| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale 16:40 - Oct 30 with 10879 views | RochdaleAFC.com |
https://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/
If you want to remove this post from the board index, just click the hide post icon below. To hide all our news posts click the ignore user icon under the avatar. |  | | |  |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 21:03 - Oct 31 with 1035 views | 442Dale |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 20:44 - Oct 31 by nordenblue |
A very good and perfectly accurate post, yet there's still some on here it seems try and defend the completely indefensible, the most alarming point even when we did win a couple of games was how many chances the opposition missed in the process, the writing was pretty much on the wall back then that whatever IW choice of football may be it certainly didnt involve a solid base and some of his choices of subs and more so the starting 11 are baffling at best regardless of the injury list. |
Who on here is still defending the indefensible?!
Think most have recognised the issues all season long. Of course, some flip further one way or another after some good results but there’s also been a recognition of the problems too.
Spot on about solid bases. That’s what leads to being successful. |  |
| |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 22:17 - Oct 31 with 715 views | nordenblue |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 21:03 - Oct 31 by 442Dale |
Who on here is still defending the indefensible?!
Think most have recognised the issues all season long. Of course, some flip further one way or another after some good results but there’s also been a recognition of the problems too.
Spot on about solid bases. That’s what leads to being successful. |
While folk do react to things differently granted, some of the things on show this season regardless of opinions on formation,tactics, injuries, playing out from the back etc have been absolutely atrocious while the managers decision making has at best been massively confusing in reality absolutely terrible.
You seem to very much try and play things down especially after heavy defeats even though its blatantly obvious what we've all just witnessed and are still witnessing far far too frequently, equally I dont think we will be winning the league anytime soon after scraping a couple of close victories either though, is there a reason why you're so against calling things out for being as shite as they so clearly are? | | | |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 22:43 - Oct 31 with 617 views | 442Dale |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 22:17 - Oct 31 by nordenblue |
While folk do react to things differently granted, some of the things on show this season regardless of opinions on formation,tactics, injuries, playing out from the back etc have been absolutely atrocious while the managers decision making has at best been massively confusing in reality absolutely terrible.
You seem to very much try and play things down especially after heavy defeats even though its blatantly obvious what we've all just witnessed and are still witnessing far far too frequently, equally I dont think we will be winning the league anytime soon after scraping a couple of close victories either though, is there a reason why you're so against calling things out for being as shite as they so clearly are? |
Playing nothing down. Consistently spoken about my concerns about the way we play right back to pre season and the Bradford game especially. The distances and lack of control have been evident throughout.
I call things out regularly and fairly, as was the case under previous managers. That I choose to try and be balanced, analytical, critically constructive and without the levels of personal abuse seen elsewhere is, again, consistent to who I am.
In this thread alone there are examples of being critical of the tactics, rhe way we’ve built the squad and the efforts of individual players.
At no stage has the indefensible been defended, unless I’ve missed something? | |
| |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 22:56 - Oct 31 with 556 views | DaleFan7 |
I think if we keep Watson on we're gambling on 1 of 2 things happening:
1) It is all down to our injuries and it will turn around if/when they're fit.
2) There are 2 worse teams than us in this division this season. | | | |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 23:02 - Oct 31 with 538 views | Yorkshire_Dale |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 14:54 - Oct 31 by JimmyRustler |
He’s also signed two perennial sicknotes in Smith and Maguire. Unforgivable |
That's the biggest wind up of all......Larry Maguire et al are probably sat at home deciding what to wear for Halloween with the kids and taking a really nice taste on the payroll....meanwhile the backup makeshift team are bearly going through the motions 60 miles down the road but also on a decent wedge.......tell me where is the sense and more importantly when will it stop?
It's like social security UK.....madness. | | | |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 23:06 - Oct 31 with 525 views | Sandyman |
Just watched last week's post match again. Hard to believe a word he says - the fans and RAFC have been let down by his words speaking louder than his actions too often. For example,
How did we start the game today?
The fan who does a very good Dale vlog after each game reckons we've lost trust in the manager. A mooch around online suggests he's not wrong. |  |
| "And only as far as Casey Pettit......" |
| |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 23:41 - Oct 31 with 385 views | D_Alien |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 23:17 - Oct 31 by 442Dale |
There was a passage of play even before Vale’s first that set the alarm bells ringing. That we set up at the start of games allowing so much space for the opposition to immediately attack is baffling.
