Lets entertain and play the Tottenham way?????
Several posters have complained about our lack of entertaining football at Ewood where we do just enough(sometimes :( )to win the game but never any more :D all in the best Jose Mourinho traditions of conserving energy for the next match.
Tottenham are probably the best case of a team where the results are considered secondary to entertaining the supporters and there is a football adviser who picks the players to sign with the manager having to manage what he is given :? :? Not sure its done them any good...I do believe the end justifies the means so wish we could defend like Mourinhos teams, which are pretty low on entertainment given the sums spent...:?
re: Lets entertain and play the Tottenham way?????
If you're talking mainly about my last post Bob, you've completely missed the point of what I was saying.
re: Lets entertain and play the Tottenham way?????
In terms of pure entertainment your probably right Dan - I remember watching us beat Norwich 7-1 in the Premier League(Shearer 2 & Wegerle 2 goals each)-it should have been 14-1 with the chances we missed:and then watching us beat Sheff.Wednesday 7-2 in 1997(Sutton 2 & Gallacher 2 goals each) but those days(and tactics)are long gone... I am pretty happy with the clean sheet though ;D
re: Lets entertain and play the Tottenham way?????
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobcrompton1896
In terms of pure entertainment your probably right Dan - I remember watching us beat Norwich 7-1 in the Premier League(Shearer 2 & Wegerle 2 goals each)-it should have been 14-1 with the chances we missed:and then watching us beat Sheff.Wednesday 7-2 in 1997(Sutton 2 & Gallacher 2 goals each) but those days(and tactics)are long gone... I am pretty happy with the clean sheet though ;D
Bob - I watched that Norwich game with Mike Wynn Jones, who - along with his wife, Delia Smith - is now the owner of Norwich. He was not a happy Canary!
re: Lets entertain and play the Tottenham way?????
No Bob, I wasn't talking about pure entertainment. Although it was dull, the game being over in 18 minutes, (and well done Rovers for that); it was the manner of the remainder of the game that caused me concern for a team that's supposedly competing to get in the top 6. On another occassion against a team that maybe had a chance of doing something, (like Derby etc) it would have been the right tactics and game plan. Time will tell, but the desire in teams like Bournmouth and Brentford is not matched currently by Rovers. That's what we need to compete with if we're to... compete. In my view. it's up to you to read into what I saying in my post as you wish. But like I said, it wasn't about entertainment. My concern was about desire and fight. Not about 'getting my money's worth.'
re: Lets entertain and play the Tottenham way?????
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobcrompton1896
Several posters have complained about our lack of entertaining football at Ewood where we do just enough(sometimes :( )to win the game but never any more :D all in the best Jose Mourinho traditions of conserving energy for the next match.
Tottenham are probably the best case of a team where the results are considered secondary to entertaining the supporters and there is a football adviser who picks the players to sign with the manager having to manage what he is given :? :? Not sure its done them any good...I do believe the end justifies the means so wish we could defend like Mourinhos teams, which are pretty low on entertainment given the sums spent...:?
Bob ..if Rovers COULD win 1-0 every week then great ..we d walk this league but Rovers cant ..we cant defend for toffee at times and our only way to defend is to attack and score more goals ...
As for Saturday ..2-0 against a team who simply didnt want to be there ..(wo
re: Lets entertain and play the Tottenham way?????
As Dan said the OP misses the point entirely.
Before the match on Saturday GB visited the legends lounge and took a few questions from the fans.
The first one was from a fan who went down to Brentford and asked why the Rovers didn't show the same commitment for 90 minutes as Brentford did.
In response GB said that the fan wouldn't have asked that after the Middlesboro game and that there had better be an improvement against Charlton or players would be dropped.
The point is there was an improvement for 18 minutes against Charlton then it was back to normal. It's a good squad but not good enough to dictate if and when the players can be arsed to put a full shift in. I sopke to dozens of fans and they all shared the same opinion.
Bowyer was quite impressive with his answers but was so utterly boring. Does he have what it takes to motivate his squad?
re: Lets entertain and play the Tottenham way?????
didnt we win on sat? as in we won, kept a clean sheet?
they are allowed to join in aswell. They didnt bother. Usually it takes two sides to make for a good game of football.
So we did what we did, we won at a canter.
re: Lets entertain and play the Tottenham way?????
Champs, I think you have also completely missed the point of my earlier post too.
re: Lets entertain and play the Tottenham way?????
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanRrr
Champs, I think you have also completely missed the point of my earlier post too.
I read it and got what you where saying. I was detached from this one, I just saw the result, read the various reports, watched the highlights & goals on TV. By all accounts it wasn't the best of games. I hink it's fair comment to say they are allowed to join in aswell, and didn't. It was a flat day and over early on. That was the only important bit...IMO...especially taking into consideration the last 2 results. A win is a win is a win and all that...
Performances? We aren't blowing sides apart, finishing teams off. The likes of Bournemouth and at this very point, Brentford. We made Bournemouth look a very very ordinary side. Nice football, no cutting edge. On a consistent level, they have something good going on. Aspiring to be as good, bearing in mind we scored 3 and beat hem easily ...not sure I agree with that? Performances may come in time? There
