Rodgers

[winteriscoming]

35 minutes ago, Dr The Singh said:

Can you tell me when In the Punjab, those guys are well unprepared, please.

 

Sometime between January and December next year. Hope that helps. 

[Philkeavo]

2 hours ago, STUHILL said:

Quite right Sir! No harm in disagreeing. Do you see why the Times probably should have done their homework first though? 

Fofana - nursing a ongoing knee problem

Maddison - nursing a ongoing knee problem

N'didi - still not fully fit from injury

Castagne - still not fully fit from injury

Albrighton - knackered 

Tielemans - knackered

Vardy - managing groin issue 

 

7 changes there, that I think are justified. You could argue Tielemans and Vardy could have started but with the way we played in that first half, we should have had the game done and dusted. It is a shame we had to bring both Tielemans and Vardy on, but we had to take that risk to try get a result. Not ideal and we may pay for it, in terms of Vardy and Tielemans not getting the rest they need, but it got us a point and probably could argue should have got all 3, with the late chances. 

 

At least they were talking about us. I read just about every article I could find after the Man U game and I would lying if I said we got more than a passing mention. The Mirror report on the game was frankly embarrassing, we did not get a single mention other than in the byline.

[Anglodanglo]

9 hours ago, 5waller5 said:

I’m a big BR fan. My slight criticism of him v Palace wasn’t the initial team selection or the subs.... 

 

it was that he watched us dominate for 45 minutes, then Palace come back into it after half time and waited for them to score.

 

The time to make the subs was when it was apparent they’d woken up at half time. We let them steal the initiative. 

To be fair mate was still 0-0 when Youri was introduced 12 mins into 2nd half.
Somewhat ironically, his immediate involvement was taking the free kick which lead to the Palace goal.

Funny old game as they say.

[Aus Fox]

9 hours ago, sacreblueits442 said:

...if you have to play Tielemans and Vardy in this game...they start!!!

  The substitution are made at appropriate times.

  The team chosen was not inspiring but injuries were an overriding factor.

 If Vardy or Tielemans needs to be rested then rest them.

The problem was we shouldn’t of had to play them. They were on the bench as an insurance policy and in the end we had to cash it in.

If we had gone in 3 up at the break, it wouldn’t have flattered us and we would have been able to keep Youri and Vardy rested. 
You can make all the game plans in the world but if we miss simple chances, that is out of your control. 
IMO Brendan made all the right choices, gave some players an opportunity and they failed to take it.

[Ceirboy]

15 hours ago, coolhandfox said:

What is your point?

My point being that now you think you have answered as to why BR did what he did, then all comments must now be deleted because you've given us the insight we were all lacking and we couldn't possibly have considered this before making our own thoughts known?

An experienced PL Manager shouldn't be needing advice from his backroom team to know what the best chances of grabbing all 3 points to maintain position in an already horrifically congested top 10.

The best chance was to play his best available team, he didn't and that is his decision.

Too many bed wetters on here want to forensically analyse his decisions to try and convince themselves that he doesn't have a penchant for ego/arrogant led decisions.

 

Brendan makes odd choices and persists with things for too long- that is why he'll never be an elite gaffer.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Ceirboy said:

My point being that now you think you have answered as to why BR did what he did, then all comments must now be deleted because you've given us the insight we were all lacking and we couldn't possibly have considered this before making our own thoughts known?

An experienced PL Manager shouldn't be needing advice from his backroom team to know what the best chances of grabbing all 3 points to maintain position in an already horrifically congested top 10.

The best chance was to play his best available team, he didn't and that is his decision.

Too many bed wetters on here want to forensically analyse his decisions to try and convince themselves that he doesn't have a penchant for ego/arrogant led decisions.

 

Brendan makes odd choices and persists with things for too long- that is why he'll never be an elite gaffer.

It doesn't take forensic analysis to know that he and his staff are in a better place to judge the fitness levels of his players than we are, does it? Doesn't mean we can't discuss the selection and I don't think that's what anyone's suggesting, it's just an undeniable fact.

 

Would it not be quite arrogant of him to discount the opinions of our expert medical and fitness staff when considering who should start and who shouldn't?

[Ceirboy]

14 minutes ago, Guest said:

It doesn't take forensic analysis to know that he and his staff are in a better place to judge the fitness levels of his players than we are, does it? Doesn't mean we can't discuss the selection and I don't think that's what anyone's suggesting, it's just an undeniable fact.

