roversfan99

Had he played more football for us then he likely would have improved upon and proved those weaker areas and generated more attention. Also, you downplay it but £18-20m is not an insignifant amount especially considering FFP to spend in January even if its a bargain as teams restructure their team more in the summer. But even if it was still only Palace, they would have had to pay more if we werent so desperate. We were desperate to sell, it was January and had he stayed he would have proven his quality more. I dont care about other incomparable players, England under 21 caps or Nixon rumours, its surely basic business logic that had we waited and not been so desperate we most likely would have got more.

You can go down the rabbit hole of well this player went for this, Nixon thinks this player is worth this, this player has these England under 21 caps, whatever. Surely it is common sense that if it wasnt in the much quieter January window, if we werent as desperate and if he had more experience and game time under his belt, we would naturally be in a position to get more money. There probably was a ceiling in that he would only ever go for the big, big money after proving himself in the Premier League. But due to the various circumstances leading to us pushing him out of the door, his value was reduced.

Typical refusal to believe that the club could have possibly done wrong. Of course as a Championship player there would always be a cap on his value. But common sense says, if we werent so desperate, had there likely been more interested parties in a summer window where teams naturally spend much more and after further proof of his ability playing for us, we could have got more. Its not even about direct comparisons to other players, its just logic based on our weak negotiating power. It doesnt matter anyway. £10m, £20m, £30m, it makes no difference to the club as we dont see a penny.

Its incredible revisionism to now have people suggesting that West Brom and Watford were wrong to sack him. Delusion.

So Ismael has done an excellent job in all 3 Championship clubs that he has been in, and his 2 sackings were unjust. Amazing that he hadnt been snapped up before he came here and that we even considered anyone else.

I dont think hes on a different planet, both are very good and probably at a similar level. But Palmer isnt a winger. Woud leave us imbalanced and sticking square pegs in round holes to try and force him in. (As I think would having Rice as the most defensive midfielder)

I disagree, I dont think he has the ability to play quick enough on the half turn, its not really his game. He has also shown for Arsenal in the last couple of years that he really benefits from having someone more disciplined next to him to allow him to roam more. Its a bit like Travis with us, although obviously Travis is nowhere near as good at it. Play him as the deepest midfielder and he is nowhere near as effective as having a Tronstad next to him. Rice was stifled at the Euros with more attack minded options beside him and the side was imbalanced.

The other argument is that managers havent finished higher than where Ismael was mid season since. Ismael had those clubs at stronger points than those since. West Brom as you say had just gone down, they finished the season Ismael left with Steve Bruce. Once they wasted that season, it naturally gets harder and harder to compete at the top and they have had financial issues since. The squad Cleverley got at Watford was weaker too.

The sell on is a seperate thing, its not as if it wouldnt have been included had we been in a position to get a bigger fee. Had we not been such distressed sellers then we could have got more had we waited. We were desperate to sell which weakened our bargaining power. Had we waited he would have had more time to prove how good he was/is. And crucially had it been in the summer, Premier League clubs naturally spend far more and buy more players so it likely wouldnt have been just Palace.

Its impossible to say over a year away. Stones and James are seldom fit but if you are just assuming that players whose bodies have repeatedly failed them are all fit, then do you even include Luke Shaw? One thing I am sure of is that Saka is our only top class winger and would be a guaranteed starter. Sticking Palmer there is again just trying to pick individuals rather than a balanced team. Your team lacks a defensive midfielder but as I have touched on I dont really think we have one of note. I would like to see Wharton next to Rice as that makes the most sense but I am not 100% convinced even then by the balance.

I think excellent is probably a description aided with the England blinkers on and Stones is seriously on the decline. As you touch on in another post though, you dont always need world class centre backs and Tuchel can organise teams so that has to be the hope. He needs to get the team playing to more than the sum of its parts. Wharton seems like the most obvious fit but even then im not so sure and either way, he isnt in Tuchel's immediate thoughts it seems. We as Rovers fans have higher than average opinions of him but he is still rough around the edges. Rice as you touched on in another post played best when he had Kalvin Phillips next to him. Rice is often pigeon holed as a holding midfielder for England but he isnt, Partey at Arsenal allows him to push on and gets the best out of him. Wharton played better for us I thought with Tronstad doing the defensive side rather than when Wharton was the most defensive and Travis was doing a budget equivalent of what Rice does, going box to box. Wharton isnt half as good off the ball as he is on it. We just dont have any good defensive midfielders. The fact you mentioned Henderson says everything. Someone like Owen Hargreaves or Michael Carrick who had that ability to just sit in and block the space in front of the defence, especially as for us our defenders individually are not great. Its another hard conundrum for Tuchel to try and solve as a tactician.

Agreed, there are some very good players in attack but its really difficult to find a balance and we are also much weaker further back. As you say, the attackers all want it to feet and most want to all be number 10s. Saka is the one stand out winger and he likes it to feet, Kane the stand out striker and he keeps dropping deep. You then have Bellingham, Palmer and Foden who all want to play in the same position, Tuchel will need to be brave and probably just play 1 (likely Bellingham) rather than falling into the same trap of picking the best players but stifling them. There was lots of criticism that Gibbs White wasnt in the initial squad and hes a good player but when most are fit assuming we arent putting square pegs in round holes, he woulr struggle to get on the bench.The likes of Gordon and Bowen are a level or two below some of the above names but if you play them wide it suits them more and gives us runners in behind. Further back, the defence as individuals are not close to the level of a tournament challenging team. It will take some brilliant work from Tuchel to make them able to keep the better countries at bay. We also have a lack of players who compliment Rice in midfield, Wharton is the obvious one but its a big ask at this side and im not sure those 2 provide much protection to an already questionable defence.

