[Archived] Bowyer

[Stuart]

You only have to look at the mess he inherited last March/April to see the advancement.

We would have lost that game in the dying stages yesterday. GB is cautious, but he has to be with the hand he has Stuart. You cannot say that Henley didn't need that help yesterday, hence the Kane and Williamson instead of Mahoney substitution.

In time I doubt Williamson will be near the squad - he was a sub when Evans, Cairney and Lowe played earlier in the season and we looked good - especially before Hanleys sending off at wigan. Probing and solid at the same time.

There is a lot more to football than just having/not having tactical nous. The next two games and the last week of the transfer window are going to shape what happens for the rest of the season and I think if Gary can get a replacement in the same ilk of Marshall (no mean feat) and another left sided player - we may just suprise a few. I honestly think losing Marshall is a bitter blow - don't underestimate his worth to both defensive and attacking.

I also think the left foot is something we are desperately lacking and I think it plays a part in putting Cairney on the right. For GB's idea of tactics, we desperatley need someone who can cut inside on that right flank. Hence freeing Cairney up for a central role and making our flanks more dynamic.

At what point does 'what Bowyer inherited' become 'Bowyer's team'? Our first eleven is barely recognisable from Kean's. It's like a club stuck in a post-apokeanlylptic twilight zone where all of Bowyer's failings can be attributed to Kean (whose stench is almost at trace level) and Venkys (who have all but shut up and simply sign the loan agreements - during agenda item 38 of their Venkys business meetings).

But I'm also confused a little by the contradiction in your otherwise well penned post.

How can it be part of Bowyer's master plan to have Cairney play from the wing and cut inside when this results in exposing the fullback to the point where we have to take off a potent potential match-winning forward to replace him with a second fullback, belt and braces style? Either the master plan is wrong or you have made that bit up to excuse a bonkers substitution yesterday?

[thenodrog]

How can it be part of Bowyer's master plan to have Cairney play from the wing and cut inside when this results in exposing the fullback to the point where we have to take off a potent potential match-winning forward to replace him with a second fullback, belt and braces style? Either the master plan is wrong or you have made that bit up to excuse a bonkers substitution yesterday?

A simple swap of wings for Taylor and Cairney would have sorted that. Taylor could offer more cover to Henley than Cairney had done, Dunn on in the middle to stifle space their midfielders were exploiting and to retain possession with just Gestede leading the line.

Pretty sure we'd have 2 more points on the board today if we'd done that.

[Stuart]

A simple swap of wings for Taylor and Cairney would have sorted that. Taylor could offer more cover to Henley than Cairney had done, Dunn on in the middle to stifle space their midfielders were exploiting and to retain possession with just Gestede leading the line.

Pretty sure we'd have 2 more points on the board today if we'd done that.

Okay, I could go for that.

If we had to sacrifice Rhodes (goals), and if we must attempt to shut up shop, then I'd sooner do it when we are leading than when we are level. Rhodes is in the side to help win games, Gestede (as the 'one') as part of a formation to avoid conceding.

The flip side is that if we do concede anyway then we have just subbed our best attacking threat (if used properly). So it's a fine balance. Playing the percentages yesterday though I would not have taken Gestede off when we did. I think Bowyer struggles most at changing a game, making poor substitutions time and again. He needs an experienced number 2. What's Mike Phelan doing these days?

[thenodrog]

A simple swap of wings for Taylor and Cairney would have sorted that. Taylor could offer more cover to Henley than Cairney had done, Dunn on in the middle to stifle space their midfielders were exploiting and to retain possession with just Gestede leading the line.

Pretty sure we'd have 2 more points on the board today if we'd done that.

Okay, I could go for that.

If we had to sacrifice Rhodes (goals), and if we must attempt to shut up shop, then I'd sooner do it when we are leading than when we are level. Rhodes is in the side to help win games, Gestede (as the 'one') as part of a formation to avoid conceding.

The flip side is that if we do concede anyway then we have just subbed our best attacking threat (if used properly). So it's a fine balance. Playing the percentages yesterday though I would not have taken Gestede off when we did. I think Bowyer struggles most at changing a game, making poor substitutions time and again. He needs an experienced number 2. What's Mike Phelan doing these days?

Mike Phelan? What the hell do you want Mike Phelan for? Mike Phelan didn't write the first post did he? I bloody well did!

I could do the sub thingy from the JW Upper like 'Ssshhhhteve Maclarenmeoldduk' did for the first 50 mins in my sleep, and not only that (and this'll appeal to the venkymob]... I'd do it for half the cost of Phelan.... and a cup of Bovril at HT!

