League Two Rovers (1) v MK Dons (2)

[dollar'sbloke]

Think Nigel had it spot on. They had enough advanced possession to put us away first half. We actually caused them more headaches second half but they were more incisive up front. We rode our luck until that failed.
Gung ho attacking isn't a prerequisite. I used to watch Notts Forest do it at home won leagues and Euro cups, not a bad outcome. Morecambe saw us off in our last decent season through it. First half they threaded the ball into our half and we had four shirts in their half, clearly better to keep your powder dry and they did struggle for a while.
Progress won't be linear but it will be upward. 10-12 finish

 

[ADD]

As others have said a poor performance overall with several very average performances and Apter ironically his worst game for us in ages albeit being double marked. Disappointed in their first goal - not sure if McGee was unsighted but would have expected him to at least get a hand to it.
MK were a very good side however on the day so that needs to be taken into account and thoroughly deserved the win. Two consecutive defeats is not the end of the world but as Adkins said post match the momentum has clearly stalled and we looked so less threatening and gave posession away so cheaply which was the most disappinting thing to me.
I know I have mentioned it before but I am simply baffled that Taylor has not got any meaningful opportunities since October now under Adkins. Why on earth I have no idea. Jolley is never going to be good enough and is a NL/ NLN player at best - Taylor from what I have seen most definitely is so why not even on the bench when Dennis clearly wasn't fully fit.

 

[bigmart]

If you back off good players and give them time you will come unstuck and ultimately we did yesterday. We were successful against Notts with the pressing game which was not used yesterday.
We had won the previous 4 or 5 home games but seemed happy to sit back but to no good effect. The last 2 games we haven't really attacked much and have given too much respect to the opposition than trying to give them more things to worry about

 

[Goody Two Shoes]

The tactics, particularly second-half, have clearly split opinion. I’m with Ian and others as it was taken to the extreme yesterday, although similar tactics, we didn’t sit that deep v Notts County and had a higher line and more pressure on their defence during that game. Regardless of how many games we win/lose/draw, comments are valid and it’s not a case of overreacting. Having a bit more ambition at home is a gimme for me; each to their own I guess, but I’m hoping that second half freedom of PP is a one-off for visiting defenders. Ultimately, we lost the game and MK bossed both halves; did we die fighting yesterday…..felt more like a whimper in the end “if you back off good players and give them time you will come unstuck….”

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

Adkins did actually emphasise in his interview that he wanted us to press at opportune moments, but the players were simply too passive.

I think Nigel's absence from the bench did not help in that regard.

 

[Goody Two Shoes]

Adkins did actually emphasise in his interview that he wanted us to press at opportune moments, but the players were simply too passive.

I think Nigel's absence from the bench did not help in that regard.

Fair point.

 

[Boz]

While agreeing that it was refreshing for a Rovers manager to explain the thinking behind his approach, there was some repetition, where the time could have been explored looking at other issues. Given he talked about the defending for the winner, one of the most obvious being did the double full-back substitution impact on the late goal conceded?

I'm definitely with those on here who felt that it was an over cautious approach to the game. Nigel appeared to pay Milton Keynes too much respect in the strategy for this game. Rovers didn't ask enough questions attack-wise to be able to evaluate how good they were defensively While the base plan may have been similar to v Notts County, we certainly didn't allow the Magpies the same time on the ball as our opponents yesterday. If the intention was to press more and the players weren't executing that, then there ought to have been more guidance from the bench initially, Danns and Parky seemed to be quiet throughout. If that didn't work then make the subs earlier. There was too much in common with the Wrexham home game under Dawes, when we only had a serious goal attempt after Sam Taylor came on, for my liking.

While thanks to Nigel's post-match, I now understand the thinking behind Morris' substitution, Kieron was one of our better players in attack yesterday and with the going narrow strategy, the braver choice would be to take Apter off, if that really was the only option. I wasn't really sure where Lewis fitted in either, he didn't seem to be playing in Jolley's position, but didn't make much of an impression.

Ian has highlighted the dreadful defending for the Milton Keynes winner and having looked at it again, when the first clearance was made, nobody went to close down on our right-side and they were immediately able to cross another ball into the box, which led to the winner. If Pike was still on, he'd have gone over, but think Yarney was positioned more centrally, but someone should have been covering and making it more difficult to get that ball in.

Did anyone see the 'water incident' where someone from the MK bench allegedly threw water at the home crowd after their winner? Disliked the prolonged celebration after the first goal and really hope they don't go up.

 

[O4anotherplayoff]

I wonder if the contrast with the approach to Notts County was one of belief, or even simply a case that MK are a better side than them? Notts, despite their lofty position, had been a bit wobbly for weeks and, despite having one of the most potent attacks in the division, also have one of the leakiest defences in the division. Given that, the game plan to beat them made perfect sense.