 

Would it not be quite arrogant of him to discount the opinions of our expert medical and fitness staff when considering who should start and who shouldn't?

Not sure you followed, nor am I sure I follow you? 

Listen, Crystal Palace had just been done for 10 goals, they were on the ropes with legs buckling, they were there for the taking. Brendan decided that our least likely to inflict further pain goal scorer was the man for the job, whilst leaving the perfect option for an already jaded and scared defence on the bench.

 

No amount of "expert opinion" will make that howler look any better!

[foxile5]

1 minute ago, Ceirboy said:

Not sure you followed, nor am I sure I follow you? 

Listen, Crystal Palace had just been done for 10 goals, they were on the ropes with legs buckling, they were there for the taking. Brendan decided that our least likely to inflict further pain goal scorer was the man for the job, whilst leaving the perfect option for an already jaded and scared defence on the bench.

 

No amount of "expert opinion" will make that howler look any better!

I can forgive the starting of Iheanacho, he's actually improved under Rodgers. 

 

Bringing on Gray, however, he deserves criticism for. There were better options in the bench and Gray hasn't produced anything since Cardiff away. 

[Nick]

10 minutes ago, foxile5 said:

I can forgive the starting of Iheanacho, he's actually improved under Rodgers. 

 

Bringing on Gray, however, he deserves criticism for. There were better options in the bench and Gray hasn't produced anything since Cardiff away. 

I think the Gray decision was actually fair enough. It was his last creative option to bring somebody in that might change the game and create something and was also a shop window opportunity. If he scores, his value goes up and BR gets a bigger budget to replace him with!

[Nick]

He made the changes to give us a decent opportunity to finish the season with our best players intact. Had Madders put his knee out or Vardy or Fofana picked up an injury that put them out for January and half of Feb or worse, this thread would be slating him for risking the players. Instead we had good chances to win the game but players didn’t step up - we got a point and we move on to Newcastle where we will have Madders Vardy Fofana and Tielemans fit to play 90 mins.

[foxile5]

10 minutes ago, Nick said:

I think the Gray decision was actually fair enough. It was his last creative option to bring somebody in that might change the game and create something and was also a shop window opportunity. If he scores, his value goes up and BR gets a bigger budget to replace him with!

Albrighton. Albrighton would've made a difference and is far more deserving of game time. 

[Nick]

2 minutes ago, foxile5 said:

Albrighton. Albrighton would've made a difference and is far more deserving of game time. 

Meh.

 

Ten minutes to change a game - bring on the prolific Albrighton?

 

Take your point and maybe if the game was stretched but Demarai was probably more likely to create something in that type of congested game where they are all behind the ball.

[foxile5]

2 minutes ago, Nick said:

Meh.

 

Ten minutes to change a game - bring on the prolific Albrighton?

 

Take your point and maybe if the game was stretched but Demarai was probably more likely to create something in that type of congested game where they are all behind the ball.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating with Gray. He did absolutely **** all other than squander a good free kick opportunity. Stunk the place out. 

 

There's no way Albrighton DOESN'T have a better ten minutes. 

[Guest]

35 minutes ago, Ceirboy said:

Not sure you followed, nor am I sure I follow you? 

Listen, Crystal Palace had just been done for 10 goals, they were on the ropes with legs buckling, they were there for the taking. Brendan decided that our least likely to inflict further pain goal scorer was the man for the job, whilst leaving the perfect option for an already jaded and scared defence on the bench.

 

No amount of "expert opinion" will make that howler look any better!

You're right, I don't follow. You were treating the suggestion that Rodgers would have made an informed decision on who needed a rest and who was capable of playing the whole game in collaboration with medical staff as a slight and an attempt to shut down the debate. You then criticised him for being arrogant and led by his ego while also criticising him for not overruling his backroom staff on their area of expertise.

 

It's a game I think we should have won, and may well have done with a full strength team out, but I don't think it's fair to describe rotating the team as a howler when many of the players rested have recently come back from lengthy injury absences, are carrying knocks and/or have played a lot of football already this season. I also think the team he picked was more than capable of winning the game, but didn't, as is often the case in football.

