What’s the point in playing Rhodes?

[gurujuan]

On 29/12/2019 at 17:37, shandypants said:

He obviously didn’t have anything to do with Cardiff’s goals l but he contributed absolutely nothing when he came on. He had a 10/10 game when he got his hat-trick but what’s the point in playing someone that has one good game in 30?!!  

He’s over 6’ tall and built well but puts himself around like a schoolgirl. 
 

...and you can fvvck off if you say we don’t make chances for him because the ball went into the box enough for him to fashion at least half a chance. 

Puts himself around like a schoolgirl, but not in a good way

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, DJMortimer said:

It's like that old joke about the pills that keep the elephants away.

 

When he's rubbish, then the manager, the officials, his team mates, our opponents, the weather, biorhythms, bullying by Gary Hooper (I'm not making that up), a bad curry, reading a sad book and all sorts are to blame.

 

When he scores (on average about once every three months), then it just proves how great he is.

 

You have to be a special kind of fanboy not to appreciate the large disparity of available evidence.

I’ll take stats and professionals views who are actually in the game, than a pessimistic fans opinion. 

[Inspector Lestrade]

12 hours ago, 2roland2 said:

obv not the one you did.  

 

Well start going to Hillsborough so we can start to talk about the same game

[OwlinOldham]

47 minutes ago, DJMortimer said:

It's like that old joke about the pills that keep the elephants away.

 

When he's rubbish, then the manager, the officials, his team mates, our opponents, the weather, biorhythms, bullying by Gary Hooper (I'm not making that up), a bad curry, reading a sad book and all sorts are to blame.

 

When he scores (on average about once every three months), then it just proves how great he is.

 

You have to be a special kind of fanboy not to appreciate the large disparity of available evidence.

 

To be fair, its not about being a fan boy for most, its about looking at the whole picture rather than just a little part of it.

My argument is that up until this season, we have never really set up in any way to get the best out of Rhodes since he came or any of the other strikers we have here.

Fletcher is a good example, in his 3 previous championship seasons with us hes scored 10 in 38 games, then 2 in 19 games and 11 in 40 games. yet now Hes now scored 12 in 21 games this season, which coincides with us finally obtaining wingers and trying to put the ball in the box on every occasion we can. 

 

You could then suggest that the change in how we play might actually now help other forwards at the club if they are given a chance too. Rhodes has only played 470 or so minutes (4.8 games worth) of football this season for us. Maybe we give him a chance to see what he does when settled into the side and with the ball actually being played into the box for once. he looked decent next to Fletcher and its unfair to then say hes been crap when the best target/holdup man we have is away injured in the next games after that. Before anyone says it Nuhiu is not a target man. 

Edited December 31, 2019 by OwlinOldham

[DJMortimer]

54 minutes ago, Half time Bovril said:

I’ll take stats and professionals views who are actually in the game, than a pessimistic fans opinion. 

 

What? Like all those (6 for those who are counting) who have been leaving him out of our team, even when we've had crippling injury lists? Or all those who have made no effort to sign him despite knowing he'd been a failure here and we were in a desperate financial position? How about all those supposedly less talented players who have been comprehensively outscoring the man who "guarantees goals" (tm) despite a supposed "lack of service" (tm)?

 

As for stats (sigh), the only impressive ones are receding ever further into the mists of time.

 

How fine the Emperor looks in his new outfit.

 

Edited December 31, 2019 by DJMortimer

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, DJMortimer said:

 

What? Like all those (6 for those who are counting) who have been leaving him out of our team, even when we've had crippling injury lists? Or all those who have made no effort to sign him despite knowing he'd been a failure here and we were in a desperate financial position? How about all those supposedly less talented players who have been comprehensively outscoring the man who "guarantees goals" (tm) despite a supposed "lack of service" (tm)?

 

As for stats (sigh), the only impressive ones are receding ever further into the mists of time.

 

How fine the Emperor looks in his new outfit.

 

Premier Norwich wanted to sign him, I don’t think fans know everything that happens at the club.

[DJMortimer]

35 minutes ago, Half time Bovril said:

Premier Norwich wanted to sign him, I don’t think fans know everything that happens at the club.

 

 

Yeah. They were so taken with his abilities that even £1 was too much for them.