"A barrage of negativity." I think it was standard and boring qualification fare. Players playing at 75% against really poor opposition and winning comfortably. You dont really learn anything as qualification is really easy with the additional teams in every tournament, its against far inferior opposition, its over a year until the tournament and there is no test. The defence will likely be our ondoing v the top teams but for the most part had no concerns last night.

To be fair Foden was the best player in the Premier League last season and still always was allowed to play with a level of freedom. Admittedly he has been off the boil this season.

With an option so him and Hedges are nice easy ways to avoid signing new players and to keep the cost down. Doesnt matter than neither are good enough, the priority is to cut costs. Im guessing from another thumbs down that you are still expecting us to have a successful summer.

You are the sole member of the Markanday fan club. Nowhere near good enough. No but he will be cheap which is all that matters.

The Lancashire Telegraph have reported how numerous players havent been even spoken to regarding new deals, Travis included. The owners must have blocked new deals.

Its one of them where any team he would have picked would have had too much against really poor opposition. People pick apart the team and the squad but it was never going to matter, an easy win was always on the cards. The concerns would be when we play anyone who is any good. Some of his selections were strange, Rashford has struggled and hasnt had the sudden renaiscance that the media seem to want to portray since joining Villa and Foden has had a poor season and isnt a wide man. Henderson even being in the squad ahead of Wharton and Gallagher is just very odd. The defence will be a major concern beyond any selection questions. Guehi surely has to play but even then, hes not a top centre back and hes the best we have. The fact that a 32 year old Dan Burn for all of his limitations is starting, that isnt happening for the main contenders for the World Cup. Walker is past it but tonight, average or past their best defenders could in the main rest easy against a poor side, although even then they had the odd wobble.

Typical qualifier really. A somewhat disjointed display but the gulf in class v such a poor side leads to a comfortable victory. I think the defence will be a danger zone against anyone decent.

Im not re writing history, he was sacked by both West Brom and Watford within a year with both sides in a rut, and both sackings were seen as totally understandable and expected. Neither spell went to plan, and he had both clubs in far better positions with stronger squads than subsequent managers there as the parachute payments slow down. I would argue that the one re writing history is the one trying to make out as if his spells at West Brom and Watford were successful. He may have learnt from his mistakes, thats what we need to hope. He couldnt have started much worse, in 4 games and a very favourable run of fixtures, hes taken us from being in the play offs to be pretty much out of contention entirely. Some feat. You seem to have kidded yourself into thinking that him saying he wants to play quick possession football will lead to this lovely balanced style of sometimes going long, only ever playing in the right areas and everything going to plan. His only success came playing direct football which apparently he cant repeat here. The current squad isnt suited to possession heavy football, the resources arent there to overhaul the squad, and a far more talented coach in Tomasson couldnt be successful adopting that style. That Rovers v Watford game has become a bit of an obsession of yours. From what I remember, it was an uneventful game settled by a goalkeeping howler. That Rajovic was a really poor striker.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/west-brom-valerien-ismael-sacked-22958279.amp Here is an article on him. They started really well and then nosedived, he was tactically inflexible and had started to fall out with senior players. He was also replaced by Steve Bruce inheriting an unhappy squad so that doesnt scream bringing in someone to do the job properly. I dont know why his time there is being reconstructed as somewhat successful. It wasnt.

5 wins would take us to 67 points so I think 6 or more likely 7 would be needed. Not happening.

Feels like people are rewriting history based from afar and purely on league positions without context to say that he did a good job when he was expectedly sacked. Or equally dismissing when he did once do an impressive job at this level. Its surely better to just judge as we go rather than setting a random time point to which we can be allowed to judge. Even if that involves early predictions, knowing that people can get things wrong. We though Eustace was going to be crap based on the early days, same with Brereton, whereas on the flip side we thought Cantwell would be a potentialy good signing. I havent personally said he definitely will be a failure, although even if he isnt he will be undermined and it ends the same as if he is crap. But not only the results which are beyond just an extension of typical bad run of form considering the opposition, but the tactics he seems keen to adopt, just doesnt make sense.

There have been examples of both sides of people massaging Ismael's career to suit an argument on either side. He was poached from Barnsley after overachieving there. He was doing a good job clearly and was picked up by a better side. Its unfair to suggest that he didnt. On the flip side, he was sacked at West Brom and Watford for not doing a good job. You cant take where he was out of context but at West Brom the expectation was automatic promotion and his team was getting worse, journalists and supporters alike expected and welcomed his departure. And at Watford, you cant just dismiss it as being at Watford as if it was an unwarranted dismissal by a trigger happy club. Again, his sacking was in the pipeline, greeted positively when it happened. You also cant compare it to the jobs done by subsequent managers. Ismael had both of those clubs at times where he inherited a much stronger situation, West Brom had just come down and he was allowed to bring in a couple of players he had worked with before. Watford also had a better squad than what Cleverley has got to work with.

A number of quality signings? A hybrid of Eustace's organisation and pragmatism and Tomasson's entertaining style where we control games? Pacy and creative players entertaining the crowds? Dominance over promoted sides? Real character to regularly come back to win from losing positions? I like the sound of it. I mean, under owners focused solely on slashing costs, a limited playing squad sorely lacking in players capable of dominating games effectively, a novice in charge of recruitment who has made a dogs dinner out of it this season. And a head coach who has only really done well in this country at one club at which he played a long ball style totally at odds to what he is proposing, and who has started embarassingly badly. It aint happening. But one can dream.