[Nick]

8 minutes ago, foxile5 said:

The proof of the pudding is in the eating with Gray. He did absolutely **** all other than squander a good free kick opportunity. Stunk the place out. 

 

There's no way Albrighton DOESN'T have a better ten minutes. 

Using capital letters doesn’t make your argument hold any more weight!

 

A decision was made. On his day Gray is capable of taking a game by the scruff of the neck and making something happen. It didn’t happen. Pudding is hindsight and I doubt Albrighton would have changed the game. It seems like you are being angry for angry’s sake. 
 

If you wanna blame somebody I’d go with Nacho, Praet and Pérez who were only very slightly above the level of a total dogshit performance.

 

Giving Gray an opportunity for ten minutes isn’t the reason we only took a point.

[Ceirboy]

8 minutes ago, Guest said:

You're right, I don't follow. You were treating the suggestion that Rodgers would have made an informed decision on who needed a rest and who was capable of playing the whole game in collaboration with medical staff as a slight and an attempt to shut down the debate. You then criticised him for being arrogant and led by his ego while also criticising him for not overruling his backroom staff on their area of expertise.

 

It's a game I think we should have won, and may well have done with a full strength team out, but I don't think it's fair to describe rotating the team as a howler when many of the players rested have recently come back from lengthy injury absences, are carrying knocks and/or have played a lot of football already this season. I also think the team he picked was more than capable of winning the game, but didn't, as is often the case in football.

No, my point was that all that had gone before was now a moot point because 24 hours after the event, the poster had come to the forum to report the reasons behind the rotation. I then quipped that all other opinions should be dismissed then now that he had laid down his post as some sort of gospel.

I think you are reading too much into my reply.

 

The highlighted text is to point out that we don't know that he did or didn't overrule them do we?

[Ceirboy]

2 minutes ago, Nick said:

Using capital letters doesn’t make your argument hold any more weight!

 

A decision was made. On his day Gray is capable of taking a game by the scruff of the neck and making something happen. It didn’t happen. Pudding is hindsight and I doubt Albrighton would have changed the game. It seems like you are being angry for angry’s sake. 
 

If you wanna blame somebody I’d go with Nacho, Praet and Pérez who were only very slightly above the level of a total dogshit performance.

 

Giving Gray an opportunity for ten minutes isn’t the reason we only took a point.

Alright Dems fam, you okay?

 

[Nick]

1 minute ago, Ceirboy said:

Alright Dems fam, you okay?

 

Be glad to see him gone. He doesn’t fit the Brendan mould and should move on for regular game time somewhere. The lads a talent but needs to go play his football somewhere else. Not a fan or fam, just don’t think giving him ten minutes a free range to go create isn’t a terrible move. The reason he’s not in the side is his reading of the game throughout the 90 when he needs to make the decisions on and off the ball which BR wants and he appears unable to do that hence no game time of any significance when he’s needed to something other than what he’s good at.

[Ceirboy]

5 minutes ago, Nick said:

Be glad to see him gone. He doesn’t fit the Brendan mould and should move on for regular game time somewhere. The lads a talent but needs to go play his football somewhere else. Not a fan or fam, just don’t think giving him ten minutes a free range to go create isn’t a terrible move. The reason he’s not in the side is his reading of the game throughout the 90 when he needs to make the decisions on and off the ball which BR wants and he appears unable to do that hence no game time of any significance when he’s needed to something other than what he’s good at.

I agree but I'd just add that he never got above Championship level and Birmingham City knew exactly the outcome of his career and cashed in.

Some players just need a new environment or a different country and league and pace of football- he isn't one of those and he really should be thinking of getting involved at Reading or somewhere like that.

Edited 30 December 2020 by Ceirboy

[foxile5]

23 minutes ago, Nick said:

Using capital letters doesn’t make your argument hold any more weight!

 

A decision was made. On his day Gray is capable of taking a game by the scruff of the neck and making something happen. It didn’t happen. Pudding is hindsight and I doubt Albrighton would have changed the game. It seems like you are being angry for angry’s sake. 
 

If you wanna blame somebody I’d go with Nacho, Praet and Pérez who were only very slightly above the level of a total dogshit performance.

 

Giving Gray an opportunity for ten minutes isn’t the reason we only took a point.

Using capital letters is a stylistic choice to highlight an inflection I'd normally place on it vocally. 

