16 minutes ago, JoeH said:

How time can affect views. Jordan Rhodes is the best striker this club has had for a decade. He was a top quality player who almost single handedly got this club promoted. Let's not pretend he was anything other than brilliant for us.

Very limited player.. not brilliant at all.. Gary bowyer constantly tried to sell him and replace.

Why in the world would anyone want Jordan Rhodes? Busted flush who wasn't great first time round, when he at least scored a few goals..

How about Phil Jones back on loan from man u? Still only 27..

It's so sad to watch rovers become a hollow shell of what it once was.. and probably never will be again.

Just now, OnePhilT said:

And all the while, the difference that Graham makes to the team in comparison to Gallagher is there for all to see. I'm not a fan of the idea of forcing a younger striker in there for a learning curve when we have a far superior option for the remainder of this season - even if Graham is getting on a bit, he is STILL our best and most reliable lone-striker by some distance. Gallagher can't complain at the lack of chances he's had this season, but I think we should stop thinking about the team we want in a year's time, and go with what will get us results this season. There is surely no harm in starting with Graham whenever we can and bringing on Gally when Graham gets tired. I think that's the best way to do it until Graham hangs up his Rovers boots or becomes incapable (whichever comes first).

SG ain't that young.. to me, he just is lacking confidence, and you only build that up from playing games.

Just now, JacknOry said:

The 'wing' police strikes for the second time today.

Sorry..

Just now, Amo said:

If Graham's not up to it, then it has to be Gallagher up top. What's the sense playing him and Arma in the wrong positions?

SG is never gonna be Graham's replacement without getting the chance. We have to keep putting him in there.

Just now, OnePhilT said:

If Arma does get put up front on his own, then it almost certainly would be Gallagher on the wing. 

Once again, it's not 'the wing', as we don't play with wingers. If SG plays there, it's as a supporting forward from wide.

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

Upset, why? 

Gallagher is big, but i wouldn't say he uses his size very well. Yet anyway 

Upset cos he may start if fit.

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

 

 

I don't want Graham dropped, but if he is I would prefer a minor tweak to last night as opposed to something wholesale. I agree about Armstrong, I have huge reservations too, but at least he has a bit of pace. I just hope it's not Gallagher on the wing....

SG is a big physical unit.. Stoke are a big physical team.. hmm, you could be upset..!

Just now, WIR Second Coming said:

It's all a bit too 'hit and hope' for me. 

Why can't TM accept the notion that appears to work very well in other clubs, that a consistent and stable line up breeds success. The constant tinkering on the basis of trying to out-think the opposition has only demonstrated one thing, and that is that TM isn't very good at it. If it ain't broke, Tony, don't FFS try to fix it!

I'm pretty certain he won't play that line up away to Stoke.. I can't understand it, but I'm not a football manager.

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

There will surely be changes alright. Hopefully not too off the wall, but I wouldn't bet on it! 

I would be happy if Armstrong is upfront for Graham and then Holtby fills in for Armstrong. 

I don't think AA has the physiche to be the lone front man.. far better as a wide supporting forward.

Just now, JacknOry said:

Inverted wingers, inside forwards...whatever you want to call them.

Just clearing up confusion, as if folk are expecting Armstrong to play like a winger(like Ripley for example), no wonder they are disappointed.

Just now, JacknOry said:

Have to give credit to AA last night as well. He has received some criticism this season and for the most part, deservedly so. I thought he had a good game and was instrumental in the goal. First the tackle, then the run behind and cross field ball to Downing. 

Besides the goal, I thought he gave them problems throughout the game. Another night he would have bagged two goals if it were not for Raya. I also thought that he grafted defensively too and him and Nyambe worked well together down that right side for the most part. I do hope he is finally growing into this wing position because his pace can really trouble teams, simply by having that pace he prevents the oppo defence from pushing up too far. 

Him and Rothwell on the wings is probably the way to go when we are looking for fast counter attacks. 

Holtby is the one that is seemingly hard to fit in at the moment. obvious quality but doesnt offer the pace of either of those two on the wing and I have not been convinced with him in CM so far. 

We don't play with wingers.. rothwell and Armstrong are wide attackers..

Just now, JoeH said:

I feel that there's justification in altering the line-up. Each game is different and Stoke are probably still the most physical side in this division. Danny Batth, Lee Gregory, Nick Powell - they've got a very direct approach. We need to be able to compete physically. Need to retain the Evans &Travis ball winning midfield for me though, and Downing (the 35 winger) is twice the left back Bell is. Tough one because last night is near our perfect XI, but Stoke an entirely different beast and it would be naive to try and go with the exact same tactic and expect it to work. But you never know.

I can see Bennett playing to be honest.. I can hear the groans at that one.

Can't see TM playing such an attacking line up(in terms of personnel) Vs Stoke in an away game. For me, that's a pity, as I think that's a major criticism of his management at Rovers.

There's no reason to alter the 11 at all.. Brentford had all the possession, so we played it like an away performance anyway.

We'll have to see.