Man of the match- Blackburn (H)

[McRightSide]

10 minutes ago, Kagoshimaowl said:

Yeah exactly what I thought! I’ve  said a thousand times that I think Westwood is a better keeper but that Dawson deserves the shirt right now. Not a vendetta at all, I’m actually supporting the lad!

There’s a weird situation on this site that seemingly prevents anyone from talking about Dawson or Westwood in isolation.

 

Case in point:

 

Dawson at fault, Westwood would have saved it

 

Dawson had a good game again. Westwood is finished.

 

Its so weird.

 

FWIW I’m certainly supportive of Dawson keeping the shirt, but I do have my question marks if he can handle a full season.

 

The worst result is he loses his place after the window shuts and he spends the rest of the season on the bench.

Edited January 19, 2020 by McRightSide

[A E Neuman NYowl]

5 hours ago, Kenners3896 said:

A goalkeeper who conceded 5 goals gets man of the match and a 6 out of 10. Wow just wow. 

 

 

The 2nd goal whilst unlucky came as a result of a poor hand to the shot. 

He could have and should have done a lot better with 2 or 3 of the goals today, he shares as much blame as the rest of them. 

Westwood wouldnt have conceded 5 today. He would have got a grip of that back 4. 

 

Dawson is out of contract in the summer... if he was any good at all there would be teams sniffing around him. 

There arent and he isnt. 

 

Dawson is like the vast majority of this squad and Mr Monk himself..... mediocre 

 

I don't know what you are on about, I didn't give any marks but clearly stated that I gave MoM to Hutch.

 

It looks to me like you have real issues with Dawson, that's fine that's your opinion.

 

FWIW I am a big fan of Westwood and on many occasions have said he is the best keeper we have had in my 30 odd years of watching the Owls. This season he has been poor and In my opinion Dawson has been the better keeper of the two.

[Rhubarb n Custard]

This thread is the very definition of an oxymoron.

[Guest Ash76]

On 18/01/2020 at 18:40, OwlBiSeeinThi said:

I went for Borner. Although he was one of the many at fault for the first goal.

He was more calm and composed than anyone else. But he was offered nothing by his team mates.

 

Jesus Christ, you’ve got to be taking the p1ss? Was at fault for 3 goals, switched off and lost his man every time 

[nevthelodgemoorowl]

3 hours ago, Rhubarb n Custard said:

This thread is the very definition of an oxymoron.

Catachresis me thinks. 

[Holmowl]

On 18/01/2020 at 21:03, frastheowl said:

 

Ugh...here goes...

 

Dawson - 6 - Man of the Match - I'm not sure he could have done much else for any of the goal. The 1st goal he's made a sharp save from close range, but hasn't diverted it away from danger (I'd have to see it again). The 2nd goal, he makes a decent save onto the post, and he's unlucky to score an own goal. But, he made a couple of fine saves...in particular the one from Reach straight after half time. Ridiculous reactions. Could've been 7 or 8 had it not been for him. 

 

Urhoghide - 3 - Well, he was brought back down to Earth with an almighty bump this afternoon. Absolutely terrorised by the brilliant Armstrong. Poor in possession, and really struggled to do the basics right. 

 

Iorfa - 4 - Looked all at sea against Blackburn's mobile forward line. But let's put some perspective in here... that back four today, was let down by a frankly pathetic midfield trio. Within the 1st five minutes, their centre half threaded a ball through the entirety of it, into the striker's feet, and before you know, the back four have four Blackburn attackers running at them. 

 

Borner - 3 - Like Iorfa, I've actually gone easy on him a little, because of the lack of protection they were afforded. But, gave a self-inflicted needless foul away which got him book, looked uncomfortable and uneasy from the first minute, and his defending for Blackburn's 4th, is abject. 

 

Fox - 4 - Suckered in by Nyambe for the 2nd goal. Defending narrow, rushed out to close the full back down, but turned inside out far too easily. Struggled against the physicality and intelligent movement of Gallagher all game. 

 

Bannan - 3 - Had zero effect on the game, but failed to perform his basic defensive duties today. Last week at Leeds, he was diligent and stopped any balls through the centre. But from minute one today, he was sluggish and seem to have no desire to perform those dirty, unappreciated tasks. Did he expect it to be a cake walk and have the run of Hillsborough? There's been cases made about not needing an anchor man when playing at home (of which I often agree with)...but today, just shows the damage that can be done, when that role isn't performed well. 

 

Lee - 3 - Slow, off the pace, careless in possession. The 3rd goal came about from a poor touch in midfield from him. Could have no complaints getting dragged off at HT.