 

A goalscorer, by definition, scores goals. You don't need a PhD to see the problem there.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, OwlinOldham said:

 

To be fair, its not about being a fan boy for most, its about looking at the whole picture rather than just a little part of it.

My argument is that up until this season, we have never really set up in any way to get the best out of Rhodes since he came or any of the other strikers we have here.

Fletcher is a good example, in his 3 previous championship seasons with us hes scored 10 in 38 games, then 2 in 19 games and 11 in 40 games. yet now Hes now scored 12 in 21 games this season, which coincides with us finally obtaining wingers and trying to put the ball in the box on every occasion we can. 

 

You could then suggest that the change in how we play might actually now help other forwards at the club if they are given a chance too. Rhodes has only played 470 or so minutes (4.8 games worth) of football this season for us. Maybe we give him a chance to see what he does when settled into the side and with the ball actually being played into the box for once. he looked decent next to Fletcher and its unfair to then say hes been crap when the best target/holdup man we have is away injured in the next games after that. Before anyone says it Nuhiu is not a target man. 

 

He's a bloody expensive striker if he is only capable of performing when alongside Fletcher and to be fair he has only done that once this season anyway.

 

We did try and get balls into the box 2nd half on Sunday but they must have been the wrong type of balls in as he got nowhere near them. In all seriousness the service wasn't great but he doesn't have the ability to turn an average ball into a good one and doesn't adequately contest crosses so that it makes a difficult clearance for the opposition. His play outside of the box is non-existent and we couldn't get anywhere near the Stoke box on Boxing Day due to the hold up play of him and Nuhiu. 

 

I'd love him to come good, most of us would but I don't have any faith in it happening and would prefer someone who was capable of performing when Fletcher isn't available as well because as things stand we look inept in open attacking play without him.  

[OwlinOldham]

14 minutes ago, hirstyboywonder said:

 

He's a bloody expensive striker if he is only capable of performing when alongside Fletcher and to be fair he has only done that once this season anyway.

 

We did try and get balls into the box 2nd half on Sunday but they must have been the wrong type of balls in as he got nowhere near them. In all seriousness the service wasn't great but he doesn't have the ability to turn an average ball into a good one and doesn't adequately contest crosses so that it makes a difficult clearance for the opposition. His play outside of the box is non-existent and we couldn't get anywhere near the Stoke box on Boxing Day due to the hold up play of him and Nuhiu. 

 

I'd love him to come good, most of us would but I don't have any faith in it happening and would prefer someone who was capable of performing when Fletcher isn't available as well because as things stand we look inept in open attacking play without him.  

 

This is leading back to what i said earlier in this same fred. You dont sign someone like Rhodes and expect him to turn average passes into good ones or to dribble past 3 men and score. You sign him to score all the chances you create in the box. Thing is, we have never been a team to create them lots of chances in the box, so never needed a player like him to do that. We haven't ever and likely wont ever really play to his strengths as its a very specific set up he needs. whilst we now have wingers at least we are a little closer to that set up than we ever have before in his time here. least we can do is give him a chance with the best set up we have had in a long time, rather than slate him after less than 5 games worth of football and 3 goals this season. 

 

Just to add to the above, I do feel he has been a bad signing for us, but i also do think we messed up signing him and not having any plan or set up to get the most out of him. 

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, OwlinOldham said:

 

This is leading back to what i said earlier in this same fred. You dont sign someone like Rhodes and expect him to turn average passes into good ones or to dribble past 3 men and score. You sign him to score all the chances you create in the box. Thing is, we have never been a team to create them lots of chances in the box, so never needed a player like him to do that. We haven't ever and likely wont ever really play to his strengths as its a very specific set up he needs. whilst we now have wingers at least we are a little closer to that set up than we ever have before in his time here. least we can do is give him a chance with the best set up we have had in a long time, rather than slate him after less than 5 games worth of football and 3 goals this season. 

 

Just to add to the above, I do feel he has been a bad signing for us, but i also do think we messed up signing him and not having any plan or set up to get the most out of him. 

 

I agree, he was a 'marquee' signing but not the player we needed at that time or since and as such was a waste. I think his natural instinct as a goal scorer has dwindled and he is unlikely to get back to his peak. 

As you say he was heavily reliant on good service but was able to contest much more with defenders in the box than he does now and create space for himself, he could beat a defender to the front post and get free in the box, he doesn't look like doing that regularly now as his initial movement is just not sharp enough.  

