roversfan99

Cant argue with Cooks record though.

As you say, is home is never in the centre of midfield, but he doesnt necessarily need to always be a bit part player for us. He needs to work on his positional discipline, but his home is in one of the 3 roles behind the striker, as his strength is running at and committing players.

https://www.rovers.co.uk/news/2018/november/a-horrible-game-but-a-vital-three-points/ Even the manager has described it as "a horrible game" and said that we need to "move on and produce a better performance next week." So he is being "negative" too. The performance was poor, theres no dressing that up. Of course the result is the important thing and people have acknowledged that.

Quite surprised you think Evans was excellent, personally thought he was as bad as hes been all season. He's usually the one who is more likely to play passes through to Dack and find him in space in between the lines, but I thought he was really poor on the ball today and constantly gave the ball away. Think you are a little harsh to call Palmer a showboater and he also did do running going back but he certainly was off the pace when on the ball, both him and Rothwell did nothing really. Agreed with your other comments on Bell, Brereton, Dack and the centre backs.

Very, very poor game, but happy tonight as results are all that matter. Mowbray is right to point out that the referee was really poor, bit of a jobsworth really. But hes also benefited from a penalty that never was, and needs to look closer to home in terms of a negative team selection that led to a laborious and slow performance, with the ball constantly going slowly sideways and backwards. That said, the team spirit hes generated is what ground out that win. Its difficult to cast too much of a judgement on the defence in that QPR were totally toothless and clearly intent on getting a nil nil. Leutweiler could have stayed on the bench still, Smallwood could have stayed in net! Bennett was untested in the main but his tendency to dive in is a constant source of worry. Bell was the worst player on the pitch for me, so terrified to run at his man, constantly turned back or gave the ball away and so one-footed its untrue. Lenihan was a colossus and deserved his man of the match award, Williams was ok but the difference is stark with Mulgrew on the ball, and a clear factor in our inability to pass the ball through the lines. I've always thought that our best defence is Nyambe to come back in at right back, with Williams at left back, and the obvious 2 at centre back. Evans had possibly his worst performance of the season, kept giving the ball away, and him and Smallwood being selected together were a fundamental reason behind the game being so boring and slow, we needed a Reed or even a Rodwell in there at home in a winnable game. Armstrong wasnt clever enough to take advantage of the fact that he had such an obvious pace advantage on Angel Rangel, and when he did get around him his end product was poor. Reed was industrious as ever and my favourite part of the game apart from the goal and the final whistle was Reeds tackle at the end followed by him celebrating like hed scored a goal. Dack was poor and got really frustrated towards the end but kept his cool to slot home the penalty and his time wasting at the end was brilliant to watch, such a clever player. Graham was not given any service but should have scored in the first minute. And to the subs, thought Palmer and Rothwell were both pretty poor when they came on, Palmer did some good work tracking back but he was ponderous on the ball. Brereton was bright when he came on, went wide once or twice and gave the ball away with terrible crosses to no one, but looked a real threat in behind when he moved central (where he seemed to be more often than not, bit of a curveball to suggest hes just being considered wide?) and did some excellent work to kill time with Dack. And obviously he earnt the penalty with what was a blatant dive. More signs that suggest to me that I'd really like to see him as a number 9 ahead of Dack. His running in behind could cause problems as it did when he was impressing at Forest.

Mixed team news. Really, really pleased to see Dack, Graham and Lenihan back, hope all are 100% fit. Glad to see the team in general look more familiar than I expected with all the doubts. Will greatly miss Mulgrew. Bennett at right back a concern, would have had Rodwell in midfield and Nyambe at RB, and Palmer shouldnt have been dropped.

Ah right sorry. They need to keep Paul Cook at all costs. Very, very good manager.

Youve stated more than once that you wouldnt play him wide. So whats changed?

