League Two Crewe (2) v Rovers (0)

[dollar'sbloke]

Morris does not play wide he plays inside Hawkes when not in an emergency role including being sacrificed. Jennings plays right inside Saunders currently.

It is questionable how people rate McGee and Jolley. One has produced some great stops which is his job and he gets plenty of opportunity nowadays. However he got himself sent off and previously went to ground again to allow an acute angle to be viable for a goal and make a howler of a claim in the dying seconds needing Davies to save us. Jolley meanwhile fulfills a role he is isn't suited to, one Hemmings now getting game time a level higher would not do better and Dennis really struggles at.

The issue in my opinion is Dawes chose to sign just one player to lead the line and Mellon chose none. That man is looking quite fragile ironically for a bettering ram.

We will rise up the table in time but the overall effect will be tempered by the meltdown moment when saving on Mellon's future contract, as it now seems

 

[Boz]

McGee is a decent keeper for this level and an improvement on Doohan and Hewelt. He’s not without his faults but has saved us more points than he’s cost us.

Agree Jolley isn’t suited to the line-leader role, his strengths are good finisher and workrate, but Sam Taylor a better techical player and for a striker Charlie is poor in the air. If we need a line leader until Luke Norris recovers then maybe Nigel should look at Lewis who was used in a similar capacity by Keith Hill for a spell.

 

[Sparky]

Bemused by any criticism of McGee. He isn’t perfect as Boz says but he’s a league two keeper and for this level, overall, is very good and the best we’ve had a for some time. And a promotion winner

Jolley just isn’t good enough and I’d be amazed if he carves out a career in the EFL. He works hard but that isn’t enough I’m afraid. If our front three included both Saunders and Jolley this season we’d once again have goalscoring problems

 

[Goody Two Shoes]

My last say on this thread for those who believe with 100% certainty that we’d be better off with Mickey at the helm (of course, that’s your prerogative).
Based on 100% certainty that my calculations are correct (never bet your house on a “100% certainty”!).
Since Mickey was sacked, we’ve had 22 league games. Of those games, there’s been 5 wins, 5 draws and 12 defeats.
Mickey’s last 22 League games resulted in 6 wins, 6 draws and 10 defeats.
With those stats, it could be assumed we’d be marginally better off right now if Mickey was boss.
If you add into the equation that we’ve had a “rookie” manager, who in some people’s eyes has was terrible and should never have been given the job, it takes any gloss of Mickey’s marginally superior record.
Of course, stats can be used/manipulated to suit, but I’d suggest those given are the most relevant and are, by their nature, facts. We could debate all day long about other factors (ifs, buts, wheres and when’s), but it would all be speculation.
I’ll repeat, possibly for the last time, I’m not Mickey bashing, or bashing anyone else for that matter, but just like to process information based on the available facts. If I was Mark Palios (now there’s a thought), Mickey may well still be in charge, bit the fact is, he’s history and it’s okay to reminisce (believe you me, I do). Who knows, maybe one day, there will be a third-coming.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

My last say on this thread for those who believe with 100% certainty that we’d be better off with Mickey at the helm (of course, that’s your prerogative).
Based on 100% certainty that my calculations are correct (never bet your house on a “100% certainty”!).
Since Mickey was sacked, we’ve had 22 league games. Of those games, there’s been 5 wins, 5 draws and 12 defeats.
Mickey’s last 22 League games resulted in 6 wins, 6 draws and 10 defeats.
With those stats, it could be assumed we’d be marginally better off right now if Mickey was boss.
If you add into the equation that we’ve had a “rookie” manager, who in some people’s eyes has was terrible and should never have been given the job, it takes any gloss of Mickey’s marginally superior record.
Of course, stats can be used/manipulated to suit, but I’d suggest those given are the most relevant and are, by their nature, facts. We could debate all day long about other factors (ifs, buts, wheres and when’s), but it would all be speculation.
I’ll repeat, possibly for the last time, I’m not Mickey bashing, or bashing anyone else for that matter, but just like to process information based on the available facts. If I was Mark Palios (now there’s a thought), Mickey may well still be in charge, bit the fact is, he’s history and it’s okay to reminisce (believe you me, I do). Who knows, maybe one day, there will be a third-coming.

You have just stated that Mellon earned 24 points from his last 22 games, compared to the 20 points since, which is actually a significantly better performance if extrapolated to 46 matches. If Mellon's performance is extended to an entire season we almost certainly would not be relegated, but in any case, your cut-off point is spurious: he managed for virtually the entire season last year and we finished comfortably in mid table, and our performance did not improve when he was sacked and replaced by Dawes. You can't just cherry pick statistics based on short term peaks and troughs in form.

He has never been relegated from this division, and probably would never be, other than if he was operating in particularly dire circumstances.

Mellon's points per game record throughout his entire career is excellent and was very good even in his second spell here. I find the comparisons with Dawes somewhat bemusing, given their very different (!) contributions to this club.

 

[Goody Two Shoes]

I think your match reports are often 100% spot-on, but your interpretations of other people’s contributions, that you have a disagreement with, often bemuses me RLC. Cherry-picking is clearly not exclusive. I was trying to put out some generic “interesting” information, which even I tried to suggest could potentially be deemed as factoids or manipulated to suit. Even my expressed “admiration” for Mellon couldn’t clear the mist.
I’m liking that you’ve stated “we almost certainly would not be relegated”. I’d suggest that’s potentially 99% spot-on.
Apologies for saying it was my last say on the thread; they think it’s all over…….