 

Luongo - 4 - Before mentioning his dismissal, let's not absolve him of the shower he was involved in, early on. Didn't form any links or partnerships, didn't get up to support Winnall, gave the ball away too often. And then the tackle... it's soft, it's not a red card. But, what a pathetic attempt to win the ball. Epitomised the sides aggression. Pulled out of the tackle, but felt he needed look as though he was sticking the foot in. Pfft...to go from a top performance at Leeds last week, to that. And he's one of the newbies.

 

Murphy - 5 - Probably, the bright spark in the 1st 20 minutes. When I say bright spark, I mean the only flicker of light. Looked to get at Bell, and made a couple of dangerous runs, and looked to put the ball in the box. Reduced to playing off scraps, when moved up front. We need more from him, but he's the least of the issues today.

 

Reach - 5 - Probably our best outfield player over the course of the 90 minutes. But, it's not saying much. Was tidy in possession, and kept going. 

 

Winnall - 4 - You feel for him, because he was p!ss!ng in the wind. But, the fact is, he's not good enough. And he can't play that lone forward role, if we aren't controlling the game. There's a perception you have to be big and strong to play that role...you don't. Armstrong played it brilliantly today for Blackburn. But Winnall just doesn't have the strength, pace, guile nor intelligence to play it, and if the midfield can't string two passes together, he's going to really struggle. 

 

Nuhiu - 5 - Can see why he was introduced, unfortunately, the 2nd goal went in seconds before been introduced, and the game was gone. We needed to have an outlet up front to allow us to get players up to support the forward, and Nuhiu does offer that. In truth, he had little impact on the game. 

 

Lees - 5 - Came on, didn't settle things down. But, it was damage limitation time.

 

Hutchinson - 6 - Came on, and at least did the basic requirements. Run around, put tackles in, let the opponents know you're there. He wasn't great, but it was refreshing to see, in amongst the sea of mediocrity and cowardice. 

 

Overall...

 

Yet again, our start to the game dictated the course of the 90 minutes. The way our midfield started the game wasn't good enough, and to be honest, it was 100% down to, a perception, they thought they were going to run the show. Not one of those midfield trio's came out with the intention to graft and do the hard yards. Within a minute, I was screaming about Adaraybioyo been able to play a pass that bypass the midfield into Holtby's feet. That happened four times more within the first 10 minutes. Utterly unacceptable. 

 

We were too deep, too passive, and frankly, too proud to run about and get into Blackburn's faces. The defence had a poor day at the office, and poor old Urhoghide won't have a much tougher examination than the one he got off Armstrong today. But, talk about been exposed. By the time we were 1-0 down, it was the least Blackburn deserved. 

 

And what upsets you the most, is our reaction to the sending off. How many times do we hear managers bemoan how difficult it can be, to play against 10 men? Did we even attempt to knuckle down, and make it difficult for Blackburn to play through us? No. We collapsed and surrendered at 1-0 down. Unacceptable. 

 

What I will say though, is how impressed I was with Blackburn's attacking threat. I thought Armstrong was absolutely brilliant, and Gallagher has the skillset that we are desperate for. Mowbray played him as an inside forward today, but he could easily play the central role as well. Their movement, with Rothwell, Holtby and Downing providing the creativity make them a very dangerous side. That said...you'd probably fancy most attacking front lines to have had a field day up against our shower today.

 

What's the answer? To which question? I don't know where Monk goes from here with this squad of players. He's shuffled and muddled, and managed to get some tune out of them. But of late, we seem to be really struggling, especially at home. I thought the midfield trio of Bannan-Lee-Luongo had some real promise after last week...now I'm questioning that. We thought Urhoghide might have been a real find, and solve a potential squad issue, question marks raised over him (I'm not writing him off, but he's got some learning to do). And it's another game, where our striker has looked utterly toothless. I'm not sure we can solve these issues, during this transfer window. 

Excellent summary as always mate, full of reason.

 

Thank you.

 

I agree with your last comments especially. We looked to be heading roughly if stutteringly in the right direction, but Saturday threw up so many doubts about individuals and our approach.

[OwlBiSeeinThi]

8 hours ago, Ash76 said:

 

Jesus Christ, you’ve got to be taking the p1ss? Was at fault for 3 goals, switched off and lost his man every time 

I literally spun the wheel and threw my axe.

[frastheowl]

1 hour ago, Holmowl said:

Excellent summary as always mate, full of reason.

 

Thank you.

 

I agree with your last comments especially. We looked to be heading roughly if stutteringly in the right direction, but Saturday threw up so many doubts about individuals and our approach.

 

That's the thing, I think a lot of us have felt, that Monk had been getting results, without really having a system or philosophy instilled into the players. He's alluded to that himself. It, boils down to the fact, that he doesn't have the ingredients nor probably the trust in these players, to be able to start instilling that style of play, yet continue to pick up results.