I also noticed that Bowyer was constantly waving toward Henley for 10 mins before he put Kane on? I noticed cos it was right below me and I kept looking to see if he had Dunny warming up.... which he obviously hadn't. Puzzling.

btw old Schhshteve was sat with a magnetic board the size of a chessboard on his knee pushing tiddlywink sized counters about. I'm sure father Christmas brought me something similar when I was 8.

Oh and he missed our goal too. He made it back just in time to watch the replay on the big screen and mouth the usual that doesn't need a lip reader to interpret.

[Stuart]

Mike Phelan? What the hell do you want Mike Phelan for? Mike Phelan didn't write the first post did he? I bloody well did!

I could do the sub thingy from the JW Upper like 'Ssshhhhteve Maclarenmeoldduk' did for the first 50 mins in my sleep, and not only that (and this'll appeal to the venkymob]... I'd do it for half the cost of Phelan.... and a cup of Bovril at HT!

.

Hmm. Mike Phelan, trusted right hand man to the best manager of the last 20 years, during a season where a team of very ordinary players won the title, or Gordon off of BRFCS... It's a thinker alright.

[K-Hod]

Nelson Mike? Doubt he'd touch us with a barge pole, he'll have plenty of money left from his time at United I suspect...

[dingles staying down 4ever]

Hmm. Mike Phelan, trusted right hand man to the best manager of the last 20 years, during a season where a team of very ordinary players won the title, or Gordon off of BRFCS... It's a thinker alright.

I'll say two words to you .....

Brian and Kidd

What we need is someone with organisational sense, an experienced MANAGER not another coach. Possibly in a D of F position above Boywer.

[Leonard Venkhater]

Agree with this. I rant about the tactical errors, but the frustration comes from us being almost there thanks to bowyer getting a lot of other stuff right.

Gestede and rhodes are starting to gel. He brought in marshall, taylor, evans and cairney who would make a good championship midfield if all fit at the same time and they are improving.

He sold the good ollsson which I doubted, but brought in spurr for nothing and on less of a wage.

The fans at ewood are backing bowyer, and we should continue to do so.

A very well made point. Gary has achieved so much.

Re tactics, however, I assume most coaches/managers are able to read what is going on systemically during a game. It is just that they may have different solutions and better players available to solve emerging problems. However, I am getting a real sense that Gary is very cautious and I don't know what that is about, given the so called s**t or bust season.

Also, I do like the phrase" the good Olsson" mostly because ( with Martin's poor performance for us) it serves to emphasise just how bad the bad one is, What an awful signing amongst so many awful.signings!.

[Stuart]

I'll say two words to you .....

Brian and Kidd

What we need is someone with organisational sense, an experienced MANAGER not another coach. Possibly in a D of F position above Boywer.

Two words to you...

Assistant Manager.

(Brian Kidd was/is pretty good at that. )

[TBTF]

A very well made point. Gary has achieved so much.

Re tactics, however, I assume most coaches/managers are able to read what is going on systemically during a game. It is just that they may have different solutions and better players available to solve emerging problems. However, I am getting a real sense that Gary is very cautious and I don't know what that is about, given the so called s**t or bust season.

Also, I do like the phrase" the good Olsson" mostly because ( with Martin's poor performance for us) it serves to emphasise just how bad the bad one is, What an awful signing amongst so many awful.signings!.

I thought their managers influence and experience showed over ours yesterday.McClaren looked like he knew what he was doing, was reading it and making changes based on what he saw.They were the only winners in that game once they equalised.I did wonder where we'd be with a manager like McClaren rather than GB-but thats an observation not necessarily a complaint.We are as they say, where we are!

It looks sometimes like GB is working to somekind of formula the way we approach games and adapt during games.

[thenodrog]

I'll say two words to you .....

Brian and Kidd

What we need is someone with organisational sense, an experienced MANAGER not another coach. Possibly in a D of F position above Boywer.

Me again then.

[Darwen Rover 007]

Let's look at the facts...

Bowyer took over a team that was in disarray, we were touching the relegation zone..

In just over 6 months he has got us in touching distance of the play offs...

As some have mentioned, his progress to date has helped his critics miss manage their expectations..

Could he improve? Of course.. Even the likes of Wenger / Mourinho etc are criticised for their blind spots.. He's done a lot of good and right now we need a steady hand to nurture the young team he has created..

Be careful what you wish for chaps, another change in my view could be catastrophic.. As we have seen on many occasions and not just under the venky dictatorship..

[john.leigh]

IMO Bowyer is doing ok on the pitch and working wonders off it.

All things considered, it could be catastrophic if we were to part with him at this moment in time.