 

'a decision was made' - pointing out inalienable facts doesn't give your argument any weight and it doesn't make any real sense either. The discussion of Roger's decision making doesn't need that pointing out as it is the focal point of the discussion. That's a redundant clause at the start of a meandering paragraph full of conjecture. 

 

I'm not seeking to blame anybody. I was pointing out that Rodgers, in my estimation, made a bad decision. You've leapt to an impassioned defence of Gray.

[coolhandfox]

1 hour ago, Ceirboy said:

My point being that now you think you have answered as to why BR did what he did, then all comments must now be deleted because you've given us the insight we were all lacking and we couldn't possibly have considered this before making our own thoughts known?

An experienced PL Manager shouldn't be needing advice from his backroom team to know what the best chances of grabbing all 3 points to maintain position in an already horrifically congested top 10.

 

What the point of employing a backroom staff and medical team if you aren't going to take their advice, I'd say that exactly what an experience manager would do.

1 hour ago, Ceirboy said:

The best chance was to play his best available team, he didn't and that is his decision.

How do you know who was available? 

 

1 hour ago, Ceirboy said:

Too many bed wetters on here want to forensically analyse his decisions to try and convince themselves that he doesn't have a penchant for ego/arrogant led decisions.

Who's a bed wetter?

1 hour ago, Ceirboy said:

 

Brendan makes odd choices and persists with things for too long- that is why he'll never be an elite gaffer.

Explain how this was an ego driven decision?

 

All Elite managers have ego, thats part of hat makes them elite, Mourinho, Pep, Sir Alex 

 

And for the record I'm not saying BR is elite, just believe his the best we could attracted and also has the best top flight win ratio of any long term manager. 

[Chocolate Teapot]

Brendans selections irritate me as much as anyone, and sometimes he talks nonsense.

 

However, there aren't many managers in the prem I'd have over in him and everytime hes linked with another job I realise we'll miss him when he's gone.

 

Arguably only klopp and pep are the ones I'd have over him.

 

Arteta - no

Lampard - no

Mourinho - maybe but not likely with the style he plays

Ole- hell no

Hassenhuttel - maybe

Ancelotti - probably not

Dean Smith- **** no

Nuno - no thanks

[majaco]

I find it strange that Rodgers is being slated by some.

 

I thought the team selection dubious initially, then watched us dominate the first half.  ihenacho had apparently scored penalties in training then took a terrible penalty in the match.  Rodgers played him as the best back up option to Vardy.  I was pleased that Vardy wasn't playing; Vardy starting would have been an injury risk.  Unfortunately, Ihenacho does not appear to be up to it;. He has ability but I question his self-belief.  Having to use Vardy as a sub felt risky;. however, Rodgers was decisive.

 

I thought it fair enough that Gray came on.  But I thought Gray blew it.  With the free kick he insisted on taking, he was spoilt and petulant and put himself above the team.  Yes, he showed passion and was trying to prove a point but to see our players arguing about a free-kick seemed silly.

 

I think we deserved to win the game.   The missing link was a quality second striker.  That role should be Ihenacho or Perez - both cost enough but they are far from Vardy's quality.

 

I think Rodgers decisions were ok.  He worked with what he had.

 

[sacreblueits442]

2 hours ago, foxile5 said:

Albrighton. Albrighton would've made a difference and is far more deserving of game time. 

...he has been an absolute stalwart and was overdue a break from the team!!!

  He was out on his feet in the previous game.

[Ceirboy]

2 hours ago, coolhandfox said:

What the point of employing a backroom staff and medical team if you aren't going to take their advice, I'd say that exactly what an experience manager would do.

How do you know who was available? 

 

Who's a bed wetter?

Explain how this was an ego driven decision?

 

All Elite managers have ego, thats part of hat makes them elite, Mourinho, Pep, Sir Alex 

 

And for the record I'm not saying BR is elite, just believe his the best we could attracted and also has the best top flight win ratio of any long term manager. 

All of Brendan's decisions will have been made by Brendan. He may get people involved and butter them up but he will make the decisions.

 

I quite like TV Brendan and his little flicked hairstyle and the way he chews his chewing gum and the fact he has to look up to virtually everybody in Premier League football but his tiny TV persona, I can live with as a rule because I can turn the TV off when he becomes too much like a little puppy can.