v Cardiff (a) - 15/1/22 - 12.30pm kick off

[joey_big_nose]

8 hours ago, Gav said:

In our last 13 league games we have won 10 and only lost 1, with or most recent win only yesterday as we all know. 

If teams have worked us out long may that continue, we'll go up as Champions on current form.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/championship/table

Yes teams might have worked out how limit us to less chances, but they certainly haven't worked out how to score against us.

For me still think the 343 works phenomenally well, no one's got near cracking it yet. 

Our downturn in offensive prowess is due imo to 1) lack of quality from the flanks. Really need Pickering back and more from right wing back. 2) poor final ball - every game we actually generate a lot of really good chances but mess up the final ball. Did that three or four times against Cardiff.

I'm really not worried at all at the moment. Even when we were down to 10 yesterday we looked in total control. 

[Blue blood]

14 minutes ago, joey_big_nose said:

Yes teams might have worked out how limit us to less chances, but they certainly haven't worked out how to score against us.

For me still think the 343 works phenomenally well, no one's got near cracking it yet. 

Our downturn in offensive prowess is due imo to 1) lack of quality from the flanks. Really need Pickering back and more from right wing back. 2) poor final ball - every game we actually generate a lot of really good chances but mess up the final ball. Did that three or four times against Cardiff.

I'm really not worried at all at the moment. Even when we were down to 10 yesterday we looked in total control. 

Three: small squad syndrome. None of our players can afford to have an off day as the downgrade in their replacement is significant. For example if the three miss have an off day it's Johnson or Davenport, BBD has an off day we downgrade to Gally. Sure there's a few positions with quality cover - having Dolan and Ayala on the bench is great for example - but overall there's not much margin for off days. 

[TheRoversReturn]

On 16/01/2022 at 00:29, AllRoverAsia said:

Streamamg, not the club. They were overloaded on server.

A few days ago Cardiff TV were asking people to buy passes early as Streamamg (who Cardiff also use)  needed to know what load to expect ........

I saw nothing. I hope the replay works but maybe we should set up a schedule so we dont overload it again.😒

Fucking shambles caused by Waggott buying the cheapest Streamamg package. 

With the refunds it would appear that Waggotts scrooge tactics have lost the club all the income from probably the most subscribed for game so far this season on RoversTV. You could not make this up.

 

Has anyone with an annual pass been contacted by the club?

[AllRoverAsia]

14 minutes ago, TheRoversReturn said:

Has anyone with an annual pass been contacted by the club?

I only, and only occasionally, buy a match pass.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

1 hour ago, Blue blood said:

Three: small squad syndrome. None of our players can afford to have an off day as the downgrade in their replacement is significant. For example if the three miss have an off day it's Johnson or Davenport, BBD has an off day we downgrade to Gally. Sure there's a few positions with quality cover - having Dolan and Ayala on the bench is great for example - but overall there's not much margin for off days. 

That’s why we need another attacking midfield player. Maybe that lad at Peterborough ?

Edited January 16, 2022 by Tyrone Shoelaces

[Oldgregg86]

18 hours ago, rigger said:

For me Pears is just right for our bench keeper. My thought would be, Pears would be on the bench all season. He comes on if required as a sub during a game. Our second choice keeper would be playing with the U23s, and gets put into the first team above Pears in case of needing a keeper to start a game.   

Surly a sub keeper can play for the u23s and be ready come off bench or start when needed

[Exiled_Rover]

14 hours ago, Blue blood said:

Three: small squad syndrome. None of our players can afford to have an off day as the downgrade in their replacement is significant. For example if the three miss have an off day it's Johnson or Davenport, BBD has an off day we downgrade to Gally. Sure there's a few positions with quality cover - having Dolan and Ayala on the bench is great for example - but overall there's not much margin for off days. 

Davenport could step into this starting XI no problem - I've no idea why he doesn't get more playing time. How Johnson is preferred to him is beyond me.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

19 minutes ago, Exiled_Rover said:

Davenport could step into this starting XI no problem - I've no idea why he doesn't get more playing time. How Johnson is preferred to him is beyond me.

I think it’s about height and heading ability in a team with a lot of players who aren’t good headers of the ball.

[rigger]

1 hour ago, Oldgregg86 said:

Surly a sub keeper can play for the u23s and be ready come off bench or start when needed

I wouldn't want Pears in the U23s. 

[Admiral Nelsen]

42 minutes ago, Exiled_Rover said:

Davenport could step into this starting XI no problem - I've no idea why he doesn't get more playing time. How Johnson is preferred to him is beyond me.

 

For all the talk of Mowbray having favourites and not treating others equally (Nyambe, Rothwell, the idea that Travis was kept out of the team for too long, etc.) Davenport is the one who can feel genuinely hard done by in my opinion. Injuries have been horrible, but he's been fit for a while now and has never been given a half decent run in the team. Makes sense now that the Rothwell/Travis/Buckley midfield is so nicely balanced, but there's no reason at all why he didn't get more game time last season for me. I'll be sad to see him go at the end of the year (assuming he will, of course) and I think he would be a very shrewd signing for someone. 

 

Having said that, I can understand why Johnson has come on for 20 minutes here and there to see games out. We all know that his passing can be very hit and miss, but his physicality can be a real asset. 