I'm not saying he's the perfect manager but he's perfect for Rovers at present.

[Riverside67]

I just wish he would understand that midfield is a a key weakness currently and is the reason we cannot control a game.

He cannot continue with the present line up and expect an inmprovement.

He is either too loyal to those guys or he is too slow to learn.

[Mike E]

I just wish he would understand that midfield is a a key weakness currently and is the reason we cannot control a game.

He cannot continue with the present line up and expect an inmprovement.

He is either too loyal to those guys or he is too slow to learn.

Or he's waiting on Evans being fit and attempting to address defensive midfield w/ this Bryan Dabo?

[FGS5635]

I thought their managers influence and experience showed over ours yesterday.McClaren looked like he knew what he was doing, was reading it and making changes based on what he saw.They were the only winners in that game once they equalised.I did wonder where we'd be with a manager like McClaren rather than GB-but thats an observation not necessarily a complaint.We are as they say, where we are!

It looks sometimes like GB is working to somekind of formula the way we approach games and adapt during games.``

Funny thing with managers who make changes to avert a game their way is they have to get it wrong to start with in order to need a change. It could be argued McLaren had all week to plan for rovers, yet he got it wrong and out coached by bowyer. He was then forced to change plans and fair play to him he did that

[JAL]

I just wish he would understand that midfield is a a key weakness currently and is the reason we cannot control a game.

He cannot continue with the present line up and expect an inmprovement.

He is either too loyal to those guys or he is too slow to learn.

We can only hope that its simply a lack of money.

[JBiz]

I just wish he would understand that midfield is a a key weakness currently and is the reason we cannot control a game.

He cannot continue with the present line up and expect an inmprovement.

He is either too loyal to those guys or he is too slow to learn.

Or the guy he bought to do a job in midfield has been out for 3 months...

[JAL]

Just read the Lancashire Telegraph story claiming Rovers, Gary Bowyer in particular should have had a penalty when Todd Kane had a shot at goal.

How to make a manager look stupid when his player has just had a free shot at goal ffs.

[Clitherover]

I wouldn't want Bowyer out, for the first time in ages we have a manager that players want to play for and players that seem to be improving as footballers under him.

The problem obviously lies in the strange tactical decisions which don't seem to be improving. The answer could be an experienced head alongside him in the form of a Director of Football who wouldn't be afraid to tell him the glaringly obvious things he's getting wrong in games.

At the end of the day we're three points from the playoffs with some easy games (on paper) to play. I'd have been begging to be in this position at the end of last season so I'm keeping the faith in Bowyer and just hoping that he will finally, one day soon, wake up and see what he is doing wrong during games.

Also there's the small matter of our board not being able to pick their noses let alone a new manager, If Bowyer went I'd expect another Kean/Berg/Appleton in.

[dingles staying down 4ever]

Just read the Lancashire Telegraph story claiming Rovers, Gary Bowyer in particular should have had a penalty when Todd Kane had a shot at goal.

How to make a manager look stupid when his player has just had a free shot at goal ffs.

To be fair if Kane had gone down, the ref should have awarded a penalty. As Kane stayed up it was never a penalty

[Leonard Venkhater]

To be fair if Kane had gone down, the ref should have awarded a penalty. As Kane stayed up it was never a penalty

Surely not the case. A foul is a foul.

[Jimmy612]

Just read the Lancashire Telegraph story claiming Rovers, Gary Bowyer in particular should have had a penalty when Todd Kane had a shot at goal.

How to make a manager look stupid when his player has just had a free shot at goal ffs.

It was a penalty. There was contact, Kane was through on goal and stumbled, thus narrowing his angle on goal. A difficult chance and he put it wide.

If Kane goes down its a stonewall penalty. But why should he have to go down? Price you pay for honesty eh?

To be fair if Kane had gone down, the ref should have awarded a penalty. As Kane stayed up it was never a penalty

Yes it was. The defender has clearly impeded his progress and the opportunity to shoot earlier. Pathetic this rule that if player tries to stay on their feet it's not a foul. It was and it affected his opportunity on goal.

Put it this way. If Kane was in the centre of the field, got clipped like that and then passed it out of play instead of to a player on the wing then what would the referee have done?

[dingles staying down 4ever]

Surely not the case. A foul is a foul.

He stayed on his feet so had a shooting opportunity so the ref had every right to play advantage. Sorry to say Kane finished like the right back he is.

If he went down the ref had no option but to award a penalty.

[gumboots]

From where I sit it was a clear pen. It's wrong that you have to go down to get a pen and run the risk of getting booked for diving