nowadays) or is my memory playing tricks.

I don't know if we are remembering the same incident, but Watford turned up about an hour late in the 1st leg of the semi final play off game in 88/89. They were stuck in traffic but played in their own kit which they changed into whilst on the coach. I think they were allowed a few minutes to stretch before we kicked off. 

[roversfan99]

Just now, Mercer said:

You are right.

We need to get smashed in a few games.

I think we need 'Maggott', Mowbray and Venus out of our club asap.

Kean and Coyle were vilified, however, at least they didn't try to downgrade our magnificent Brockhall complex which is still the envy of many, many football clubs which is what I suspect the 'Coventry three' are very much part of.

That may be true, but a couple of losses wont lead to that, so hoping to get "smashed a few times" is pointlessly counter productive.

There is no evidence that Mowbray is behind the downgrade of Brockhall.

[Mercer]

8 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Nothing can be gained from us losing, it will not accelerate the managers departure and if it means Mowbray saying "how good we are" afterwards then so be it.

Really?

I think if Mowbray had done his job. we would be back in the PL or going back there this season.

There is little doubt in my mind that Mowbray's, IMO, failure to move the club forward in his four years is the root cause of huge financial losses and the decisions made by the club about Brockhall. 

Have said it time and time again - a club like Rovers needs a top class a CEO and Football Manager.  We have Waggott and Mowbray - IMO, enough said. 

[roversfan99]

1 minute ago, Mercer said:

Really?

I think if Mowbray had done his job. we would be back in the PL or going back there this season.

There is little doubt in my mind that Mowbray's, IMO, failure to move the club forward in his four years is the root cause of huge financial losses and the decisions made by the club about Brockhall. 

Have said it time and time again - a club like Rovers needs a top class a CEO and Football Manager.  We have Waggott and Mowbray - IMO, enough said. 

I want a change of manager and have for a bit.

But will hoping to get battered guarantee or even make that likely? No. But as with calling Owen Coyle "Coyley" and suggesting bets on us beating every team by 3 or 4 goals, your comments are done purely to provoke and court controversy.

To pin the blame on Mowbray for indirectly prompting the owners to downgrade the training facilities is a stretch even for you.

[Mercer]

3 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

That may be true, but a couple of losses wont lead to that, so hoping to get "smashed a few times" is pointlessly counter productive.

There is no evidence that Mowbray is behind the downgrade of Brockhall.

I think you are naive.

At the very least, Mowbray, as football manager, would have been consulted.  Our owners, allegedly, trust and respect his opinion.  IMO, any football manager worth his salt would fight tooth and nail to preserve such a wonderful facility.  Footballers can be sold and replaced.  Brockhall can't.

Also, how many references has Mowbray made in recent times about NOT using the indoor facility as not good on the body - IMO, it all makes sense.  I don't think Mowbray is quite as thick as sometimes he seems.  

[Stuart]

3 hours ago, arbitro said:

The whole Nyambe thing on Saturday just didn't sit right. When he came off he sat on the perimeter wall by the dugout with only Damien Johnson in shot with him. He clearly didn't go back to the changing room for treatment and didn't appear to have any ice on his hamstring. Then Mowbrays wild assertion post match that he might be out for months and yesterday we learn he could be fit for Wednesday.

Very strange.

What is it about players called Ryan having their injuries overstated?

He’ll be in traction next. 😉 

[roversfan99]

2 minutes ago, Mercer said:

I think you are naive.

At the very least, Mowbray, as football manager, would have been consulted.  Our owners, allegedly, trust and respect his opinion.  IMO, any football manager worth his salt would fight tooth and nail to preserve such a wonderful facility.  Footballers can be sold and replaced.  Brockhall can't.

Also, how many references has Mowbray made in recent times about NOT using the indoor facility as not good on the body - IMO, it all makes sense.  I don't think Mowbray is quite as thick as sometimes he seems.  