Anyway, disappointing not to keep hold of a point but, again, despite the optimism of 5 wins from 6, the last two opponents have been a bit of a step up for us and we’re not there yet. I’m sure there’ll be no lasting damage, instead what the last couple of months has shown us is that we probably are good enough to push for top half, but not yet good enough to compete consistently with the best. Still heading in the right direction though.

Did anyone see the 'water incident' where someone from the MK bench allegedly threw water at the home crowd after their winner? Disliked the prolonged celebration after the first goal and really hope they don't go up.

No, and I was wondering that myself. I overheard an MK fan after the game explaining to his mate that one or two of our fans had tried to invade the dugout after the winning goal and that police ended up getting involved. That sounds a bit far-fetched to me but I’ve not yet seen or heard any other accounts of what went on.

 

[Sparky]

It does seem to be more common than ever than players will give abuse to opposition fans when scoring. I always remember cookie and Nors liked to do it. But if it keeps happening you’ll have some idiot throwing something at a player. Not condoning it but if you’ve got a player taunting you then it’ll risk the chance of it happening.

 

[O4anotherplayoff]

It does seem to be more common than ever than players will give abuse to opposition fans when scoring. I always remember cookie and Nors liked to do it. But if it keeps happening you’ll have some idiot throwing something at a player. Not condoning it but if you’ve got a player taunting you then it’ll risk the chance of it happening.

It’s become far more blatant this season, for some reason. A few years ago, when the pathetic ‘shushing’ started, it was frowned upon but these days the winding up is much more blatant and the powers that be seem relaxed about it. It’s unnecessary and, if the trend carries on unchecked, I agree it’s only a matter of time before someone somewhere responds to it with trouble.

 

[Boz]

One query that's been raised elsewhere. Dan Pike's throw-in looks like a foul throw, so was the referee right to let play continue, leading to the opening goal?
Sparky, any thoughts?

 

[Keith Hill (Bolton)]

We were not very good yesterday, we did deserve to get beat, but because of our resilience lately, it wasn't one of those games early in the season, we would have conceded a few. It shows in the after match, we would have been happy to get a point. When we have had our run of wins at home.
Changes again to the back four again is not helping. And in the last couple of games, it has clearly shown, the replacements are not nearly as good. Maybe lack of first team minutes, maybe not enough match fitness, just not good enough all round.
I have said that another injury to our centre back position, would be very bad. Another target man as well. We can't rely on Connor and Apter, when there is not an out, cos of injury.
And then make more subs/adjustments to the back line, when under pressure to try and waste time. Well, that worked didn't it?
I'm hoping it's a blip.
Gave them far too much respect. Maybe that was the tactics but it might be ok away, but at home, you need to boss games, better options and a will to be on the front foot.
We didn't win the battles individually.
My last point was the passing, I've seen better at primary schools football. It was awful to this level and put us in trouble, time and again.
It was an awful performance, no energy, not much passion, and we are not out of the woods yet!
Two away fixtures, we could do with picking up a couple of points to steady ship.
And it was bloody cold.

 

[Keith Hill (Bolton)]

One query that's been raised elsewhere. Dan Pike's throw-in looks like a foul throw, so was the referee right to let play continue, leading to the opening goal?
Sparky, any thoughts?

Advantage. But was it a foul throw?

 

[Boz]

Advantage. But was it a foul throw?

The ball didn’t appear to get over Pike’s head so arguably yes.
The referee didn’t appear to signal advantage either.

 

[Keith Hill (Bolton)]

It's all in the interpretation of the laws.
I've heard that so many times by officials.
I'm sure they make it up as they go.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

One query that's been raised elsewhere. Dan Pike's throw-in looks like a foul throw, so was the referee right to let play continue, leading to the opening goal?

Yes, it was a blatant foul throw, so the throw should have been awarded to the opposition as far as I am aware. Is the referee allowed to play advantage in that circumstance, given that the ball did not actually enter the field of play correctly ?

 

[O4anotherplayoff]

The throw was actually legal, having been thrown from behind then over the head. Pike just released it before he’d intended to.

It’s correct that advantage can’t be played from a foul throw, it just gets awarded to the other side.

 

[Ian]

Yeah, there was nothing wrong with the throw, it just slipped out of his hands on the way out.

 

[Keith Hill (Bolton)]

Yeah, there was nothing wrong with the throw, it just slipped out of his hands on the way out.

That is your opinion, interpretation.
Bring back the ballboy towels!
Ha!

 

[O4anotherplayoff]

That is your opinion, interpretation.

It’s actually a statement of fact.

https://www.thefa.com/-/media/files/thefaportal/governance-docs/laws-of-the-game/2023-24/law-15---the-throw-in.ashx

EDIT: And the EFL has banned towels as well!