Jump to content

BRFCS

BY THE FANS, FOR THE FANS
SINCE 1996
Proudly partnered with TheTerraceStore.com

Jon Dahl Tomasson - Sweden coach


Recommended Posts

Robins said: “Yeah, I think so. I think they’re the best team in possession that we’ve played this season here. I like the way they play. They are really good and brave in possession"

 

More praise. JDT is light years ahead of most all managers in this league. 

If we'd have taken our chances/had more luck we'd be in the top 2. 

The fact we aren't is on Venky's.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Displaced Rover said:

Another opposition manager has had a lovely evening watching us knock it about nicely without offering any threat on their goal, as we roll over for another defeat. Great.

Give me shithousing our way to 1-0 wins all season any day. No points for style.

I'm with you, if you read the script of last night's game which was it being a scrappy game with poor finishing but a team got a late winner, we all know which team would have lost. We are still not in my opinion for all the good JDT has done, a team with any sort of grit when the chips are down.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

JDT is the right person to be Rovers head coach. He has us with a style of play and you can clearly see what the style is. Time to stick with him and it right we show loyalty to him during this time

I love our style of play when we have the ball. I can't remember the last time Rovers were as easy on the eye in possession.

I don't think there's any danger of him getting sacked unless we suddenly found ourselves cut adrift in the relegation zone, which I don't think will happen at any point this season. I do think it's going to be a bumpy season though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is JDT to blame for the situation? Not really. 

It's Venkys, Waggot and Broughton before him.

However we are conceding at an alarming rate because we are wide open committing too many men forward. That is on the manager. Against Hull with 10 men we showed we can sit back and defend but use the players we have to hit on the break. Same at Watford.

It might not have opposition managers purring, but it may grind out more points.

Edited by Hasta
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sweaty Gussets said:

Robins said: “Yeah, I think so. I think they’re the best team in possession that we’ve played this season here. I like the way they play. They are really good and brave in possession"

 

More praise. JDT is light years ahead of most all managers in this league. 

If we'd have taken our chances/had more luck we'd be in the top 2. 

The fact we aren't is on Venky's.

I agree that the Venkys slowly killing the club is the main problem. Our summer transfer window was pathetic. 

However, our xG has been higher than our opponent's for half of our matches. We are not consistently creating more dangerous goalscoring chances than our opponents.

JDT has to take responsibility for choosing to play Pears despite so many poor performances. You cannot claim you're unlucky when you stick with an awful goalkeeper who predictably keeps gifting away goals.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Inferi said:

However, our xG has been higher than our opponent's for half of our matches. We are not consistently creating more dangerous goalscoring chances than our opponents.

 

Thought I'd have a look at that in a bit of detail:

Rovers 1.52 v WBA 0.84

Rotherham 0.7 vs Rovers 2.58

Rovers 1.63 v Hull 2.13

Watford 1.48 v Rovers 0.34

Plymouth 1.13 v Rovers 1.42

Rovers 2.38 v Middlesbrough 2.22

Rovers 2.32 v Sunderland 1.84

Ipswich 2.64 vs Rovers 0.66

Rovers 1.24 vs Leicester 1.97

Coventry 0.72 vs Rovers 0.52

AVERAGE OVER THE SEASON:

Average xG for Rovers - 1.461

Average xG for Opposition - 1.546

 

We're getting worse as well:

image.png.bd77cac2ea54e50649695e7b0eadb142.png

So it's fine saying we're just being unlucky and creating more than the opposition.

But it isn't actually true. 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, LeftWinger said:

Thought I'd have a look at that in a bit of detail:

Rovers 1.52 v WBA 0.84

Rotherham 0.7 vs Rovers 2.58

Rovers 1.63 v Hull 2.13

Watford 1.48 v Rovers 0.34

Plymouth 1.13 v Rovers 1.42

Rovers 2.38 v Middlesbrough 2.22

Rovers 2.32 v Sunderland 1.84

Ipswich 2.64 vs Rovers 0.66

Rovers 1.24 vs Leicester 1.97

Coventry 0.72 vs Rovers 0.52

AVERAGE OVER THE SEASON:

Average xG for Rovers - 1.461

Average xG for Opposition - 1.546

 

We're getting worse as well:

image.png.bd77cac2ea54e50649695e7b0eadb142.png

So it's fine saying we're just being unlucky and creating more than the opposition.

But it isn't actually true. 

Very interesting. It’s like those saying that Coventry were ridiculously fortunate to win last night. On another day we take a point - but let’s not forget they still hit the woodwork 3-4 times. 

I’m very concerned personally.

Edited by Gavlar Somerset Rover!
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, cesus said:

I'm with you, if you read the script of last night's game which was it being a scrappy game with poor finishing but a team got a late winner, we all know which team would have lost. We are still not in my opinion for all the good JDT has done, a team with any sort of grit when the chips are down.