I never said that he is thick, I just am content with criticising him for what I perceive to be an on field stagnation, confusing tactics, poor transfers etc, rather than getting too worked up with how he acts on the touchline, what he says in his interviews or indeed in your case, based on conspiracy theories dreamt up about what set of events may have played out prior to the owners selling part of the training ground.

[Mercer]

1 minute ago, roversfan99 said:

 

To pin the blame on Mowbray for indirectly prompting the owners to downgrade the training facilities is a stretch even for you.

Please get your facts right!

Where have I said that?

I said our lack of success (failure to get back to the PL) and, IMO, stagnation under Mowbray and therefore substantial ongoing financial losses has probably resulted in our owners looking at ways to claw back some capital and reduce losses.

I think if I were in the Raos' shoes, I would be saying 'right Tony, time to cash in on the diamonds you bought in Brereton and Gallagher'..................!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Richard Oakley]

13 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

That may be true, but a couple of losses wont lead to that, so hoping to get "smashed a few times" is pointlessly counter productive.

There is no evidence that Mowbray is behind the downgrade of Brockhall.

There's no evidence Mowbray isn't. Mowbray has complete control over football and Brockall's part of his remit.

If we got stuff in the middle of a good run of form winning games, there wouldn't be any point in calling for the manager's head or expect him to be fired. Our recent run of defeats has people saying that we could and should have conceded more goals in each game. That will eventually happen. It can't get swept under the rug. Change has to happen.

[Mercer]

2 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

I never said that he is thick, I just am content with criticising him for what I perceive to be an on field stagnation, confusing tactics, poor transfers etc, rather than getting too worked up with how he acts on the touchline, what he says in his interviews or indeed in your case, based on conspiracy theories dreamt up about what set of events may have played out prior to the owners selling part of the training ground.

There you go again.

Please when referencing me do not make such false claims.  By all means quote me but do not throw sh1t at me.

Brockhall - cause, club haemorrhaging money, why, failure to get back to PL, effect partial realisation of club assets with cost reduction.

 

[Guest]

Pike and McBride in contention for bench spots.

[roversfan99]

16 minutes ago, Mercer said:

Please get your facts right!

Where have I said that?

I said our lack of success (failure to get back to the PL) and, IMO, stagnation under Mowbray and therefore substantial ongoing financial losses has probably resulted in our owners looking at ways to claw back some capital and reduce losses.

I think if I were in the Raos' shoes, I would be saying 'right Tony, time to cash in on the diamonds you bought in Brereton and Gallagher'..................!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

9 minutes ago, Mercer said:

There you go again.

Please when referencing me do not make such false claims.  By all means quote me but do not throw sh1t at me.

Brockhall - cause, club haemorrhaging money, why, failure to get back to PL, effect partial realisation of club assets with cost reduction.

 

The club haemorrhaging money is not Mowbrays responsibility, even if money he has spent on transfer fees under him may have not helped that, the manager is given funds by the owners to whom are responsible for the financial side of things.

It is not reasonable to suggest that Mowbray can be directly blamed for any collateral damage caused even based on an assumption that the club had to achieve promotion within his first 4 years to avoid having to start selling off the training ground to compensate. If that is the case, which is a huge assumption, then that falls on the owners, not Mowbray. I would also question how likely it should have been deemed to necessarily get promoted in that time frame anyway.

My problem with the manager is that although I feel that he has done a good job, he cannot further us and his tactics/subs/transfers etc are not pushing us forward any more, and I feel that we are starting to go backwards slightly. I want Mowbray gone because I dont think he can convert us into promotion challengers, not because he has failed to get us into the Premier League by now.

10 minutes ago, Richard Oakley said:

There's no evidence Mowbray isn't. Mowbray has complete control over football and Brockall's part of his remit.

If we got stuff in the middle of a good run of form winning games, there wouldn't be any point in calling for the manager's head or expect him to be fired. Our recent run of defeats has people saying that we could and should have conceded more goals in each game. That will eventually happen. It can't get swept under the rug. Change has to happen.

