| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale 16:40 - Oct 30 with 17296 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 3698 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 3381 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 3280 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 3222 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 3204 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 3191 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 3051 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 3007 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 2932 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]
| |
| |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 09:17 - Nov 1 with 2380 views | nordenblue |
| 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. |
Whatever 'process' we choose or even what the manager opts for id say the prerequisite for any football manager is to be hard to beat, before you even look to be expansive or possession based its pretty irrelevant if you're shipping 9 goals in 2 games into your own net, not sure luck has much to do with it either, especially over a season or even just 10 games that always levels out either way. | | | |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 09:27 - Nov 1 with 2363 views | DaleFan7 |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 09:17 - Nov 1 by nordenblue |
Whatever 'process' we choose or even what the manager opts for id say the prerequisite for any football manager is to be hard to beat, before you even look to be expansive or possession based its pretty irrelevant if you're shipping 9 goals in 2 games into your own net, not sure luck has much to do with it either, especially over a season or even just 10 games that always levels out either way. |
There was a worry in preseason that we'd conceded 2 goals or more in every game. We're now 14 games into the league season and have conceded 26 goals so we're pretty much still at that level.
Until we stop doing that we've got no chance of consistently winning games. | | | |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 09:37 - Nov 1 with 2328 views | 442Dale |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 09:17 - Nov 1 by nordenblue |
Whatever 'process' we choose or even what the manager opts for id say the prerequisite for any football manager is to be hard to beat, before you even look to be expansive or possession based its pretty irrelevant if you're shipping 9 goals in 2 games into your own net, not sure luck has much to do with it either, especially over a season or even just 10 games that always levels out either way. |
The “luck” part was exclusive to how sometimes getting the right manager is required to get the right person.
Being hard to beat is indeed the most important thing. Which, while there was some valid criticism of how we played at times over the last threee years, we continually and consistently developed a way of playing that ensured the opposition had limited opportunities. Not exclusive to how we defended, but how we chose to keep the ball.
The much shared clip of Carlisle fans ridiculing our passing it around at the back for ages last season? Supreme control of a game and one we went onto win.
It’s the age old ‘ other team can’t score if you have the ball’ theory. Playing out quickly with such large distances between players at the lower levels will inevitably see the ball turned over more often, thus leading to them having chances to attack the spaces left.
Hence the question around which style would be preferred for a club which wants to play possession based football. [Post edited 1 Nov 9:41]
| |
| |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 09:54 - Nov 1 with 2252 views | dawlishdale |
Didn't see yesterdays game but have now watched the "highlights" and spoken to supporters of both teams (have a good friend who has been a season ticket holder at Port Vale for 35 years)
What can we glean from yesterday's game?
Either we were not properly prepared for an L2 game, or we were set up wrongly or we don't have players with the heart and desire to play for us. Probably all three.
To start as poorly as we did yet again is ridiculous and inexcusable. The Board must not let this happen again.
It's becoming very obvious that quite a few players are simply not performing to their abilities. Is this because they don't believe in what they are asked to do or because they are also carrying injuries?
My Vale friend reported to me last night that we were "by some distance" the worst team that Vale have faced for a very long time and he included them facing teams from several divisions below in the Cup. He went on to say that he was actually disappointed that they took their foot off the gas after half time.
It took a superb all round effort (both on and off the pitch) for us to regain our EFL status. Make no mistake, IW is in danger of taking us down at the first attempt.
Even the games we have won we have ridden our luck (Shrewsbury, Oldham, Swindon and Fleetwood ) and I'm struggling to recall one single game that we have controlled for more than a third of the match. Probably Crewe away was our best 45 minutes and we still lost that game!!
Is this "flip-flopping" ? No. It's being honest. | | | |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 10:35 - Nov 1 with 2100 views | nordenblue |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 09:37 - Nov 1 by 442Dale |
The “luck” part was exclusive to how sometimes getting the right manager is required to get the right person.
Being hard to beat is indeed the most important thing. Which, while there was some valid criticism of how we played at times over the last threee years, we continually and consistently developed a way of playing that ensured the opposition had limited opportunities. Not exclusive to how we defended, but how we chose to keep the ball.
The much shared clip of Carlisle fans ridiculing our passing it around at the back for ages last season? Supreme control of a game and one we went onto win.
