Monk's done with Rhodes?

[daveyboy66]

4 hours ago, @owlstalk said:

What has happened is we reached for the stars, put Carlos in charge, nearly got there, but then hit a wall with a hard smash, the senior pro's went sour and we smashed the FFP rules to bits and got busted

So now we're paying for it

We've had to downgrade the squad

We're now in the process of filling the team with literally anyone we can get our hands on - literally anyone - whether they've not played for months since breaking their legs, or  have reputations of being really quite poor and not making the grade, never having played a first team game EVER etc

We are having to do that. We have no choice. We breached FFP (badly)

Because of the actions of the past Monk is having to deal with the consequences (forget whether he's the right man for the job or not for a moment)

So we're buying players along the lines of Gary Taylor-Fletcher and hyping them up to be these exciting young prospects

90% of our players are simply not good enough

That's why fans getting all upset about the manager/tactics etc  are right do so but at the same time mistaken that we can do anything about the quality of the squad

And guess what?  It's gonna get way worse before it gets better

 

But they expect us to transform into a top six side in FOUR games with six new players... 

[DJMortimer]

Just now, Jack the Hat said:

SERIOUSLY? We aren’t scoring goals. At some point we have to score goals. Scoring goals gets the best outcome for the team. None of our players have scored in 4 games. We have loads of players that run around and don’t score. The disasterous signing that is Jordan Rhodes is currently a better option than the others currently proving they can’t score. I don’t really care how well the players get on and how high morale is and how tidy the dressing room is. I want to see the ball in the back of that Soddin onion bag and points on the board.

 

You only have to look at our dear neighbours to see that team is all that matters. They just had their best finish for almost 50 years, but their top scorer had six. The league table cares only about points; not goals, and especially not who scores them. Look at the leading scorers list in the Championship last season. Quite a few of them were on teams that were well down the standings. Do you think West Brom cared that they didn't have anyone score more than 10 league goals? 

 

And regardless of that, Rhodes has done little to demonstrate he would significantly outscore other options in the long run (current form of 18+12 appearances, 5 goals), and even if he did, it would probably come at a cost outside of the opponent's penalty area. In our situation especially, that is the key - what is the best balance between attack and defence?

[Guest Jack the Hat]

8 minutes ago, DJMortimer said:

 

You only have to look at our dear neighbours to see that team is all that matters. They just had their best finish for almost 50 years, but their top scorer had six. The league table cares only about points; not goals, and especially not who scores them. Look at the leading scorers list in the Championship last season. Quite a few of them were on teams that were well down the standings. Do you think West Brom cared that they didn't have anyone score more than 10 league goals? 

 

And regardless of that, Rhodes has done little to demonstrate he would significantly outscore other options in the long run (current form of 18+12 appearances, 5 goals), and even if he did, it would probably come at a cost outside of the opponent's penalty area. In our situation especially, that is the key - what is the best balance between attack and defence?

United haven’t addressed this problem and sit bottom of the league. Villa have and smashed 7 past Liverpool. 

[DJMortimer]

8 minutes ago, Jack the Hat said:

United haven’t addressed this problem and sit bottom of the league. Villa have and smashed 7 past Liverpool. 

 

Great.

 

But somehow I don't see how that really deconstructs the idea that league tables are about points won by teams, not goals scored by individuals.

[cookeh]

19 hours ago, Sergeant Tibbs said:

Calros played Rhodes with Winnall playing off him. When ? How many times ? Is this when Fletcher, Hooper and Forestieri were in the side. 
 

Rhodes was fourth choice striker back then and still is now. 
 

Lukuhay gave Rhodes game time when he arrived, so what changed his mind. What did he witness on the training ground ? 

 

Had a weel look to check I wasn't crazy and yes.. 8 of Rhodes' first 11 appearances were in a front 2 with Winnall.
The dynamic when they played was as i said. Rhodes was the hold-up player and Winnall trying to play off him. 100% misuse of Rhodes.

 

Rhodes started the first 12 league games he was available for and played in every league match to the end of the season. That's not exactly screaming 4th choice to me, but maybe you know better.

 

Jos gave Rhodes time when he arrived? That's just flat out not true tho is it.
Here's a list of the minutes per match for Rhodes after Jos arrived.
70, 72, 0, 0, 0, 85, 0, 0, 0, 45, 13, 0, 0, 0, 0, 7, 87, 68, 0, 0
A lot of zeros for "getting game time". An average of 20 minutes per 90, and never starting more than 2 games in a row.
Just what a striker needs to get going.
He was then shipped out to Norwich on loan for a year. So when exactly did Jos give him a fair shout?