Brereton signed with a promising reputation, on the back of playing for Nottingham Forest for over a season, primarily as a centre forward, week in, week out in the Championship. The game he made his name was as a striker against Arsenal, ripping them apart. That said, I think my expectations and thoughts are fair in that I DIDNT expect him to come here and instantly take that mantle, regardless of his price tag or desire to come here to play football. I expected Graham to continue as our first choice, but Brereton to offer much fiercer competition than Samuel and Nuttall have in the past, maybe playing if Graham was unable to, replacing him off the bench, hell, even playing wide occasionally if Graham was still on the pitch! I didnt expect him to be first choice striker, taking everything in his stride, already on 10 goals etc. The brunt of the criticism seems to have strayed towards Mowbray, on the assumption that he gave the green light to sign off the deal. From what I've seen, Brereton does not look comfortable or look of any use playing in a wide position. Armstrong is a fair example but he took to it straight away, hes quicker than Brereton, hes more nimble, he runs at players more comfortably, and hes far smaller so I can somewhat understand the logic. He's also still considered to be a striker. Most of my criticism doesnt even come around the fact that I dont see the logic or any real signs that Brereton could make an effective wide man, based on what I have seen so far and based on his struggles there for Forest according to their fans. Lets assume that Brereton suddenly becomes very effective in that role. Even then, it would leave us short up front, as we were prior to the summer. We have Palmer, Rothwell and Armstrong already competing for that solitary attacking wide role that Mowbray employs. Beneath a 33 year old Danny Graham, we then resort to playing our best player out of position there, and even Kasey Palmer has been mentioned for that position, highlighting the lack of depth we have. Ergo, Brereton wouldnt be fit for purpose for what we was missing. If Mowbray had signed a striker AND Brereton then maybe this discussion wouldnt be taking place.

If Cook goes that would be crazy.

If this is true, then it isnt a system I agree with. I dont think that its healthy or often constructive for someone aside from the manager to make the final decision on players. I disprove of Director of Footballs and the like for the very same reason. We needed a striker, and signed one for a lot of money with a burgoning reputation. Its a big if but if hes been signed above Mowbray, then that would make sense in that he seemingly has some belief in his potential but he doesnt trust him or see him as a player in the position that he was signed in. Leaving us short up front still and with a 7m player he isnt entirely sure what to do with at the moment. Exactly. When Alex Ferguson signed Bebe, Kleberson or Djemba Djemba, im sure fans still trusted him whilst they slagged off them individual signings. Half the time, it isnt putting your view across. Thats what people are encouraging, but rather than give your view, you say "trust Mowbray" which is implying that any opinion you, I or any other fan holds is inferior. Please can you quote people calling you positive or stop saying it ad nauseum.

Seemingly now in the role of Mowbrays assistant manager feeding back cryptic, vague teasers Alan Nixon style that could never be proven/disproven regardless. May I ask, presuming the team line up is as unbelievable as you say, why fans wouldnt be instantly concerned about it. Just here solely on the wind up it seems now.

The thing is, a striker was always the main target in the summer. We spent 7m on a striker, we dont consider the striker to be a striker, and now Mowbray is saying he is a striker short. Regardless of how successful/unsuccessful he has been or will prove to be wide, I dont see how people pointing out the illogical nature of that process to be "over-entitled." I appreciate that signing the right striker isnt necessarily easy but I refuse to accept that it is impossible to sign a striker fit for purpose, to challenge Danny Graham. For all intents and purposes we had signed a player to at least provide some form of competition, we could have understood if for now he was Grahams understudy I also think that @philipl and his claim that there is evidence to show that the choice was Brereton or nothing is totally unsubstantiated. You mentioned fans being over-entitled and unwilling to allow him time, but the confusion manly stems around how he is being used. We have a 7m project who has featured occasionally out of position. Of course hes not been signed to be at his maximum levels this season, but firstly im not sure we can really afford to sign such an expensive player solely for the future, and I also dont think that considering he played fairly regularly over a couple of years at Forest, that he wouldnt be able to contribute a lot more now should he play in his natural position. I expected Graham to be the main man, and Brereton to be initially his understudy, he could learn plenty from Graham, he could provide the fresh legs off the bench or play when Graham is injured etc, and I am aware that there would be an adaptation period regardless. What people seem to be of the opinion that Brereton needs is to play in his best position! Something you agreed with strongly last week! And I would suggest that assuming that a player finding form and confidence more likely and more easy to come by in his natural position is a fairly logical conclusion to come to, but you also make a good point by saying "you are talking alot of rubbish" as if ive judged Brereton personally and made a massive character assassination. Again with unsubstantiated claims that there are loads of fans who dont trust Mowbray, without proof, without names, just trying to stir the pot.

Everyone hopes that Brereton scores tomorrow and we win. And the majority of "recent criticism" has not been about the player himself. It has been about the way he has been used and the amount of money he cost in light of the other deficiencies in our squad and how differently we could have spent the money, no one has blamed him for the fee though, that doesnt make any sense. Whilst he continues to play out of position, the spotlight will be on Mowbray more so than Brereton himself. I also dont need to meet Brereton as I never said it may affect his confidence based on his personality. It is based solely on playing anyone out of position, nothing to do with Brereton himself. I based my theory on if a player is placed somewhere aside from his natural position, he is less likely to play well. Simple as that. Meaningless platitudes such as "patience and time is needed" and "trust Mowbray" will naturally fall on deaf ears on an internet messageboard, in a thread dedicated to the player in question. He will be judged like anyone else on a game by game basis, and even though the fans in general trust Mowbray, people will always trust what they see with their own eyes over anything else.

