v Huddersfield Town (h) - 5/11/22

[Upside Down]

[Blue blood]

3 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

Yes Dack might have made a different or he might not have done in those games, but we will do as fact that the in the games we have won that has led us second place and 5 wins in 6 last games he has barely feature and only played 29 mins of the last 6 games. 

Szmodics has started 4 out the last 6 games (plus another sub appearance) which we won 5 of those 6 games. Szmodics has 3 goals and 1 assist in 14 league appearances. 

You said Dack is miles better than Dolan, Hirst or Vale even tho he can't play in those positions as they do. Based on his performance this season in the league this isn't true. Dolan has 2 goals and 4 assists this season in championship 

If we are basing it on performance, as oppose to blind loyalty to what the manager choses, then clearly he has done more than Hirst and Vale. They have offered the square root of naff all when they have played, which is far less than the glimpses of quality Dack has chosen. 

Look, I get it, JDT doesn't like Dack, and if I am honest I think the wages could be better spent come January. But to pretend Vale and Hirst are better options is plain daft, as neither have shown an ounce of ability, whereas Dack has shown the odd glimpse now, and showed a lot more prior to injury. 

[BRFC4EVA]

5 hours ago, roversfan99 said:

My main point has been how Dack has not been utilised at least as a sub, including on occasions when Hirst and/or Vale have been given game time ahead of him. So yes, there CAN be a comparison made between Dack and Hirst/Vale, irrespective of their best position. Dack IMO could and should have been used far more within those 8 losses whereby Tomasson has not managed to overcome a goal deficit.

I do rate him higher than Szmodics too and I would have him starting but at least Szmodics has shown some use when he has played unlike Hirst and Vale. Him being ahead of Hirst, Vale and even Dolan as a sub is very clear cut, he is miles better.

100% agree with this. And this is where mine and many other supporters frustration stems from. 

If the manager doesn't want to start Dack, fair enough. I think if you were in a court you argue that as a reasonable position..

However his failure to bring Dack on when we are literally playing to the standard of a non league team (and instead plays Hirst or Vale) boggles my mind.

[Upside Down]

Whatever the manager says we must obey.

Please tell us what to think next oh great one 

[chaddyrovers]

10 hours ago, Blue blood said:

If we are basing it on performance, as oppose to blind loyalty to what the manager choses, then clearly he has done more than Hirst and Vale. They have offered the square root of naff all when they have played, which is far less than the glimpses of quality Dack has chosen. 

Look, I get it, JDT doesn't like Dack, and if I am honest I think the wages could be better spent come January. But to pretend Vale and Hirst are better options is plain daft, as neither have shown an ounce of ability, whereas Dack has shown the odd glimpse now, and showed a lot more prior to injury. 

Yet again Most of the talk since Saturday win which was our eighth home win this season and we are second in the league, people focus is on Dack not featuring game after game instead of the players that have played a major part or some part in our season or the game, where we have the best home record in the championship, second in the league and 8 clean sheets already this season. It baffles me how much of an issue this is for fans to be honest. 

Dack played a different position to Vale or Hirst, so the comparison isn't correct and right. People will disagree and that's fine by myself.  

[J*B]

This will go down like a led balloon I suspect, but if I was a footballer for Rovers I'd be referencing Dack from both the management and the fans as the reason I shouldn't show any loyalty to the club. Some of the shit I've seen from fans - mostly on Twitter - towards his missus, who comes out of this quite well if you ask me, is unbelievable. Grown men calling a woman names because she's using her platform to express her fiance's disappointment, incredible really.

[roversfan99]

The idea of loyalty in football is an idealistic one, players have short careers and equally clubs will act in their own best interests, Brereton will happily run his contract down for example, but no one could blame him for that.

But why do all fans get lumped into one? You get a few predominantly teenagers with nothing else better to do than respond to his girlfriend on twitter, but Dack is still immensely popular, one look on here tells you that, never mind when he warms up and he receives fanfare far exceeding any other player. To imply that the fans are part of the reason specifically why Dack shouldn't show loyalty is totally unfair, but I guess it creates debate.

[oldjamfan1]

2 hours ago, J*B said:

This will go down like a led balloon I suspect, but if I was a footballer for Rovers I'd be referencing Dack from both the management and the fans as the reason I shouldn't show any loyalty to the club. 

The club has been incredibly loyal to Dack. He got a lucrative new contract despite having not at that point proved his fitness (after the first injury). He just happens to be not featuring much in the manager's plans at the moment. There are literally thousands of players in the same boat in the professional game. If that latter reason puts other players off from signing for/staying with Rovers, they won't last very long as professional footballers.

[roversfan99]

I am not sure that either party specifically has been "incredibly loyal" to the other, everything has always been done with both sides acting in their best interests. We wanted to tie Dack down to get benefit out of him for a while prior to the expiry of his contract, unaware of the second injury to come.

[Mattyblue]

There is no loyalty in football either way.

The player will move on when he feels he’s outgrown the club and/or offered a juicy pay rise and signing on fee. On the flip side the club will get shut if you are no longer up to scratch/someone a new manager doesn’t fancy.