Some peoples revisions of history are baffling.

[cookeh]

52 minutes ago, TheGaffer said:

Don't agree with the contributions part of this. Re watch the Cardiff game. The amount of "easy" free kicks he wins in the opposites half was crucial to our management of the game. It also in turn created lots more opportunities for balls into the box which he thrives off

 

This.

 

There's a perception of Rhodes not contributing. But watch him on the pitch instead of listening to tired old thing people are just saying.

[Guest Jack the Hat]

6 minutes ago, DJMortimer said:

 

Great.

 

But somehow I don't see how that really deconstructs the idea that league tables are about points won by teams, not goals scored by individuals.

So your whole point about not playing Rhodes is that we don’t need to score goals. Fair enough. Over and out from me. 

[Ronio]

3 minutes ago, Jack the Hat said:

So your whole point about not playing Rhodes is that we don’t need to score goals. Fair enough. Over and out from me. 

Wait for it, it will be we don't need any strikers on the pitch next.  

[Guest Hornsby]

If we get a good target man, Rhodes will thrive.

[DJMortimer]

11 minutes ago, Jack the Hat said:

So your whole point about not playing Rhodes is that we don’t need to score goals. Fair enough. Over and out from me. 

 

This argument fails on two rather important concepts that it appears your 'look at me aren't I a card' approach is too unsophisticated to grasp.

 

1) The league table works on points, not kissing posters of goalscorers goodnight before you go to bed. Winning 1-0 is therefore much better than drawing 4-4, a goalless draw helps more than a 3-4 defeat.

2) The player you are advocating here has proved to be rather useless at this task anyway and his meagre output also detracts from those other aspects of the game that are evidently too boring for you to worry about that also help in the acquisition of points. 

 

 

[toooldforthis]

They should have let him go on a free transfer this summer...crazy to keep him around

[DJMortimer]

1 hour ago, cookeh said:

A lot of zeros for "getting game time". An average of 20 minutes per 90, and never starting more than 2 games in a row.
Just what a striker needs to get going.

 

Well for quite a while we had eight forwards at the club, so rotation was the way of it for all of them. Yet the one who supposedly "guarantees goals" was for almost that entire time actually the one least likely to do so. When it comes to Rhodes, that's the bottom line because that was all anyone ever talked about and even some of his defenders acknowledge his limitations elsewhere. But now we're talking about him winning free kicks? Are you kidding me? I suppose it's the idea of being difficult to score if the goalposts are constantly on the move.

 

In the last five years, he has played for 4 clubs, under 6 permanent managers and 1 caretaker. In that time he has started 87 games despite no significant injuries and at times limited playing resources for some of those teams. That is well beyond the realms of coincidence and conspiracy. Could it be that a lack of playing time is BECAUSE of a dearth of production, and not the other way round?

 

The double standards are incredible. Excuses still being made for Rhodes after two and a half years, yet Paterson and Kachunga are dismissed after being here for about four weeks between them?

 

Edited October 6, 2020 by DJMortimer

[Holmowl]

2 hours ago, bigdan2003 said:

Completely understand the theory that he needs a run of games. But the thing is, imo,  Rhodes contributes very little to the rest of the game / team.  He doesn't seem to hold it up, he doesn't really create anything.  So i can understand why he isn't given a run of games to be honest, because we can't afford to carry players at this moment. 

 

I really hope he comes good, but i just can't see it happening now. 

In the two games when we started with Rhodes and Windass I thought we held it up front well.

 

OK not like Fletcher did, but quite well. 

[royalowlisback]

Whilst ever we are using the Pigs as a reason why scoring goals doesn't matter re individuals, you have to remember that Sharp and McGoldrick scored the best part of 40 goals between them when they got promoted.

[Guest Jack the Hat]

56 minutes ago, DJMortimer said:

 

This argument fails on two rather important concepts that it appears your 'look at me aren't I a card' approach is too unsophisticated to grasp.

 

1) The league table works on points, not kissing posters of goalscorers goodnight before you go to bed. Winning 1-0 is therefore much better than drawing 4-4, a goalless draw helps more than a 3-4 defeat.

2) The player you are advocating here has proved to be rather useless at this task anyway and his meagre output also detracts from those other aspects of the game that are evidently too boring for you to worry about that also help in the acquisition of points. 