[joey_big_nose]

59 minutes ago, Admiral Nelsen said:

 

For all the talk of Mowbray having favourites and not treating others equally (Nyambe, Rothwell, the idea that Travis was kept out of the team for too long, etc.) Davenport is the one who can feel genuinely hard done by in my opinion. Injuries have been horrible, but he's been fit for a while now and has never been given a half decent run in the team. Makes sense now that the Rothwell/Travis/Buckley midfield is so nicely balanced, but there's no reason at all why he didn't get more game time last season for me. I'll be sad to see him go at the end of the year (assuming he will, of course) and I think he would be a very shrewd signing for someone. 

 

Having said that, I can understand why Johnson has come on for 20 minutes here and there to see games out. We all know that his passing can be very hit and miss, but his physicality can be a real asset. 

Johnson I really think doesn't fit in anywhere except as a really desperate backup for CB. He just gets totally bipassed due to his lack of mobility in midfield. Id trade off a lack of heading ability in the middle for Davenports ability to get around the pitch.

If we lost Travis Daveport would step in, if we lost Rothwell we'd drop Buckley into midfield and play Dolan, Gallagher, Markanday or Dack through the middle up top. Not perfect but pretty good I would say.

Main issue would be losing Rothwells running from midfield but Buckley can do a bit of that, and his excellent passing would give something extra.

[Admiral Nelsen]

21 minutes ago, joey_big_nose said:

Johnson I really think doesn't fit in anywhere except as a really desperate backup for CB. He just gets totally bipassed due to his lack of mobility in midfield. Id trade off a lack of heading ability in the middle for Davenports ability to get around the pitch.

If we lost Travis Daveport would step in, if we lost Rothwell we'd drop Buckley into midfield and play Dolan, Gallagher, Markanday or Dack through the middle up top. Not perfect but pretty good I would say.

Main issue would be losing Rothwells running from midfield but Buckley can do a bit of that, and his excellent passing would give something extra.

 

I think we rate Johnson slightly differently. I'm no massive fan & I'd start Davenport over him, but when he's on his game he doesn't tend to get bypassed that much in my view. He has been maddeningly inconsistent though, and when he's not on form his lack of mobility stands out like a sore thumb. Luckily most teams at this level don't have the players to exploit that too often - so I think his power and crafty game management makes him a useful option to sure things up, especially if we're protecting a lead. He has his moments with the ball at his feet too, but obviously these are few and far between.

 

That said, I agree that if we lost Travis for any length of time and we couldn't play Edun there because he's on the left, I'd definitely rather see Davenport as his replacement. 

[rigger]

1 hour ago, Admiral Nelsen said:

 

I think we rate Johnson slightly differently. I'm no massive fan & I'd start Davenport over him, but when he's on his game he doesn't tend to get bypassed that much in my view. He has been maddeningly inconsistent though, and when he's not on form his lack of mobility stands out like a sore thumb. Luckily most teams at this level don't have the players to exploit that too often - so I think his power and crafty game management makes him a useful option to sure things up, especially if we're protecting a lead. He has his moments with the ball at his feet too, but obviously these are few and far between.

 

That said, I agree that if we lost Travis for any length of time and we couldn't play Edun there because he's on the left, I'd definitely rather see Davenport as his replacement. 

To me Johnson is another, who is suited as a bench player not a starter. 

[joey_big_nose]

28 minutes ago, rigger said:

To me Johnson is another, who is suited as a bench player not a starter. 

I think his usefulness is really limited tbh - probably on very good money too. He should be going at the end of the season.

If a players over 26/27 and not a guaranteed starter Id say we should routinely look to move them on. The whole "experienced heads" argument has been totally discredited for me, weve seen very little output for a lot of money spent on experienced players. Young players work harder, can be molded easier, get paid less, have more resell value. For one Johnson we could probably pay two or three younger up and coming players.

If Ayala can't force his way back into the team we should let him go summer also.

[Colt Seavers]

3 hours ago, joey_big_nose said:

 

If a players over 26/27 and not a guaranteed starter Id say we should routinely look to move them on. The whole "experienced heads" argument has been totally discredited for me, weve seen very little output for a lot of money spent on experienced players. 

I agree. I rated Stewart Downing whilst he was here but the Downing of two seasons ago doesn't get in our current side for me. 

A good indicator of our progress I suppose.

[joey_big_nose]

2 hours ago, Colt Seavers said:

I agree. I rated Stewart Downing whilst he was here but the Downing of two seasons ago doesn't get in our current side for me. 

A good indicator of our progress I suppose.

Yes - Stewart Downing was a solid professional who had some good games. But was he worth the money we were spending compared to a younger cheaper player? I doubt it, he wasn't excellent, he struggled to stay in the side. If Davenport had to play more to fill in for him I am not sure we would have been much worse off.

[Mattyblue]

Get your point JBN, and it is obviously the way the club is going anyway, but you can’t have an entire squad made up of young lads.

I’m not at the training ground, of course, but I do often watch the warm ups and how Ayala interacts with the likes of Wharton and Lenihan, I would put good money on him being a big influence on how we’ve improved at the back, both collectively and individually.