v Stoke City (h) - 4/10/25, k/o 12:30pm

[wilsdenrover]

It’s starting to look like we could have waited until January to sign this Baradji chap.

 

[chaddyrovers]

13 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

So to clarify, you have no problem with us signing him despite a long term injury, because they explained as such when he signed?

what to clarify? I have said my opinion on this RF99. I judge a signing on what he does on the pitch. We knew he wouldn't be fit to play when we signed him and its would be 2 or 3 before he played here, yet some of us get yourself in twist over it when it was clear what the plan was for this signing injury wise and operational wise 

[wilsdenrover]

1 minute ago, Miller11 said:

Signing an injured player does look as though it was the plan. Obviously it’s an absolutely shit plan though. The plan has contributed to us being in the relegation zone by the beginning of October, was that the plan?

I wouldn’t rule it out.

[simongarnerisgod]

10 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

what to clarify? I have said my opinion on this RF99. I judge a signing on what he does on the pitch. We knew he wouldn't be fit to play when we signed him and its would be 2 or 3 before he played here, yet some of us get yourself in twist over it when it was clear what the plan was for this signing injury wise and operational wise 

i honestly think you`de still defend the regime if they released everyone and put 11 of their chicken workers on the pitch,despite us finishing  the season on zero points,it was clear what the plan was

[Hasta]

15 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

what to clarify? I have said my opinion on this RF99. I judge a signing on what he does on the pitch. We knew he wouldn't be fit to play when we signed him and its would be 2 or 3 before he played here, yet some of us get yourself in twist over it when it was clear what the plan was for this signing injury wise and operational wise 

Do you think John Fleck was a good signing?

Only featured for 17 minutes but played well in a game we dominated whilst he was on. If we judge him solely on what he did on the pitch he’s surely an outstanding bit of business.

Edited 4 hours ago by Hasta

[roversfan99]

15 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

what to clarify? I have said my opinion on this RF99. I judge a signing on what he does on the pitch. We knew he wouldn't be fit to play when we signed him and its would be 2 or 3 before he played here, yet some of us get yourself in twist over it when it was clear what the plan was for this signing injury wise and operational wise 

You havent said your opinion on ("the plan of" signing a player out injured for months.

You have done your usual routine of going round arguing with people who criticise the club, without committing to saying that you agree with the decision.

[Lancaster Rover]

Even by the usual standards of being contrary this is surely talking the piss. A loan signing whose only contribution so far is using our medical facilities and looks he will be doing into November at the earliest. We’ve got a self imposed 10k wage cap but are happy to pay the wages of another teams player while he undergoes treatment with seemingly no timescale on when he will actually play for us. As batshit mental signings go, and there has been a few under Venky’s this one is right up there. 

[roverandout]

I think Stoke will smash us. Robbins knows how to set a team up. Ismael doesn't 

[Tomphil2]

1 hour ago, wilsdenrover said:

It’s starting to look like we could have waited until January to sign this Baradji chap.

 

A squad man who hasn't cost any wages yet, the payroll dept will love that.

I'm sure his agent will have sent his invoice in though.

[Kjell]

I have struggled a bit to see how Ismael wants us to play, maybe especially what I thought was supposed to be a high press – or at least high intensity – has shown itself to a very small degree.

Then we’re kind of somewhat organized at the back – until we aren’t. We’re not particularly direct, we’re not particularly physical, and the new players (apart from Alebiosu) don’t seem to have very clear basic skills or standout strengths.

I really haven’t found a better description than the one a Watford fan gave to LT back when Ismael was appointed (not entirely sure on the possesion bit):

"We were quite dour, not negative but we would tend to spend a lot of the first half shadow boxing to see what the other team had. They weren't playing by the same rules so often we'd be a goal down before we knew what happened. He was very safety first, massively into possession." https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/24964221.blackburn-rovers-lowdown-valerien-ismael-watford-spell/

If Stoke comes out with high intensity in the first 10-15 minutes, I could easily see us going down 0-2. At that point, Ismael will need to decide whether to bring in De Neve, Kargbo, or Henrikson to turn our fortunes around.

[Tomphil2]

It's the same stuff as under Bowyer and similar to a lot of Mowbray style.

Every now and then they'll press from the off and get a good win, other times some smart countering and an unexpected away win but in the main week in week out it's tepid bland bread and butter stuff.

Designed to carry certain players and get plenty touches and so called development into them, in other words get the stats up, possession sitting off and try to contain the opposition football.

Shite in other words and certainly not applied in other to entertain supporters or show ambition, putting value into players comes first.

Thing is most of these head coaches now have done the same courses and are grounded in the same principles and under the same instructions from above.

[J*B]

10 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

Sunshine and rain forecast for before and during the game Blackburn (Blackburn with Darwen) weather - Met Office

fully expect the game to go ahead and finish 

You know what would guarantee it would go ahead and finish? If the owners invested some actual money into the drainage system and stopped letting Ewood Park rot. 

[Upside Down]

3 hours ago, Miller11 said:

Signing an injured player does look as though it was the plan. Obviously it’s an absolutely shit plan though. The plan has contributed to us being in the relegation zone by the beginning of October, was that the plan?

You know it is.

Cheaper to run a League One club than a Championship one.

Indian government now got their eye on venkys overseas transfers so whatever scam they'd been running for the first 12 years or so can't be so easily pulled off anymore. Only option is to reduce costs. 

I see we've also deliberately reverted to the high playing staff turnover and plodding along model, albeit likely to be done in a lower division for the next foreseeable future.