So, in a hypothetical paralell universe. You would rather play Leutweiler and Bennett rather than have Raya in net and no Bennett? Each to their own opinion but I think that its crazy that youd choose Bennett over any of them in terms of importance. Raya, Mulgrew, Lenihan, Nyambe and Graham are partialy more important due to lack of quality depth in their positions.

I disagree. Dont remember him having any shots or getting close to their net. Won a couple of good free kicks. I know you do. Although you said we should sign a centre back earlier on so you clearly cant make your mind up. We cant argue but we can give our own opinions even if they go against what Mowbray does or says. Stick to your own opinions, I wont tell Tony! I dont, im suggesting that I think it might because he surely would play better in his actual position. Maybe, if thats the case then sign someone on loan if that is the plan, or move onto another target. If Rothwell was a target in January, we signed Payne and Armstrong so we werent short regardless. No, but it will forever be linked to him and part of judgements made about his signing in his own thread. We cant change games after theyve finished but we still discuss and debate them. Its a messageboard. Ok. Because I judge players with my own eyes after watching them. Stop being pedantic. You know i mean when we played Leeds, Swansea and West Brom.

I personally think it will affect his confidence more playing out of position because hes less likely to replicate any performances that caused his reputation to increase at Forest. You keep mentioning Bauer but Mowbray repeatedly bleated on about various lists throughout the summer, do even if your hypothesis is true about that deal not happening, he should have looked elsewhere IMO. The fee thing has been done to death, but people will judge when we have a 7m luxury signing having rare out of position cameos whilst we are short in other areas. People will wonder if that money could have been spent elsewhere. I never said we should sign Bamford, was just responding to Biz to justify his fee and wages. Yes but its irrelevant because I can see with my own eyes, and having seen Dack play as a striker 3 times this week and Brereton in most of his cameos wide that neither experiment/tactic in my opinion is one I would continue, as both looked uncomfortable in unnatural positions. I cant get my head around the fact that he is not even being considered in his natural position, hes solely being considered as a wide man when the alternatives are Dack, Palmer and Nuttall.

Who are the 1/2 players above being the first name of the team sheet? When everyone is fit. Dack is first on the team sheet, our talisman and primary source of goals. Him and Mulgrew, our captain, crucial with Lenihan at the back as our only 2 competent centre backs. Raya as our goalkeeper is obvious. Nyambe as our only natural right back. Graham as our only proven striker, and a critical part of our attacking play. So thats 6, plus Reed shares all of Bennetts drive, passion and versatility, aswell as a bit more quality. So for me, thats 7 ahead of him. Then youve got a straight battle between Williams and Bell at left back. Evans, Rodwell, Bennett and Smallwood as the main group battling for 2 midfield spots and Palmer, Rothwell and Armstrong as the main options for the more attacking wide role. Not dismissing his importance or saying that I wouldnt start him tomorrow but lets not exaggerate!

Against Leeds he did ok but he didnt offer any attacking threat, the work he did that was decent was very much in terms of game management, winning fouls etc. He wasnt an attacking danger. Every other time, hes looked poor there. But to be fair its not his position. The reason that people are concerned when he doesnt play, and when he does, not in his correct position, is because he was the majority of our summer budget. It can easily be argued that even if he is effective wide, it is a luxury that we could not afford to sign a striker to be moulded into a wide man, when we are short up front, and also looking light at centre back and right back. Thats nothing against Brereton himself, and at the moment all of the discussion around him is not in terms of his own abiliity, it is in terms of how the manager is using/misusing him. You yourself have commented more than once that you dont think he should be wide with Dack central, so id be interested to know what suddenly has changed your own personal mind, without repeating quotes from Mowbrays press conference today.

They are. Training is crucial, just like diet, analysis, lifestyle, sleep etc. But they are all done in preparation for matches. You train solely to make yourself as good as you can get on a match day.

He didnt. He didnt say anything like that. He, admittedly with a bit of hyperbole, said what others have said, that match days are when it matters.

I understand but disagree with Armstrong being ahead of him in your opinion. Both of them are strikers who seem to be in limbo between their natural positions and playing wide, but with Armstrong, all of his previous good performances for us were wide and his skills are more suited to be effective there, hes small, quick, runs at players. Dack I cant understand. If you put him up front, firstly you are moving him from the position he has been so impressive in since he joined. Secondly, hes shown in the last week, he isnt suited to being the furthest man forward. Mowbray stated that he potentially sees Palmer being able to play up front, hes not a striker in a million years either. My point about Nuttall was that he considered him as one of his options to be a striker. At the moment he doesnt see Brereton has an option centrally, even though he has far more positive experience at proving himself in that position. I don't think Brereton should be our first striker, and im not even demanding that he is only chosen as a striker. But to not even be considered as a striker, behind 2 midfielders and a fellow young striker without the fledgling potential that Brereton showed pre-Rovers just makes no sense to me. And to spend 7m on a striker to play wide and leave us short up front doesnt make any sense either. You are totally taking their obvious intentions out of context. Training is obviously very important otherwise they wouldnt do it. But it doesnt matter how you perform in training if you dont perform on a match day.