 

He's therefore, had to go back to basics. Get them defending well, keeping things tight, and hope that the bit of quality we had (in Fletcher) would be enough to decide those margins.

 

The stark reality is, when you try to play those margins, without that differential (Fletcher), probability dictates you'll end up on the wrong side of those tight games. Since Forest away, Fletcher has played in only 45 minutes of Championship football...it's little surprise we've gone from losing 3 games in 16 before that, to losing 4 games out of six following his absence. 

 

Monk knows, he has to keep winning games...somehow...in any which way. He doesn't have the luxury that a Wagner, Farke, Neill or Frank had at Huddersfield, Norwich, Preston and Brentford. He won't be afforded the time or patience, from the fans (or the club), to be able to write off a season to start to instil a philosophy and a way of playing. And it's going to make things very difficult, and in all likelihood, it's only going to slow down the progress the club makes. 

 

And the clubs stance in only targeting loan players in this window, is only going to exasperate that situation further. It all points to an expectation from the club, that we really need to give it a right go to get out of this division, this season. Long term thinking isn't on the agenda.

 

And while ever that's the case, Monk is going to have to continue to keep reaching into the back of the cupboards to find whatever odds and ends he can, to enable him to produce an edible meal. It might not always be pretty, it certainly won't be Michelin Star...but it just needs to do the job. 

[Holmowl]

2 hours ago, frastheowl said:

 

That's the thing, I think a lot of us have felt, that Monk had been getting results, without really having a system or philosophy instilled into the players. He's alluded to that himself. It, boils down to the fact, that he doesn't have the ingredients nor probably the trust in these players, to be able to start instilling that style of play, yet continue to pick up results.

 

He's therefore, had to go back to basics. Get them defending well, keeping things tight, and hope that the bit of quality we had (in Fletcher) would be enough to decide those margins.

 

The stark reality is, when you try to play those margins, without that differential (Fletcher), probability dictates you'll end up on the wrong side of those tight games. Since Forest away, Fletcher has played in only 45 minutes of Championship football...it's little surprise we've gone from losing 3 games in 16 before that, to losing 4 games out of six following his absence. 

 

Monk knows, he has to keep winning games...somehow...in any which way. He doesn't have the luxury that a Wagner, Farke, Neill or Frank had at Huddersfield, Norwich, Preston and Brentford. He won't be afforded the time or patience, from the fans (or the club), to be able to write off a season to start to instil a philosophy and a way of playing. And it's going to make things very difficult, and in all likelihood, it's only going to slow down the progress the club makes. 

 

And the clubs stance in only targeting loan players in this window, is only going to exasperate that situation further. It all points to an expectation from the club, that we really need to give it a right go to get out of this division, this season. Long term thinking isn't on the agenda.

 

And while ever that's the case, Monk is going to have to continue to keep reaching into the back of the cupboards to find whatever odds and ends he can, to enable him to produce an edible meal. It might not always be pretty, it certainly won't be Michelin Star...but it just needs to do the job. 

Absolutely.

 

And he and we know that by scraping results we can “easily” end up 6th, and with such a lack of outstanding teams anyone could beat anyone in the play-offs and “do a Huddersfield”.

 

Tipping point now though. How does he turn us round after that debacle? He will earn his money if we take 3 points from Wigan.

 

[frastheowl]

1 hour ago, Holmowl said:

Absolutely.

 

And he and we know that by scraping results we can “easily” end up 6th, and with such a lack of outstanding teams anyone could beat anyone in the play-offs and “do a Huddersfield”.

 

Tipping point now though. How does he turn us round after that debacle? He will earn his money if we take 3 points from Wigan.

 

 

I've put it in another thread.

 

But I don't think the hard part with this squad, is "turning it around."

 

They'll be embarrassed. They'll be hurting. And rightly so. Their egos will have taken a battering. And I fully expect, they'll go and put things right. 

 

The crux with these players is not allowing their ego dictate a lapse in performance. That seems to be the constant failing.

 

They've taken knocks, and responded well in the past. Brighton and Leeds, only last week, are testimony to that. 

 

It's kicking on from good results or good runs of form, that is the real issue.

[Owls_fan_since_1983]

The referee whistle to blow for full time. 

[Rhubarb n Custard]

19 hours ago, nevthelodgemoorowl said:

Catachresis me thinks. 

Cheers, every day is a school day 

[sherlyegg]

Why is this thread pinned?...needs to be buried.

 

[Guest Ferkorf]

8 hours ago, sherlyegg said:

Why is this thread pinned?...needs to be buried.

 

Giving me flashbacks everytime I log in to owlstalk. Needs deleting from history