roversfan99

Obviously getting wages down is very much the plan. But dont let them fool you into thinking this summers overhaul is part of any plan. They wanted to keep all of the players that left and planned far less in the way of a squad change. Do we deserve more than 6 points? The game that seems to cause people to think we are hard done by is the Birmingham game. There was little in the game either way for 85 minutes, just one moment of quality. But it was solely down to our naivety and our poor decision making that led to a defeat. I still dont get how we can end that game feeling hard done by. Otherwise, West Brom and Norwich were deserved defeats. Hull we clearly deserved to win. I would also strongly suggest that we deserved to win yesterday, we took the lead and saw the game out very well. But if you argued that we deserved more v Birmingham, you could probably say that on quality of chances and territory it was pretty even. Your general point at the end is fair by the way.

Obviously we are basing opinions both positive and negative very early on here, as its all we have to go on. For example, Gudjohnsen on a promising half an hour. But it appears a mixed bag. Gestede also comes across unprofessionally and arrogantly. Alebiousu, Morishita, McLaughlin and Miller to varying degrees also appear promising additions. But equally, he has signed a player out injured for months and also De Neve and Henriksson have appeared to be well off the standard so far. Tavares has also really struggled. But obviously the main issue has been the abject inability to hold on to any of our existing important players, with pathetic offers of the same wage and just an extra year. I suppose he isnt the main person to blame for that but Broughton managed it.

I think Ohashi is best suited to being a number 9. He likes to run in behind and he can use his body quite well. I think because of his frame, its easy to assume that he would be more effective deeper (hes hardly got the physique of a typical old fashioned number 9) but I dont see what skills he has that would be better suited there. I just dont think he is anything special. Hes a decent Championship striker but hes not one that cant be improved upon or one youd have faith in really making the difference. I liked the look of Gudjohnsen although he did have a specific job to do of helping to see a game out and he really did help in that. He has attributes that are really promising. That being said, the acid test will be what he offers in terms of helping us get more goals.

He hasnt been in the last 2 years. When he has played, he has looked really shaky and error prone and often seemed to evade criticism which was unfairly put on Hyam. I have always seen suggestions of the Premier League as unfounded but he has certainly shown before that he can be a good defender at this level and perhaps it was just those fitness issues that meant that he struggled to perform to his maximum during those 2 seasons. So the question is whether he can stay fit. Not only is it critical as he is our only natural right footed centre back but its also important to allow him to get some rhythm back.

For Wrexham in particular, it almost feels like a totally new team. With Parkinson's track record at this level, I do wonder considering that they have built a team of good Championship players, whether you just would be ruthless not based on what Parkinson deserves as it would feel unjust, but you make a tough managerial decision with similar ambition that they have shown signing players to try and get the best from them. If you arent convinced now but wait and see, you could be wasting time and leaving it too late to have a real push higher up. Im unsure if their owners will do that. They are seemingly incredibly ambitious and invested but they also seem really loyal.

Hes started really encouragingly and I really like the look of him. But Brittain was an absolute stand out for all of last season. No way is he an upgrade. Nor is that a criticism of him 5 games in.

I certainly dont think it is dire but many of their new signings didnt start either for fitness reasons or because Parkinson presumably tried to be loyal to the side that won at Millwall. Hyam, Ben Sheaf, Josh Windass, Nathan Broadhead, their new left wing back who they signed from Empoli and Issa Kabore all didnt start. They need to all gel and I suspect they dont have the manager needed to get the best of them but they certainly have some good players.

Excellent result and away performance. Arguably more pleasing than Hull in a way as there was no jeopardy at 3 up against a side ravaged with illness. We managed today really professionally and comfortably. Wharton was man of the match, absolutely brilliant. Both him and Carter did very well considering their lack of fitness. Tronstad was also excellent until he went off, getting back to his best. Alebiosu again was very good too down the right. Morishita certainly had an impact on his debut and looks a talent. Not convinced he is a wide player though, there are a number in the squad who I think would be better suited to a back 3, but selling Hyam with no replacement (and pretending it was the plan all along) robs us of that as a serious regular option. Gudjohnsen showed some really nice signs off the bench. Obviously until we see what hes like in terms of when we need a goal, then the jury is out, but he did well today and I liked the look of him. Kargbo as he often does didnt offer that same intelligent play. Miller did well coming on in a back 3 and that position suited him. Tavares was poor again and with the Tronstad potential injury and bizarre Baradji situation that position is a concern.

Ill take that as no, you just take everything they say at face value. Based on your general posting, its a fair assumption.

Ohashi has never played on the wing before. Ismael suggested that with Gudjohnsen adjusting to the league and having only trained once, that he is unlikely to need to be chucked in like Henriksson was.

Also @chaddyrovers was there any point in the interviews whereby you felt that they were not telling the truth, spinning the situation or any points where you felt that further questions were required?