 

 

So firstly you accuse me of trying to be funny which I wasn’t  before ‘attempting’ a joke yourself. Then you explain to me how winning is better than drawing and drawing is better than losing. Finally  confirm you don’t rate him which I already know!  Anyway I’m off ! There’s some poster need kissing!

[Guest Jack the Hat]

13 minutes ago, royalowlisback said:

Whilst ever we are using the Pigs as a reason why scoring goals doesn't matter re individuals, you have to remember that Sharp and McGoldrick scored the best part of 40 goals between them when they got promoted.

I remember them coming to Hillsborough 3 years ago and not scoring! That was fun!

[Sergeant Tibbs]

1 hour ago, cookeh said:

 

Had a weel look to check I wasn't crazy and yes.. 8 of Rhodes' first 11 appearances were in a front 2 with Winnall.
The dynamic when they played was as i said. Rhodes was the hold-up player and Winnall trying to play off him. 100% misuse of Rhodes.

 

Rhodes started the first 12 league games he was available for and played in every league match to the end of the season. That's not exactly screaming 4th choice to me, but maybe you know better.

 

Jos gave Rhodes time when he arrived? That's just flat out not true tho is it.
Here's a list of the minutes per match for Rhodes after Jos arrived.
70, 72, 0, 0, 0, 85, 0, 0, 0, 45, 13, 0, 0, 0, 0, 7, 87, 68, 0, 0
A lot of zeros for "getting game time". An average of 20 minutes per 90, and never starting more than 2 games in a row.
Just what a striker needs to get going.
He was then shipped out to Norwich on loan for a year. So when exactly did Jos give him a fair shout?

Some peoples revisions of history are baffling.

Yes, baffling. Having seen him play for 2 games, Jos saw what anybody who knows about football saw.

What 6 football managers saw. It’s all the managers fault, unless you’ve believe the OP in this thread because he blames Monk.

And those first twelve games - how many goals ? Those first twelve games, Hooper , Fletcher , Joao - we’re they available ? 
End of the season in question, six game unbeaten run took us into the play offs - what was his involvement ? When Hooper and Fletcher were available ? 

Now to the Play offs ? His contribution was to come on as sub in the home leg after 75 minutes and be outrun by a defender who was older in years and played 90 minutes at Huddersfield and from the start at Hillsborough. 

And when asked to take a penalty...maybe Carlos made that up.

 

Thumbs up Jordan, at least you tried. Like you said, baffling.

[quinnssweetshop]

8 hours ago, Sergeant Tibbs said:

Take a look my posts, I’m not kissing anyone’s backside, just pointing out the obvious. 
6 consecutive managers don’t rate him, but yet again pile it on Monk. 

I'm talking about monk because he's our bloody manager at the minute !! 

[Sergeant Tibbs]

35 minutes ago, quinnssweetshop said:

I'm talking about monk because he's our bloody manager at the minute !! 

Not if you and your lynch mob get your way. 
 

[cookeh]

1 hour ago, Sergeant Tibbs said:

Yes, baffling. Having seen him play for 2 games, Jos saw what anybody who knows about football saw.

 

Err.. No Joao and Nuhiu found the best form either of them have ever had in an Owls shirt and so they stayed in the starting 11.

 

  

1 hour ago, Sergeant Tibbs said:

What 6 football managers saw.

 

So we've got from 7 managers to 6 managers? Which one have you left off, the one who wasn't a manager, or the one who never had Rhodes available to select? You've still included the two that did use him an that he scored goals for.  But hey.. you "know football".

 

  

1 hour ago, Sergeant Tibbs said:

And those first twelve games - how many goals ?

 

Umm.. 3 goals. While being told to play deeper and lay it off. So even when being completely misused he'd average 10-15 goals a season. I'm sure you were trying to make some stunning point that takes down Rhode's, but err.. well.. ya didnt.

 

  

1 hour ago, Sergeant Tibbs said:

Those first twelve games, Hooper , Fletcher , Joao - we’re they available ?

 

Why am I having to tell you so much about the team you support?
Nando was available thru-out and played regularly.
Fletch was available but mostly sat on the bench.
Hooper was about for a few of them.
Joao wasn't even at the club. But I'm sure that with you knowing about football n all you knew that and what shipping him out really meant was that he was ahead of Rhodes. Yep. Must be.

Honestly, why do i bother trying to remind fools like this of reality.
 

  

1 hour ago, Sergeant Tibbs said:

 a penalty

 

Oh good god, get over it. You're just a sad wee fella that's still got the hump about a player not wanting to miss and hurt our cause.

 

  You've been demostrably wrong about everything.. well done. Keep on claiming to know about football eh.