My main qualm with the quote from Mowbray, and id like to state that like you inferred earlier, that we dont know the full context again. I don't understand why he is seemingly solely being seen as a wide man, no grey areas, hes not a striker in Mowbrays eyes short term. Especially considering how light of depth we are otherwise there. I appreciate that Forest fans stating that Brereton is no good wide is not foolproof in terms of how he will do here in that role either, your Armstrong example proves that, but nor should it be discarded. Added to that, when he has featured there in matches he has looked uncomfortable. He made his name at Forest and in the England youth teams as a central forward. His most accomplished performance that got him all the media attention was against Arsenal as a central striker. https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/17197021.rovers-boss-mowbray-happy-with-the-options-available-to-him/?ref=mac Just going off the recent selections, and the comments in the above article: Would you agree that Brereton (natural striker) should be higher in the pecking order for that position than Dack? Would you agree that Brereton should be higher in the pecking order for that position than Kasey Palmer? Would you agree that if Brereton isnt considered ready enough to even become an option to be number 9, then Joe Nuttall certainly isnt ready? Like you said, there may be the odd occasion when it suits the team. Off the top of my head, if we are losing, we dont want to break up the Dack and Graham partnership, but we want another attacker on, get Brereton wide rather than moving Dack. And I would totally accept that. My main points are to summarise: - I dont believe Brereton is best suited to be playing wide - If he has been signed to play wide, then I think Mowbray maybe needs to point questions towards himself as to why he feels short in terms of strikers. I dont think anyone could doubt that hes improved the quality of the squad. He made some good signings in the summer. But we have only 2 trusted natural centre backs, we have 1 natural right back, we have 1 trusted central striker, yet we have 4 players battling for that wide role as the third attacking player (2 natural strikers, 2 10's) and 1 or 2 too many in central midfield.

1. I never said its easy. But I refuse to accept that it was impossible to bring in a striker. You mention Bamford, he is a proven goalscorer at this level and has won player of the year at this level. Thats why he cost so much. 2. https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/17008496.tony-mowbray-on-whether-he-feels-rovers-are-a-striker-short/ Mowbray said here we are a striker short. The fact that his seemingly current second choice striker is Bradley Dack backs that up. We do only play 1 but we only have 1. 3. I just think that comments about not supporting the player, knowing better than the manager or anything like that detract from the debate at hand. Id like to be proven wrong, your point about Armstrong is valid somewhat I do appreciate and of course I hope that I am proven wrong. But Armstrong fit the position like a glove from the start, it was against much weaker opposition (he has struggle to replicate this season) and his skillset is IMO far more suited. A key part to my argument is that, with Samuel (now injured) as 2nd choice last season, it was blatantly obvious in the summer that signing a striker was a key priority. Even if Brereton turns into an excellent wide forward, which would obviously be good as an improvement to the team, its like buying a really nice car when you needed a house. It would leave us as lacking in depth up front as we were at the start of the summer. And surely when Graham isnt fit, youd agree that as second choice, Brereton would be higher up the pecking order than moving Dack into a position hes also not familiar with. @unsall you mention when Grahams not here anymore Brereton may play there but when hes not been in the team at times in the last week weve played Dack there! Another main point is that Brereton gained the reputation he has as a striker. The Forest fan on here was clear and it seems a common theme, Brereton playing wide didnt suit him and it coincided with his form dropping off. He made his name as a central striker, he ran Arsenal ragged as a striker, he impressed both for Forest and Englabd youth teams as a striker. Its been mentioned that hes being easing in but surely playing the last 20 or 30 minutes up front his natural position where hes more likely to impress would make more sense. Obviously he will be scrutinised but if he continues to play out wide and doesnt do anything, then I sense that the blame has shifted from Brereton onto Mowbray for how hes using him.

I dont get why, if the only opinion you are happy to consider is the managers, that you come on a fans messageboard. (This isnt me saying dont come on here before you say it) Obviously the manager knows more about management than me. He knows more than everyone on here. And no one doubts that. Training is different, Ben Gladwin was our best player in training apparently. I judge players on games and have given a detailed reasoning on why I disagree on Brereton playing wide in my post to biz.