Both sides also protect their interests/security with long contracts.

That’s the game, it’s transactional and both sides know the score.

 

Edited November 8, 2022 by Mattyblue

[smiller14]

3 hours ago, J*B said:

This will go down like a led balloon I suspect, but if I was a footballer for Rovers I'd be referencing Dack from both the management and the fans as the reason I shouldn't show any loyalty to the club. Some of the shit I've seen from fans - mostly on Twitter - towards his missus, who comes out of this quite well if you ask me, is unbelievable. Grown men calling a woman names because she's using her platform to express her fiance's disappointment, incredible really.

I'd agree with the point about the comments towards his other half. Some very weird comments, mocking her when we win etc - doesn't paint us in a good light. 

[Mattyblue]

That’s social media, it’s a cesspit and every public figure gets it.

But I’m sure he and the rest of the squad knows that the vast, vast majority of fans are great here. And I’d be very surprised if footballers are making life altering decisions on the back of a few dozen sad acts tweeting from their mum’s spare room…

[oldjamfan1]

56 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

I am not sure that either party specifically has been "incredibly loyal" to the other, everything has always been done with both sides acting in their best interests. We wanted to tie Dack down to get benefit out of him for a while prior to the expiry of his contract, unaware of the second injury to come.

This is slightly revisionist. Of course they were unaware of the second injury but at the time of offering him that new contract, a much-improved one I hasten to add, he had not yet recovered from the first injury (and he never really did, before he sadly suffered the second one). I seem to recall quite a few eyebrows being raised, including on this very message board, when he got such a long contract at that time. So yes, the club was 'incredibly loyal' to him, just as they were with several of the other senior pros who got us out of the third division, and mainly in the players' best interests, rather than the club's.

[Mattyblue]

Or the club saw an opportunity to tie down a top player that would have been in the PL a few weeks after that Wigan game if it wasn’t for the injury.

Totally agree on the Mulgrew/Bennett/Smallwood deals though. I would wager in the post TM, Broughton era, I doubt we’ll see contracts thrown around with such abandon again…

Edited November 8, 2022 by Mattyblue

[oldjamfan1]

8 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

Or the club saw an opportunity to tie down a top player that would have been in the PL a few weeks after that Wigan game if it wasn’t for the injury.

 

This is partly what I mean about the revisionism Matty. Regardless of where he may or may not have ended up if it wasn't for what happened at the Wigan game (and I agree with you he almost certainly would have ended up in the prem), he did get the injury. Rovers took a huge chance on the fact that he would get back to his best. Even Shearer wasn't the same player after he did his ACL.

[Mattyblue]

Of course it was a gamble, but it was obviously a calculated one, as they got the keep a player that otherwise would’ve gone, and who they had no chance of replacing with a player of the same quality.

[Blue blood]

8 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

Yet again Most of the talk since Saturday win which was our eighth home win this season and we are second in the league, people focus is on Dack not featuring game after game instead of the players that have played a major part or some part in our season or the game, where we have the best home record in the championship, second in the league and 8 clean sheets already this season. It baffles me how much of an issue this is for fans to be honest. 

Come on Chaddy, it shouldn't be a surprise. The abysmal defeats when we look toothless, weaker players playing ahead of him, plus his history at Rovers. No way you should be surprised by this. I take your point that there are a ton of positives and that these outweigh the negatives, but to say this is a surprise topic is a tad naive. Lots of reasons I've mentioned as to why it's a topic that's being discussed. The biggest one for me being just imagine where we'd be using him instead of Vale or Hirst. 

8 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

Dack played a different position to Vale or Hirst, so the comparison isn't correct and right. People will disagree and that's fine by myself.  

Well that's not true either. The comparison is valid because a) all three are in the team to score and create goals and b) natural/preferred position doesn't prevent us comparing how one would do outside of that natural position. We can still evaluate their skills there. Different natural positions doesn't protect them. Example no 1 Nayambe's natural position was RB, however given his abilities etc he was still a better bet at CB for us than say Greer. Messi's best position say is as a wide forward but it would be daft to say he wouldn't offer not more up top than Brown did for example. 

Not sure why you are so keen to defend JDT's use of two of the worst forwards in Rovers history. 

[chaddyrovers]

12 minutes ago, Blue blood said:

Come on Chaddy, it shouldn't be a surprise. The abysmal defeats when we look toothless, weaker players playing ahead of him, plus his history at Rovers. No way you should be surprised by this. I take your point that there are a ton of positives and that these outweigh the negatives, but to say this is a surprise topic is a tad naive. Lots of reasons I've mentioned as to why it's a topic that's being discussed. The biggest one for me being just imagine where we'd be using him instead of Vale or Hirst. 

But people keep going on about him days after days even after a win where he didn't play. 

12 minutes ago, Blue blood said:

Well that's not true either. The comparison is valid because a) all three are in the team to score and create goals and b) natural/preferred position doesn't prevent us comparing how one would do outside of that natural position. We can still evaluate their skills there. Different natural positions doesn't protect them. Example no 1 Nayambe's natural position was RB, however given his abilities etc he was still a better bet at CB for us than say Greer. Messi's best position say is as a wide forward but it would be daft to say he wouldn't offer not more up top than Brown did for example. 