That isnt his responsibility though, people including me are understandably frustrated by the on field situation and are just blaming him for everything, but that falls on the owners. Do we think Mowbray spoke to the owners and suggested selling off half of the training facilities to build houses?

If it came out prior that if we lose then he goes, then maybe I could sort of understand, even though it would go against my instinct, I would be able to empathise. As it is, it seems certain that he will remain regardless, so we may as well hope for the team to win.

 

[davulsukur]

19 minutes ago, JoeH said:

Pike and McBride in contention for bench spots.

Yep, seems that way.

No Lenihan either. Johnson and JRC still not back.

https://www.lancs.live/sport/football/football-news/blackburn-rovers-team-news-watford-19896509

[Bigdoggsteel]

11 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

 

The club haemorrhaging money is not Mowbrays responsibility, even if money he has spent on transfer fees under him may have not helped that, the manager is given funds by the owners to whom are responsible for the financial side of things.

It is not reasonable to suggest that Mowbray can be directly blamed for any collateral damage caused even based on an assumption that the club had to achieve promotion within his first 4 years to avoid having to start selling off the training ground to compensate. If that is the case, which is a huge assumption, then that falls on the owners, not Mowbray. I would also question how likely it should have been deemed to necessarily get promoted in that time frame anyway.

My problem with the manager is that although I feel that he has done a good job, he cannot further us and his tactics/subs/transfers etc are not pushing us forward any more, and I feel that we are starting to go backwards slightly. I want Mowbray gone because I dont think he can convert us into promotion challengers, not because he has failed to get us into the Premier League by now.

That isnt his responsibility though, people including me are understandably frustrated by the on field situation and are just blaming him for everything, but that falls on the owners. Do we think Mowbray spoke to the owners and suggested selling off half of the training facilities to build houses?

If it came out prior that if we lose then he goes, then maybe I could sort of understand, even though it would go against my instinct, I would be able to empathise. As it is, it seems certain that he will remain regardless, so we may as well hope for the team to win.

 

True, but surely if we go into 6, 7 defeat in a row territory, he will have to be sacked? 

[perthblue02]

1 hour ago, Colt Seavers said:

I don't know if we are remembering the same incident, but Watford turned up about an hour late in the 1st leg of the semi final play off game in 88/89. They were stuck in traffic but played in their own kit which they changed into whilst on the coach. I think they were allowed a few minutes to stretch before we kicked off. 

No it was not that one that I am thinking of, was definitely earlier than that, was still at school.

Just looked at the 11 v 11 website , and the only home games against Watford (from the time I started going Rovers ) are in 

72 ,73  and 74 then 81 and 82 , considering those dates I'm leaning it to being 1974 if it was Watford.

Edit : 1982 game is on youtube 

 

Edited February 23, 2021 by perthblue02

[Mercer]

9 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

 

The club haemorrhaging money is not Mowbrays responsibility, even if money he has spent on transfer fees under him may have not helped that, the manager is given funds by the owners to whom are responsible for the financial side of things.

It is not reasonable to suggest that Mowbray can be directly blamed for any collateral damage caused even based on an assumption that the club had to achieve promotion within his first 4 years to avoid having to start selling off the training ground to compensate. If that is the case, which is a huge assumption, then that falls on the owners, not Mowbray. I would also question how likely it should have been deemed to necessarily get promoted in that time frame anyway.

My problem with the manager is that although I feel that he has done a good job, he cannot further us and his tactics/subs/transfers etc are not pushing us forward any more, and I feel that we are starting to go backwards slightly. I want Mowbray gone because I dont think he can convert us into promotion challengers, not because he has failed to get us into the Premier League by now.

That isnt his responsibility though, people including me are understandably frustrated by the on field situation and are just blaming him for everything, but that falls on the owners. Do we think Mowbray spoke to the owners and suggested selling off half of the training facilities to build houses?