 

You say give him a chance but acknowledge he needs a very specific set up to have a chance of being successful. I think we would be better served trying to cut our losses if we got any interest at all next month and instead tried to get someone in capable of being effective with what we have to work with and who can adapt to different styles of play. 

[DJMortimer]

Oh... so they've got to be special chances we create, not ordinary ones that less talented players have to make do with? And I'm guessing we only decide which category each opportunity falls into when we see whether Rhodes can take it or not? That's nothing but a circular, and self-fulfilling pick and mix (or 'bollocks' if you prefer).

 

The rest of the team really ought to feel ashamed of themselves; winning tackles, covering runners, retaining possession, making clearances, running into space, opening up the defence, blocking shots and battling physically whilst His Majesty reads his newspaper and sips his cocktail, waiting for someone to put the ball on the goal line for him.

 

 

 

[OwlinOldham]

16 minutes ago, hirstyboywonder said:

 

I agree, he was a 'marquee' signing but not the player we needed at that time or since and as such was a waste. I think his natural instinct as a goal scorer has dwindled and he is unlikely to get back to his peak. 

As you say he was heavily reliant on good service but was able to contest much more with defenders in the box than he does now and create space for himself, he could beat a defender to the front post and get free in the box, he doesn't look like doing that regularly now as his initial movement is just not sharp enough.  

 

You say give him a chance but acknowledge he needs a very specific set up to have a chance of being successful. I think we would be better served trying to cut our losses if we got any interest at all next month and instead tried to get someone in capable of being effective with what we have to work with and who can adapt to different styles of play. 

 

Agree with most of that. I will just clarify that by give him a chance I mean simply because right now we have nobody better to play alongside Fletcher. 

Not sure if his abilities have dwindled as you suggest, or if its just a case of him going through the motions and not being game sharp. Either way, until hes gone hes our problem and id give him a shot in the hope that he can recapture some kind of form.  

 

6 minutes ago, DJMortimer said:

Oh... so they've got to be special chances we create, not ordinary ones that less talented players have to make do with? And I'm guessing we only decide which category each opportunity falls into when we see whether Rhodes can take it or not? That's nothing but a circular, and self-fulfilling pick and mix (or 'bollocks' if you prefer).

 

The rest of the team really ought to feel ashamed of themselves; winning tackles, covering runners, retaining possession, making clearances, running into space, opening up the defence, blocking shots and battling physically whilst His Majesty reads his newspaper and sips his cocktail, waiting for someone to put the ball on the goal line for him.

 

 

 

 

They dont have to be special chances, it just helps if they are chances specifically created with his strengths as a player in mind. Which is the same as almost any other team would do if they had signed a player with a reputation fr scoring goals like his. 

would you have played long ball football with Zola up front if you were the Chelsea manager? Would you have played the ball to feet if we had Crouch up front? Im guessing not. but that mist also count as special chances because your playing to their chances. So why would you not try and play the ball into the box via through balls and cutbacks from the byline when you have one of the best poachers in the division in your team? have we done that at any time since he has been here other than this season? nope.

 

I get it, you dont like Rhodes, but maybe at least try and put over some kind of argument why rather than just talking a load of circular, and self-fulfilling pick and mix . 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, OwlinOldham said:

 

Agree with most of that. I will just clarify that by give him a chance I mean simply because right now we have nobody better to play alongside Fletcher. 

Not sure if his abilities have dwindled as you suggest, or if its just a case of him going through the motions and not being game sharp. Either way, until hes gone hes our problem and id give him a shot in the hope that he can recapture some kind of form.  

 

. 

 

That would be worse than him losing ability. The number of managers we have had since his signed for us, all of which have decided not to put faith in him for any period of time, tells it's own story.

 

 

[DJMortimer]

2 minutes ago, OwlinOldham said:

I get it, you dont like Rhodes, but maybe at least try and put over some kind of argument why rather than just talking a load of circular, and self-fulfilling pick and mix . 

 

Rhodes is just another player to me. Like everyone else, if he contributes significantly to the team effort and better than other options we might have, then he deserves a place in the team. But let's face it, he's hardly even threatened that since he got here.

 

I have much more of a problem with those defending him using little more than history, make believe, bias and wishful thinking. That's not aimed at you by the way. You are at least attempting to mount some kind of logical case, but over the last couple of years we've had all sorts of fanboys, fantasists and fraudsters.

