Southend v Rovers

[Rockford's Love Child]

So in short, people who think Mellon should be replaced after what he has achieved at the club are seriously misguided. Fortunately, we have an intelligent chairman who realises this.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

I also don't think it is by any means certain that we will go down. We are two points from safety with a game in hand, and we look capable of keeping clean sheets with Clarke and Woodyard in the side, which we have not previously this season. Our scoring ratio is not that poor - yesterday's game was the first in twelve that we have failed to score - and if we keep clean sheets we will inevitably pick up points in the weeks ahead.

 

[Ian]

Some of the comments I’ve read elsewhere post match are well OTT and quite frankly ludicrous. Fans have very short memories and completely unrealistic expectations.

 

[Ian]

I think it’ll probably go down to the wire but there are plenty of games to go and we might have a better second half of the season now we have strengthened in certain areas.
Some called yesterday’s game ‘must win’. Now that we haven’t won does that mean our season is over?

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

Also whether Mickey will ever change his ways and be more positive playing two strikers up top as we’re not getting enough goals with just one

Does not this just come down to the quality of the strikers that are available ? I don't think Mellon has been negative in his approach in the last three years and when we had two good strikers - Cook and Norwood - he played them as a pair. However, Payne and Mullin are not good enough and RHM is injured, so I would say it was sensible to play Jennings behind Ferrier yesterday. Jennings played well in the first half and we had created chances.

It also does not necessarily follow that playing a lone striker can't work, as Norwood demonstrated last season.

 

[bring back the cowshed!]

Also whether Mickey will ever change his ways and be more positive playing two strikers up top as we’re not getting enough goals with just one

I agree with RLC on this. He'd love to play two strikers if he had them. Yesterday, Ferrier was isolated and tightly marked, so created zero chances. The game cried out for one or two pacy players to run into the box, but as has been said RHM is injured and CBT not fully fit. Only Danns broke from midfield and he had just two shots. Micky is doing the best he can with the resources available at any one time.

 

[Sparky]

Just to be clear in no way do I think Micky should leave. I’m just saying it’s an option MP has which I don’t think he should do. Micky has worked wonders in his time with us.

just playing devils advocate really

 

[Boz]

I've not seen any highlights yet, so making these observations on what I've read here and elsewhere.

While a clean sheet is a positive, get the impression that as much due to a lack of clinical finishing from Southend as a big improvement from us? Another side like Ipswich would have polished off some of the chances we gave yesterday. That's not to say Clarke isn't a valuable addition to the defence, seems he managed to rescue us on occasion yesterday and his organising ability is much-needed. Given what's been said about Chapman, starting to wonder if he's a significant improvement on Pilling?

There seems to be a consensus that Morris is better deployed in a creative role, while Caprice hasn't convinced on the right at this level. Feel like a broken record, but we do still need another full-back capable of covering both sides of the park.

Midfield line-up looked a bit samey on paper, although with Danns playing a freer role. I don't think Banks is the answer in away games, where he tends to dive in or go for over-ambitious balls rather than keeping it simple.

Playing a lone striker, isn't of itself a negative, but it depends on that player's ability. It worked with Norwood, as he was prepared to drop deep to collect the ball and carry it some distance. Ferrier operates predominantly in the top third of the pitch, so while his work-rate is good, much more dependent on others supplying him. Could see Micky's logic in bringing Mullin on rather than Payne,when Jennings was forced to go off; Steffan the better finisher,but Paul's work-rate greater and he will do some closing down/tracking back, needed from forward in away games . Maybe Micky should have tried a more like-for like switch, playing Gilmour in the Jennings role, but that would have been risky as don't recall Harvey being used in a more attacking position while at Rovers. How long is Hepburn-Murphy out for?

None of us were expecting an easy season and the opening game high-lighted the gulf between L1 and L2. It will be a real struggle and probably beyond us to stay up with just the current squad, but one or two additions in the right areas could significantly change thingsin Rovers' favour.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

Southend did not have many chances yesterday. We definitely restricted them with the new defensive set up, aside from Chapman's errors.

 

[Boz]

Managed to catch up with the brief highlights. Good early run and shot from Danns. I wasn't sure that Chapman was entirely at fault for not coming for the ball over the top, which seemed to end up in no-mans land, though as BBTC suggested many officials would have given a penalty for his attempt to recover the ball.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

I thought Chapman should have come for the ball in that incident, but that was only one of several errors he made. His decision making, command of his area and distribution were pretty woeful all afternoon.

He nearly gifted Southend a goal early in the game, with a clearance to an opposition midfielder which left him with a virtual open goal.

 

[Boz]

Yes, I haven't seen that incident, where he effectively passed to the Southend player, but it was mentioned in match reports.

To go back to the question I posed earlier, is Chapman a significant improvement on Pilling?

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

To go back to the question I posed earlier, is Chapman a significant improvement on Pilling?

Difficult to say, because Pilling has never really been tested in the heat of battle. Do we want to take that risk now ?

Davies should be back soon anyway.

 

[Boz]

Difficult to say, because Pilling has never really been tested in the heat of battle. Do we want to take that risk now ?

Davies should be back soon anyway.

It depends on how bad Chapman is! Only seen him in action for Rovers once, so I'm not well-equiped to judge.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

It depends on how bad Chapman is! Only seen him in action for Rovers once, so I'm not well-equiped to judge.

He looked OK until yesterday. However, I have noticed that he does not really seem to save anything that is away from his body, similar to Pilling. His handling and distribution had generally been solid prior to the Southend game.

The moral of the story is probably that Davies is much more reliable than a lot of his critics will allow.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

Defeat for MK Dons tonight at Burton, which keeps them within touching distance.

 

[ONIGP]

Defeat for MK Dons tonight at Burton, which keeps them within touching distance.

A good result for us but they now have 3 home games on the spin - Sunderland, Rochdale and Wycombe.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

A good result for us but they now have 3 home games on the spin - Sunderland, Rochdale and Wycombe.

At least two of those three games are tough, however.

We have two games in hand on them and they are still to come to Prenton Park, so they remain in the mix.

 

[ONIGP]

At least two of those three games are tough, however.

We have two games in hand on them and they are still to come to Prenton Park, so they remain in the mix.

Best hope is that they come a cropper against Sunderland and the wheels start to fall off their revival.

 

[Boz]

Lincoln hammered notlob and are pulling well clear of the drop zone. Their fortuitous win against Rovers seems to have set them on a roll.