That three players don’t react quickly enough on that first goal only serves to prove the point they’re subliminally used to those spaces existing.
It’s as if we begin every match hoping to be the first to attack, down the flanks usually, and draw the other team into an end to end basketball match. For the best example of this working well, see the Fleetwood game. For another that produced an entertaining evening, Grimsby.
It’s obviously with a lot of hindsight, but retaining structure and control should have been the aim going back into the league. Irrespective of whether that was seen as a bit boring to watch. [Post edited 31 Oct 23:18]
|
All of these details just point back to one thing (do i need to say it again?} - the recruitment process
Watson was recruited on the basis of meeting the criteria that the Dale board were working with; something along the lines of "Dale values" and a way pf playing football
If the process identified the wrong man, even with all the initial challenges and injury setbacks, where do the board turn to, to identify the "right" man?
At this stage, the rest is just noise [Post edited 31 Oct 23:42]
|  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 23:51 - Oct 31 with 344 views | 442Dale |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 23:41 - Oct 31 by D_Alien |
All of these details just point back to one thing (do i need to say it again?} - the recruitment process
Watson was recruited on the basis of meeting the criteria that the Dale board were working with; something along the lines of "Dale values" and a way pf playing football
If the process identified the wrong man, even with all the initial challenges and injury setbacks, where do the board turn to, to identify the "right" man?
At this stage, the rest is just noise [Post edited 31 Oct 23:42]
|
I think that sometimes processes (despite my own personal obsession with them) fall down at the feet of luck when it comes to appointing football managers.
Keith Hill would be the pinnacle of this in the world of Dale. Andy Ritchie could have been in the role if problems hadn’t cropped up or we may have lost at home to Wrexham after a defeat at MK Dons. We get an equaliser in a cracking game and then win 4-0 twice.
This time around they followed what seems a reasonable process to identify another manager who played possession football that got results. The problem appears to be that the type of possession football didn’t get as many results for Rochdale as that produced previously.
That’s why the phrase “trade off” has been used previously. Do we want a manager who plays more expansive football, quicker when we get it right, or one which focuses on controlling games with possession that also makes us harder to beat?
It doesn’t mean there isn’t someone who can’t produce both at the same time. But it’d be interesting to see what both those at the club and supporters would choose if it was a distinct two options available. | |
| |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 00:05 - Nov 1 with 266 views | D_Alien |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 23:51 - Oct 31 by 442Dale |
I think that sometimes processes (despite my own personal obsession with them) fall down at the feet of luck when it comes to appointing football managers.
Keith Hill would be the pinnacle of this in the world of Dale. Andy Ritchie could have been in the role if problems hadn’t cropped up or we may have lost at home to Wrexham after a defeat at MK Dons. We get an equaliser in a cracking game and then win 4-0 twice.
This time around they followed what seems a reasonable process to identify another manager who played possession football that got results. The problem appears to be that the type of possession football didn’t get as many results for Rochdale as that produced previously.
That’s why the phrase “trade off” has been used previously. Do we want a manager who plays more expansive football, quicker when we get it right, or one which focuses on controlling games with possession that also makes us harder to beat?
It doesn’t mean there isn’t someone who can’t produce both at the same time. But it’d be interesting to see what both those at the club and supporters would choose if it was a distinct two options available. |
I can't imagine that anyone as intelligent as Cameron Ogden will have been "sitting on their hands" during the recent turmoil
The trouble is, his family asked Simon Gauge to retain his shareholding and accept the joint chair position on the basis of his work before the Camerons took over ownership
As with Keith Hill, i think Dale got very lucky indeed with Jim McNulty. You're right, therefore, to point out the "luck" element, but having got lucky once, the relative inexperience of Gauge remains a sticking point. The Camerons simply can't rely on his judgement, even though he's been on a steep learning curve
To "stick" could cost them a fortune, and might even question whether they wish to remain in position in the longer term (having made clear they weren't here to bankroll the club). To "twist" will also be costly, with no real process to guide them
I'd hope, with their business experience, they'll be looking for outside guidance, whatever that might be
[Post edited 1 Nov 0:08]
| |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.