That’s obvious. The stats of how many games we’ve failed to  turn around from a losing position is damning. I’d like to bet we are the worst in the whole of the football league over the last 5 seasons in that respect. That tells you all you need to know. I’d be deeply ashamed if I was one of the players.

Edited by Tyrone Shoelaces
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tomasson is a victim in all of this, a victim of the shambolic way in which the club is run and those above him.

He isn't infallible though and ultimately has to take some responsibility for results.

Unless it starts to pick up, something will have to change, if for no other reason than simply for change's sake.

And as wrong as it is - considering those above him - that something will likely be him, doing so with dignity and of his own accord.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Inferi said:

I agree that the Venkys slowly killing the club is the main problem. Our summer transfer window was pathetic. 

However, our xG has been higher than our opponent's for half of our matches. We are not consistently creating more dangerous goalscoring chances than our opponents.

JDT has to take responsibility for choosing to play Pears despite so many poor performances. You cannot claim you're unlucky when you stick with an awful goalkeeper who predictably keeps gifting away goals.

 

xG doesn't take into account who the chances are falling to.

There is also no context to xG. 

If you're smashing balls across the face of goal and you don't have a striker worthy of the name to anticipate them, it won't be accounted for by xG.

Similarly, if you get in good positions and all that's missing is the final ball (happens all the time with Rovers), and you don't have players capable of playing the final ball (happens all the time with Rovers) then it won't impact xG.

We are excellent box-to-box, the best in the division, but where it matters we fall down time after time. 

Selling your best keeper and not signing a good quality striker who can remain fit obviously is having a huge impact. 

We'll see where we are in January when hopefully those issues are resolved. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sweaty Gussets said:

xG doesn't take into account who the chances are falling to.

There is also no context to xG. 

If you're smashing balls across the face of goal and you don't have a striker worthy of the name to anticipate them, it won't be accounted for by xG.

Similarly, if you get in good positions and all that's missing is the final ball (happens all the time with Rovers), and you don't have players capable of playing the final ball (happens all the time with Rovers) then it won't impact xG.

We are excellent box-to-box, the best in the division, but where it matters we fall down time after time. 

Selling your best keeper and not signing a good quality striker who can remain fit obviously is having a huge impact. 

We'll see where we are in January when hopefully those issues are resolved. 

That's with good reason - otherwise it isn't a fair reflection of the game itself. The logic is that better strikers outperform their xG and thus show their value. What the xG shows above is that we are often not creating more chances than our opposition, which does undermine the 'unlucky' label many have attributed to our recent form. If xG was updated to be based on the player the chances fall to, I imagine it would look even worse given our lack of striker. 

Agree on the smashing the ball across the face of goal though, that won't show up on xG - it's why you can never really look at it in isolation (like with any stats). I imagine there were games last season when our xG was really low and you'd think we were never in it, when in truth we probably had heaps of possession and no killer ball. 

Feel like a massive geek talking about xG and whilst I think it's flawed, I do think there's merit in using it (like we do with possession, shots on target etc). It usually ends up being quite predictive. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, smiller14 said:

That's with good reason - otherwise it isn't a fair reflection of the game itself. The logic is that better strikers outperform their xG and thus show their value. What the xG shows above is that we are often not creating more chances than our opposition, which does undermine the 'unlucky' label many have attributed to our recent form. If xG was updated to be based on the player the chances fall to, I imagine it would look even worse given our lack of striker. 

Agree on the smashing the ball across the face of goal though, that won't show up on xG - it's why you can never really look at it in isolation (like with any stats). I imagine there were games last season when our xG was really low and you'd think we were never in it, when in truth we probably had heaps of possession and no killer ball. 

Feel like a massive geek talking about xG and whilst I think it's flawed, I do think there's merit in using it (like we do with possession, shots on target etc). It usually ends up being quite predictive. 

I think my point was that xG is in many ways an indication of the quality of players at your disposal. 

For example: Good wingers = good crosses = good chances = higher xG.

Having a good striker to anticipate and connect with those crosses also helps. 

Generally, I don't think we've got our just desserts this season, just like during the run-in last season. Luck is always a factor, and we just don't get any. My hope is that changes, my fear is it's just not going to happen for JDT and he'll get frustrated and move on to better things. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Gavlar Somerset Rover! said:

Very interesting. It’s like those saying that Coventry were ridiculously fortunate to win last night. On another day we take a point - but let’s not forget they still hit the woodwork 3-4 times. 

I’m very concerned personally.

Coventry hit the woodwork twice and Leo Wahlstedt tip an effort onto the bar also. 

We hit the bar with the Hill's Strike 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.