 

[ADD]

I think it is pretty clear we would not be third from bottom of the league with Mellon in charge, given that with an equivalent or poorer squad last season we were comfortably in mid table. Mellon has never been embroiled in a relegation battle in this division.

I think Palios has made some horrendous decisions, but my post was directed at ADD. He claimed that Dawes would be an improvement on Mellon and when - as was completely predictable - that proved not to be the case, he attacks supporters who wanted Dawes removed for the good of the club, as if his sacking was some kind of injustice.

Never did I say Dawes would be an improvement on MM that is simply untrue. MM was never going to get a new contract so to link MM's departure and Dawes appointment is simply wrong. The toxicity after the Newport game simply meant he went early rather than at season end which was confirmed by ITK's. I expressed surprise at his appointment no more no less. Why it was him rather than BBM etc. is the issue.

Secondly, I am not attacking supporters by saying I took a few weeks off from posting due to the level of toxicity at Dawes - that is very different from simply suggesting he be sacked which is fine - he should have been. By that definition you "attack" fellow supporters who have the temerity to disagree with you in a far more direct way day in and day out.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

Never did I say Dawes would be an improvement on MM that is simply untrue. MM was never going to get a new contract so to link MM's departure and Dawes appointment is simply wrong. The toxicity after the Newport game simply meant he went early rather than at season end which was confirmed by ITK's. I expressed surprise at his appointment no more no less. Why it was him rather than BBM etc. is the issue.

Secondly, I am not attacking supporters by saying I took a few weeks off from posting due to the level of toxicity at Dawes - that is very different from simply suggesting he be sacked which is fine - he should have been. By that definition you "attack" fellow supporters who have the temerity to disagree with you in a far more direct way day in and day out.

You were clearly happy that Mellon had been replaced by Dawes. You are being disingenous.

For some reason you wanted Mellon gone in his first spell when he won back to back promotions, let alone the (relatively) difficult second spell, which looks like a golden era compared to what we are experiencing now.

 

[Higgy 2]

Bemused by any criticism of McGee. He isn’t perfect as Boz says but he’s a league two keeper and for this level, overall, is very good and the best we’ve had a for some time. And a promotion winner

Jolley just isn’t good enough and I’d be amazed if he carves out a career in the EFL. He works hard but that isn’t enough I’m afraid. If our front three included both Saunders and Jolley this season we’d once again have goalscoring problems

Concur totally with your thoughts re criticism of McGee.
In defence of Jolley I'd just like to say, in the absence of Norris there's no o e else at the club who has the energy and bravery to chase loss causes and wrestle with big opposition CBs. Jolley is no Norris in the air, but he does give the midfield a chance to get to second balls from week headers by opponents defenders - due to Jolley getting into their ribs. Possibly Saunders could do it, but he's probably worse than Jolley in the air.
The main frustration is that the only look in Dennis gets is in that very role, which he's clearly unsuited to. He needs to be in a front two with Norris - if not available Jolley.
Adkins maybe resisting 442 as it might leave the midfield weaker still with only two CMs supported out wide by Hawkes, Taylor, Morris etc al who might not be good enough defensively when the chips are down.
One way of getting a front two might be employing a 352 set up. LOC, Walker and Hendy in centre midfield with Pike and Woods/Leake deployed as wing backs who can defend. Pike and Leake have shown they have a decent enough energy and brain power to cause problems in and around the opposition box. Woods also looks stronger than he's been given credit for IMO.

 

[Sparky]

I agree Jolley works hard (as does Saunders), and is brave and doesn’t give up. I’m just not convinced he’ll ever score enough goals on a regular basis at this level although I’m not sure many strikers would given the way we are playing.

I’m a fan of 4-4-2 but obviously you need the players for that system. I’m not saying it would solve our problems but 4-3-3 isn’t working in my opinion

 

[Higgy 2]

433 is a disaster Sparky, and I'm not sure we have the personnel to avoid us getting run ragged in midfield in a 442. But we defo need two up Top to give Dennis any chance.
Thinking 352 might be worth a shot.

 

[Ian]

I think we have to be careful of the full/wing backs. They aren't as fast or good defensively as what we had so don't want to leave them too exposed out there otherwise we'll leave huges gaps.

I think we probably need to give most of our attackers some leeway due to the 433. It does not suit our style and I think the forwards are struggling with it. Having said that we did miss some really good chances against Crewe late on in the game. They probably need some goals for confidence.

 

[Boz]

Briefly in response to a couple of the recent posts on here;

I think Jolley has battled back from a serious injury and after a full season out has only resumed playing in pre-season, so allowances to be made in that respect. Charlie's own preference is probably to be in a front 2, remembering that he linked up quite well with Hemmings in that formation.

Had Tom Davies escaped a sending off v Crewe, then the 352 and wing-backs option might have been worth thinking about. However for Doncaster you'd either pick 2/3 inexperienced players alongside Turnbull or alternatively play Turnbull, Walker and one other, but Walker has fitness issues and hasn't played that regularly in a central defensive role. While I think definitely Wood or maybe James Norris/Leake could do ok as wing-back on the left, less sure about the merits of Pike/Starbuck in that role on the right. One to park until after Friday night.