Even if we cant afford to compete with then in particular. A bigger question would be, why are we not in a position to even offer these players better terms than what they signed years ago? Gestede said 2 of Travis/Brittain/Hyam were offered equal wages but with an extra year. They all signed contracts 3 seasons ago. Why is our wage budget capped at such a low amount? Why hasnt it even increased for inflation? Whats the point even bothering with such pathetic offers that they never would sign?

As a supporter of a club. It doesnt mean that you have to go along with everything the tossers who both own and run it say and withhold all critical faculty and any form of standards. When these idiots try and spin everything, there tends to be 2 different sides. We offered them as much as we possibly could - you can either say ok fair enough. Or ask why none of them were willing to sign within that structure, why is the structure so low, why cant we offer competitive wages, what is the pattern, why cant we even sign domestic players When we sign Baradji on loan who is injured for months - you can either say yeah that is good business. Or ask why we are replacing our captain with a bloke on loan who is out for ages injured, is that wise? When Gestede suggests that we are covered by the signing of Miller at centre back - we can either accept it, no questions. Or ask why he signed as soon as Brittain left, why he was signed as right back, why has he never/barely played as a centre back in a 4 before, what would have happened if we had kept Hyam When they say the squad is better but not suggest that we will finish higher - you can either say yeah ok, hard league, need patience, or ask why they think its better? Are they trying to con us by understating the quality of those lost? My advice. Dont just take the propaganda at face value. Question it.

You would literally defend pretty much anything the club do, wouldnt you?

To be honest, theres an argument that TGH is needed more in midfield even now. He is a natural central midfielder and Tavares has looked poor so a strong argument to have him starting there.

The thing is, there was a big gap between him failing a medical and then us revisiting the deal, and also a further gap between him signing and us knowing what was going on. If they were so intent on signing him, could this recuperation not have started far sooner? Ismael said he might be back after the next international break but maybe even the one after that. Basically he cant put a timescale on it. Ill be amazed if we see him before Christmas. An utterly pointless signing and within a squad lacking quality in depth. Although according to one or two, its a very clever bit of business.

What a bit of business that was. Replacement for Travis. Henriksson also out with a broken hand.

I disagree personally on the numbers but my main point was that I dont agree with signing 1 player to cover 2 positions. You still need 2 bodies for 2 positions. If one of those can also cover another position, it can provide extra emergency cover or more flexibility in game which is an added skill, but it doesnt compensate. Miller might be needed at RB and CB at the same time, so it will mean a second player has to be moved around. I dont think our squad is big enough. I suppose numbers and actually viable quality for our first team. Montgomery is a good example, regardless of where he plays for the Scotland under 21s, he isnt good enough at Championship level for either role. Forshaw isnt good enough. Gueye isnt good enough.

But its about quality AND numbers. You say Miller can cover centre back. But hes also covering right back. He cant cover them both if we have injuries in both.

Its being done because of cost cutting. We have historically had squads that have been unable to sustain performance over a season due to a lack of depth. Versatility is a useful tool but you cant compromise on numbers. Say if Carter and Alebiosu get injured. You then need a natural right back at centre back, a midfielder at right back and then you are potentially short in midfield. 23 registered players, including one injured for an unknown period. Adam Forshaw who shouldnt be starting games and is injured. Other players with bad injury history. Makhtar Gueye. Its a long old season, now that versatility is a tool we can use, when you get months into the season and youve got more injuries, its very thin and you have 2 spare spaces.

My point is that versatility is good but not instead of signing players for each position. You cant sign one player to cover 2 positions INSTEAD of signing 2 players. It wouldnt take a "massive influx" of injuries for us to be badly short. We have had bigger squads in recent years and have still not had enough to avoid a massive second half of the season dip.

What was wrong with the old system?

But versatility doesnt compensate for having less numbers. One of 4 centre backs is actually a right back and cant play both at the same time. TGH cant play right back and in midfield at the same time. Neither can Montgomery although I suspect he cant do either to a satisfactory level at this stage. Even before quality, we dont have enough numbers. Before also considering injury records.

Ismael is very comfy on his long deal and very much trotting out the company line in his interview. Not convinced that hes truthfully so happy about business. He keeps talking about versatility. Yes its very useful but it doesnt compensate for a lack of numbers. For example, we are short in midfield with Travis gone, Tavares (who Ismael seems to think has done well in every game which is far from true) and us signing someone who is nowhere near fitness. So Taylor Gardner Hickman should be needed there. But he cant play there and right back at the same time and our right back cover is now considered a full time centre back. And if we are so well covered, Hyam wouldnt have been one of the first names on the team sheet. Theres a continued batting off about the contract situation. No reassurance that anything is going to change and those with 2 years on their deals will be proactively approached.

It was only "time for them to leave" because we are incapable of sorting new deals at competitive rates.