If it came out prior that if we lose then he goes, then maybe I could sort of understand, even though it would go against my instinct, I would be able to empathise. As it is, it seems certain that he will remain regardless, so we may as well hope for the team to win.

 

I think Mowbray's responsibility is to get success on the field and this comes through immaginative and successful  player trading, organisation, motivation, coaching, tactics and game management.  If he had got that right then I think we would have been back in the PL or getting there this season.

If the football manager isn't successful, the club won't be successful and there will be financial struggles.

I think the bottom line is our owners have 'lost' getting on for £200million because none of the club's CEO's or football managers they have appointed have cut the mustard.

In the days of Bob Lord, Burnley sold a player a season in order to survive and thrive.

Who have we got who would bring in £10, £15 or £20million.

Brereton and Gallagher who Mowbray signed wouldn't - it would, IMO, be chicken shit in comparison to some £12million in fees we shelled out.  I remember Mowbray's words about Brereton at Blues in Feb 2019, something like 'there's a lad who'll be worth £15, £20million in the future'.  Well if he'd got it right, I think it's pretty certain we wouldn't be looking to part sell / downsize Brockhall.

I think we have one saleable player asset (biggish money) and that's Armstrong.

The buck stops with the Football Manager and the CEO and, IMO, neither Waggott or Mowbray have delivered and that's why the club is, IMO, in one big mess.  

[Richard Oakley]

26 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

 

The club haemorrhaging money is not Mowbrays responsibility, even if money he has spent on transfer fees under him may have not helped that, the manager is given funds by the owners to whom are responsible for the financial side of things.

It is not reasonable to suggest that Mowbray can be directly blamed for any collateral damage caused even based on an assumption that the club had to achieve promotion within his first 4 years to avoid having to start selling off the training ground to compensate. If that is the case, which is a huge assumption, then that falls on the owners, not Mowbray. I would also question how likely it should have been deemed to necessarily get promoted in that time frame anyway.

My problem with the manager is that although I feel that he has done a good job, he cannot further us and his tactics/subs/transfers etc are not pushing us forward any more, and I feel that we are starting to go backwards slightly. I want Mowbray gone because I dont think he can convert us into promotion challengers, not because he has failed to get us into the Premier League by now.

That isnt his responsibility though, people including me are understandably frustrated by the on field situation and are just blaming him for everything, but that falls on the owners. Do we think Mowbray spoke to the owners and suggested selling off half of the training facilities to build houses?

If it came out prior that if we lose then he goes, then maybe I could sort of understand, even though it would go against my instinct, I would be able to empathise. As it is, it seems certain that he will remain regardless, so we may as well hope for the team to win.

 

Mowbray hasn't trained at the STC for about a month claiming the pitches are frozen. That is his decision. I don't believe his reason.

I sit in amazement at the breathtaking bewildering non-sequitors of things you don't think Mowbray is responsible for. You think he's done a good job. i don't. Hired to keep us up. he failed. He should have gone then, but got an improved contract. Been there before. 4 defeats in 11. One Southend fan going so far as naming him Southend's man of the match for changing formation back to the ineffective one that went 2-0 down. Mowbray lucked into team and formation. His game plan cost us the match at Charlton and with it the League 1 title.

Three seasons back working for owners who say they want us back in the Premier League pronto without delivering ands he wont this season, either. A manager who said he had to talk Venkys out of spending more money. What manager in their right mind ever does that? One named Mowbray. No sign of the £50m transfer war chest or Mr Balaji Rao's promise to pay Mowbray whatever it'd take to get us into the Premier League. Perhaps he liked fake Mowbray better than the real thing.

 

[neophox]

Has anyone watched McBride and Pike? Your views?

 

As a Rover fan I always want us to win games. Even on wednesday. But cant see it happening.

 

A fifth straight loss may be a way nearer the axe for Mowbray. Sorry but cant see him gone before summer if he decides by his own to step down.