Rovers v Barrow

[aldoes mustache]

Wat the fuck are tranmere doing we lose this mellon has to go. Its crap

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

Poor half and we have got worse as it has proceeded. A real lack of confidence and not enough width or creativity.

 

[Ian]

Another laboured performance so far against a pretty poor team. Sigh..

 

[Boz]

It sounds quite worrying from what bits of commentary I've caught. Efforts cleared off the Rovers line and a goal for Barrow (generously?) disallowed.

It doesn't sound like the wing-backs are having much impact. Might be wise to sub Norwood before he gets himself sent off?

 

[aldoes mustache]

Wearing on and are best midfielder off . Wat the hell

 

[aldoes mustache]

No pace . At last jennings is on . Wearing is playing ok come on tranmere

 

[aldoes mustache]

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooorwoooooooòoooooooooooooooood get fuckiiiiiing in commmmmmmme on . Take it all back

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

Thank god for that

 

[Boz]

Norwood buries a one on one to get us an injury time winner. Hope we can kick on from here, but it didn't sound an entirely convincing performance.

 

[Ian]

Not convincing at all, but let's just be thankful for the three points.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

An absolutely vital victory for Rovers, particularly in the context of other results, which nearly all went for us. However, the euphoria of the winner should not gloss over the fact this was another poor display for long, long periods.I thought the substitutions won us the game, together with the backing of the SWA who were superb in the second half, and visibly lifted the players.

In the first twenty minutes I thought we were the better side, but our football was similar to a lot of recent games, pedestrian and lacking real creativity. We created one decent chance for Cook and a couple of half chances, but in general I thought our play lacked width, the wing backs again not getting forward as they should have done, and creativity in the absence of a number ten behind the strikers.

After we failed to score an early goal confidence dipped, and for the last twenty minutes of the first half and first twenty of the second, we lost our way. Barrow, while looking a poor outfit generally, were on top in this period and we rode our luck on one or two occasions towards the end of the first half, not least with the disallowed goal.

I raised an eyebrow at the substitutions, but they did have a positive impact. Dunn in particular had his best game since signing permanently and created several openings from the position behind the front two. Pongo did not do anything spectacular but was neat and tidy and linked the play well, although I hope the substitution of Cook - who was starved of service all game - does not suggest the rift with the manager is ongoing. After the changes we started to get better possession higher up the pitch, Buxton came into the game more on the right hand side, and it was good bit of perseverance from Dunn and Norwood which led to the goal.

Individually, I thought McNulty was solid at the back and McEveley continued his improvement. Both Cook and Norwood were below par, largely due to the poor service they received for most of the game. Dunn was bright and inventive when he came on and Buxton was composed on the ball as always, albeit far too deep in the first half. However, I thought the man of the match was Oliver Norburn had who several good efforts from distance and was back to the form of the first few games of the season.

I don't think we are out woods yet by any stretch of the imagination, but the league table makes better reading tonight.

 

[bring back the cowshed!]

Well, if you can win even when you play badly .....

 

[bigmart]

Would agree with comments RLC we were poor too pedestrian and crying out for width yet again, Buxton was MOM for me. Made up with the win but we need to improve quickly if we are too challenge for promotion

 

[Sparky]

Never in any doubt!

Another frustrating performance but win was all that matters. Agree with many of RLCs points. Norburn for me was the best player on the pitch and was unlucky not to score.

Dunn was very good. I questioned him coming on for CJ but he was really positive. Nors scored the kind of goal that shows why he should always play ahead of mangan. Like the Solihull win tho, we must build on it but still some issues:

Team selection - MIckys use of subs like the Dover game once again showed he picked the wrong side from the start. Hughes, Harris and Norburn don't give enough of a midfield attacking threat. None of them really got into the box and after 5 mins I knew Micky would need to change it. Mangan not even in the squad interesting.

Wing backs - Buxton got forward 2nd half but Liam hardly ever. Does he worry about leaving McEveley exposed? Plus do we really need 3 centre Halves at home to a very poor barrow side? McEvely went off but he looked injured.

Cook - ok he missed a sitter in the first half but had no other service. I thought he went off too early and waring looked a bit raw altho tried his best. I still think cook is our best striker and it seems one or two games without a goal and he's hauled off. He gets no service whatsoever and must get so frustrated.

Big Mac was good but again nearly got involved in things he shouldn't.

We still don't create nowhere enough but a win is a win I guess. Up to the dizzy heights of 14th!

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

I agree completely with Sparky about the midfield trio we started with. Why we would start with such a cautious three when we struggle to create and score goals is beyond me, and the 532 does not work properly unless someone plays in the number ten role behind the strikers, whether it is Dunn or Jennings. However, I still think 532 is the best system to go with at the present time.

The wing backs were too deep again for most of the game. Whether this is how they have been instructed to play, or it is simply because of a lack of confidence, I don't know.

I also agree about Cook, who still seems to be a scapegoat when the team as a whole is not performing. That is a dangerous road for the manager to go down.

I disagree about McEveley who I thought had a very good game again today. I did not think there was any problem defensively down that side.

 

[Sparky]

Wasn't saying there was a problem with McEvely who did nothing wrong, just wonder if Liam thinks about leaving him isolated.

Disappointing to hear CJ and Alabi getting some abuse from the paddock when warming up. On a positive side, the drums in the kop kept us all chanting and I think helped the players keep going.

Back to Cook, who knows what strikers will start next. Nors for sure but who else is a mystery.

 

[Boz]

Waring on what's been written doesn't sound anywhere near the finished article yet. I would be disappointed if Cook doesn't start the next game. Also a bit surprising Alabi on the bench ahead of Mangan. From what I read, Alabi was getting the abuse Sparky mentions and CJ stuck up for him. Fans who abuse players in that way are not welcome.

Have some misgivings about 532 particularly at home, I don't think we have a player really suited to the attacking component of the right wing-back role.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

Cook should obviously be starting but Waring did show promise when he came on, certainly in comparison with Alabi. He seemed quite good technically and nearly scored with a diving header, the kind of chance Cook would no go for.

The big question for me is whether Dunn starts on Tuesday. He deserves to based on his cameo today, but I think he still might be an impact player at this stage.

 

[Boz]

It sounded as though Dunn started almost in a Connor Jennings position, then got moved out wide when Jennings himself was brought on? With the next two games being away, my reservation would be as to whether he'd contribute enough closing down and chasing the ball. However it's encouraging to hear that he showed some of his potential today.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

Dunn looked most effective when he was behind the strikers. He was moved wide in the very closing stages and, to be honest, I don't know what system we were playing then. I think it was a case of getting as many attacking players on as possible.