Not sure why you are so keen to defend JDT's use of two of the worst forwards in Rovers history. 

Of course, it is true, Dack is number 10 whilst Vale and Hirst are main strikers. 

We just have to simply agree to disagree on this topic

[Atko's Engine]

19 minutes ago, Blue blood said:

 

Not sure why you are so keen to defend JDT's use of two of the worst forwards in Rovers history. 

Sorry to pick you up specifically on this as I know it's a widely held view amongst many on here, but isn't this just a tad premature? They've had the grand total of what, 6 x 90 mins between them in 3 months? Much of which has been 20 mins here, 30 mins there, and often in away performances where generally the team has played poorly anyway?

And you're putting them in the same basket as Chris Brown, Joe Nuttall, David Goodwillie, Anthony Stokes, Liam Feeney et al?

Give the guys a break, c'mon!

[roversfan99]

People keep going on about Dack apparently. It would be interesting to see whic poster had posted the most in discussions about him...

[roversfan99]

7 hours ago, oldjamfan1 said:

This is slightly revisionist. Of course they were unaware of the second injury but at the time of offering him that new contract, a much-improved one I hasten to add, he had not yet recovered from the first injury (and he never really did, before he sadly suffered the second one). I seem to recall quite a few eyebrows being raised, including on this very message board, when he got such a long contract at that time. So yes, the club was 'incredibly loyal' to him, just as they were with several of the other senior pros who got us out of the third division, and mainly in the players' best interests, rather than the club's.

How do we know it was "much improved?" And it wasnt particularly long either. It was a mutually beneficial arrangement that protected both parties, not a gesture of loyalty.

Edited November 8, 2022 by roversfan99

[oldjamfan1]

24 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

How do we know it was "much improved?" And it wasnt particularly long either. It was a mutually beneficial arrangement that protected both parties, not a gesture of loyalty.

You’re arguing for the sake of it it would appear?

At that point he had played just 45 minutes of an under 23 game after a career threatening injury and the club doubled his salary on a 2.5 year deal.

And as it turned out it didn’t protect the Rovers at all, quite the opposite.

 

Edited November 8, 2022 by oldjamfan1

[Blue blood]

3 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

But people keep going on about him days after days even after a win where he didn't play. 

Of course, it is true, Dack is number 10 whilst Vale and Hirst are main strikers. 

We just have to simply agree to disagree on this topic

Kinda disappointed you didn't acknowledge or engage with any of my points 😟 Don't get me wrong I'm not saying you have to agree with me, but some acknowledgement of the points In made would be nice. It feels like you have totally ignored everything I said! 

For example I gave 3 reasons why people are still going on about Dack. Fair enough dispute those reasons and their validity - MB is all about debate - but it doesn't help any discussion to ignore what the other person says. Likewise I say why I think the different natural positions  doesn't prevent a comparison. Again, that's totally ignored. Disagree, sure but at least engage with the points I've made, in what I hope is a respectful manner. 

To clarify I don't want everyone to agree with me (well not much anyway 😉) but to engage with what's actually posted. 

[Blue blood]

3 hours ago, Atko's Engine said:

Sorry to pick you up specifically on this as I know it's a widely held view amongst many on here, but isn't this just a tad premature? They've had the grand total of what, 6 x 90 mins between them in 3 months? Much of which has been 20 mins here, 30 mins there, and often in away performances where generally the team has played poorly anyway?

And you're putting them in the same basket as Chris Brown, Joe Nuttall, David Goodwillie, Anthony Stokes, Liam Feeney et al?

Give the guys a break, c'mon!

It's a fair point they do have time to develop. And I hope they do surprise us. Bereton certainly did after 2 years of showing nothing coming good, so it's possible but it's more the exception than the rule. Maybe we should pack them both off to South America. 

That said it didn't take too much to clock those other guys weren't good, and the signs have been that both these chaps are pretty poor. I think I'd feel more comfortable not naming them so if I saw a definable quality in them, some potential. But I can't think of one thing they are showing which is decent or promising, a strength or an asset if you like. They aren't fast, they don't have presence, they don't strike me as that quick nor predatory or good in the air. Maybe it's a bit early to judge but the early signs imo are very discouraging. And Hirst certainly doesn't look anywhere near worth spending 4 million on. 

[roversfan99]

1 hour ago, oldjamfan1 said:

You’re arguing for the sake of it it would appear?

At that point he had played just 45 minutes of an under 23 game after a career threatening injury and the club doubled his salary on a 2.5 year deal.

And as it turned out it didn’t protect the Rovers at all, quite the opposite.

 

How do you know that he had his salary doubled?

I am not arguing for the sake of it, but I am not having that the club gave him a deal due to loyalty. At that point in time, he was recovering from injury but was on the cusp of first team football but had 6 months (18 including an option) which would have meant that assuming he did recover, that a fantastic player at this level would potentially leave for free as soon as he got fit. It was a calculated gamble that somewhat backfired when he then did his other knee.

He doesn't owe us anything and we don't owe him anything.