[OwlinOldham]

35 minutes ago, hirstyboywonder said:

 

That would be worse than him losing ability. The number of managers we have had since his signed for us, all of which have decided not to put faith in him for any period of time, tells it's own story.

 

 

 

To be fair its all speculation from our side. Probably a poor choice of words on my part. I think hes just one of those that requires too much change on the way we play to get the most out of him. Meant going through the motions really as in hes turning out and doing what he can but at the same time hes not ever gonna offer much more than goals if they come his way.

 

32 minutes ago, DJMortimer said:

 

Rhodes is just another player to me. Like everyone else, if he contributes significantly to the team effort and better than other options we might have, then he deserves a place in the team. But let's face it, he's hardly even threatened that since he got here.

 

I have much more of a problem with those defending him using little more than history, make believe, bias and wishful thinking. That's not aimed at you by the way. You are at least attempting to mount some kind of logical case, but over the last couple of years we've had all sorts of fanboys, fantasists and fraudsters.

 

Lol im all for debate. To be fair no malicious dig was aimed at you and hope it didnt come across like that. I will never even try and justify his time here as anything other than bad for him and us. I just think its harsh to level it all at the players feet when the cards were always gonna be stacked against him from the way we play and set up. Very little has changed up until bruce came in and got us some wingers.

 

You both do realise hes gonna go on and score a hatfull at his next club and really rub salt in it for us all .

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, OwlinOldham said:

 

To be fair its all speculation from our side. Probably a poor choice of words on my part. I think hes just one of those that requires too much change on the way we play to get the most out of him. Meant going through the motions really as in hes turning out and doing what he can but at the same time hes not ever gonna offer much more than goals if they come his way.

 

 

Lol im all for debate. To be fair no malicious dig was aimed at you and hope it didnt come across like that. I will never even try and justify his time here as anything other than bad for him and us. I just think its harsh to level it all at the players feet when the cards were always gonna be stacked against him from the way we play and set up. Very little has changed up until bruce came in and got us some wingers.

 

You both do realise hes gonna go on and score a hatfull at his next club and really rub salt in it for us all .

 

he has to take some responsibility for this as well in my opinion. The season before he joined we missed out on promotion by 1 game, the season he joined we always looked like being in promotion contention. With this in mind, we were never going to completely change the way we were playing just to suit him. Either he thought he could adapt his game enough to fit in or he was happy to sign for what we were offering regardless, otherwise why join us?

[Guest]

3 hours ago, DJMortimer said:

 

Yeah. They were so taken with his abilities that even £1 was too much for them.

 

A goalscorer, by definition, scores goals. You don't need a PhD to see the problem there.

Don’t know where you’ve got £1 from ? Yes you’re correct heS proven to score goals. 

[OwlinOldham]

46 minutes ago, hirstyboywonder said:

 

he has to take some responsibility for this as well in my opinion. The season before he joined we missed out on promotion by 1 game, the season he joined we always looked like being in promotion contention. With this in mind, we were never going to completely change the way we were playing just to suit him. Either he thought he could adapt his game enough to fit in or he was happy to sign for what we were offering regardless, otherwise why join 

 

Nah i agree with you to an extent. Its a proper conundrum really. Maybe he was promised a Ben Marshall type was going to be signed for him or maybe he thought he could do more yhan he actually can. One thing we didnt do though was adapt. After 2 nearly seasons, we didnt change and teams sussed us out.

 

Either way its not been great for both parties. I do still think theres a player in there though. Sometimes players just dont fit or work at a club. I also believe that no striker was ever going to properly flourish with how we have played in the last few years, Rhodes included. 

 

[DJMortimer]

10 minutes ago, Half time Bovril said:

Don’t know where you’ve got £1 from ? Yes you’re correct heS proven to score goals. 

 

They refused to pay any kind of transfer fee. It's really not very difficult.

 

[Guest LondonOwl313]

30 minutes ago, DJMortimer said:

 

They refused to pay any kind of transfer fee. It's really not very difficult.

 

They refused to pay any transfer fee for anyone though as they’ve used the prem money to pay off debts and get the club back on an even keel financially, that’s their transfer strategy.. it’s just twisting facts to suggest it’s because they don’t rate Rhodes enough