It’s the age old ‘ other team can’t score if you have the ball’ theory. Playing out quickly with such large distances between players at the lower levels will inevitably see the ball turned over more often, thus leading to them having chances to attack the spaces left.
Hence the question around which style would be preferred for a club which wants to play possession based football. [Post edited 1 Nov 9:41]
|
I still find it amazing so many folk, managers included are still so obsession with the whole possession based football, even more so at our level in the pyramid, I remember many a time we've had so much of the ball and done exactly zero with it, a recent example was Crewe away for all the ball and all the possession we went in 2.0 down at half time,
Call me old fashioned but the sooner we get back to a keeper who's primary skill is stopping the ball going in our net and a defender who makes life impossible for the opposition to score the better, rather than trying to ask a keeper to play like a prime Maldini from the back, theres obvious exceptions to the above like Watmuff who to be fair was levels above the National league anyway.
Currently the side is ridiculous easy to score against and offers next to absolutely zero upfront and gets run over in midfield, however any manager chooses to play thats only ever going to end one way. [Post edited 1 Nov 16:12]
| | | |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 10:45 - Nov 1 with 2087 views | RippDale |
I have seen 3 really good managers out of 31 during my time watching Dale, so it is a really difficult task. I think a lot depends on the circumstances at the time of appointment as some others could easily have been great appointments. Ian Watson was appointed at a real high time and has been afforded a great budget. He will go down as one on a par with Steve Eyre. The one common theme is that if the board doesn't act quick enough then the outcome is inevitable. This time the stakes are just too high to wait | | | |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 11:31 - Nov 1 with 1942 views | TVOS1907 |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 15:24 - Oct 31 by mikehunt |
I'd be thinking of bringing Challinor in. |
https://www.swfc.co.uk/news/20 |  |
| Maestro? No.
Elite? No.
Heavyweight poster? No.
Able to be rational and not over-react to individual results? Yes. |
| |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 11:36 - Nov 1 with 1931 views | Daley_Lama |
Two cup games coming up.
Tuesday should be used as training to the 5-2-3 formation as currently, based on yesterday, it’s our best formation with current available players.
Appreciate most rested but nevertheless
Tasker at RWB (best position)
Sherring at RCB (where he looked far more comfortable at despite the abuse yesterday)
Flint (best position)
Wilson/BeckwithLCB (best position)
Hannant LWB (best option)
CM
Gilmour (best position)
Adeeko/Francis
Front 3
Hayes/Hendo/Patersen/Smith/Silcott/Middleton
Hopefully no chants of ‘get out of my club’ or ‘how sh*t must you be..’ from the greatest set of supporters the club has ever seen on Tuesday. |  |
| |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 12:42 - Nov 1 with 1768 views | Edindale |
Are the squad not training the 5-3-2 to-day because they should be after a free Saturday yesterday! Surely a bit of an 'old school' approach would not hurt in advance of the cup game next week, especially those that did not make an appearance? | | | |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 13:08 - Nov 1 with 1667 views | Plattyswrinklynuts |
To be fair I think that out Biffo friends down the road would probably have been in the frame had he not gone to Sheff Wed, surely Mellon must be on thin ice over there now? |  | | |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 13:37 - Nov 1 with 1562 views | EllDale |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 13:08 - Nov 1 by Plattyswrinklynuts |
To be fair I think that out Biffo friends down the road would probably have been in the frame had he not gone to Sheff Wed, surely Mellon must be on thin ice over there now? |
Not sure they could afford Challinor at the moment. | | | |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 14:24 - Nov 1 with 1450 views | Daley_Lama |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 13:37 - Nov 1 by EllDale |
Not sure they could afford Challinor at the moment. |
Challi announced at Sheff Weds today. | |
| |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 14:47 - Nov 1 with 1382 views | mikehunt |
Blx! |  |
| The worm of time turns not for the cuckoo of circumstance. |
| |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 10:47 - Nov 2 with 551 views | dingdangblue |
Stuart Maynard for me. Get him now whilst he's still available. Oh and our next League game is York City. 👍 |  |
| |
| Refwatch - Port Vale v Rochdale on 11:39 - Nov 2 with 478 views | Dale_4_Life |
Two very difficult watch.
Accy at home and then the worse 45 minutes of football (1st half Port Vale) I have seen in a very long time.
The club are in a tricky position.
I have no idea how they will respond. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.