Rhodes goals return

[FreshOwl]

24 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

Recent form

 

740 minutes

6 goals

1 assist

 

We dropped him for Birmingham, Luton and Rotherham.

 

I’m just at a complete loss.

Agreed. Even if we picked up a few points in those games we’d be right back in it. FFS

[shezzas left peg]

Just goes to show what happens when you play a style that suits your record transfer buy striker. It's not rocket science, just the first time we've had a manager since Carlos season 1 that dosent ask him to play as a central focal point (ala Fletcher) or as a lightning quick counter attack striker. Hmmm, Dc and his long ball managers. 

[room0035]

Weren't both of Bannan's penalties too - i don't think he has scored a goal from open play for over 12 months.

[Ray Von shabba]

1 hour ago, Holmowl said:

Recent form

 

740 minutes

6 goals

1 assist

 

We dropped him for Birmingham, Luton and Rotherham.

 

I’m just at a complete loss.

Doesn't that tell a story eh...........

[OwlBiSeeinThi]

4 hours ago, 0742 said:

I used to be a goalkeeper, was once injured for most of a season, so towards the end when there was nothing to play for, the manager sent me on up front for the last 3 minutes of a game. I scored in a goal mouth scramble. 

 

Never bothered playing me up front again though, despite my 1 goal every 3 minutes strike rate. 

 

Saying Rhodes would have banged in 21 goals so far this season is absurd. The manager's, club, players around him have never been set up for him to do that. 

If you have a striker like Rhodes and play to his strengths he will score regularly. It's not absurd at all. His record shows just that.

The fact no one played to the strengths of a prolific striker is absurd.

[trev]

4 hours ago, pat blondeau said:

He was on loan at Norwich when Agnew and Bruce were here so you can’t include those in the list but he’s been criminally underused by the others.

 

Pulis and Monk treatment of Rhodes this season was a disgrace 

 

Was it Rhodes who got subbed as a sub?

[Guest T Hardy]

5 hours ago, Dutch McLovin said:

Been a critic of Rhodes over the years.

 

Didnt want us to sign him as i didnt think he would suit our style and we had also just signed Winnal who was a similar player.

Came in and didnt make much of a impact, was against making it a permeant transfer.

He never has fit into our style of play so never done anything but also seemed to have lost a yard of pace. of

 

However, Bullen, Jos, Agnew, Bruce, Monk, Thompson all didnt play him or try to play to the strengths that made him the goalscorer he was.

 

Moore and team have, and it is no surprise that he is scoring. Unfortunately this is too late and he is out of contract. If we had adopted this approach at the beginning of the season we may have survived.

 

Fair play to Rhodes aswell he could be sat on his hands and seeing out his contract like so many of them seem to have been in the last two years but he hasnt hes fit and giving it his all.

Agree with most of that.

 

What has stood out for me most with Rhodes is that he hasn’t ever scored goals regularly for a good team. He thrived at Huddersfield in League One, and Blackburn in the Championship who never looked like doing anything. He went to Middlesbrough when they got promoted, didn’t add anything to them that they didn’t have and wasn’t even considered for them in the Premier League. He then comes to us and is completely ineffective, until now when we are the worst we’ve been since he signed us - it might simply be that he’s just a player who is good at scoring goals for rubbish teams, kind of like Wilfred Bony, good goal scorer at Swansea, couldn’t cut it at Man City.

 

It’s not a popular opinion on here, but I also trust the many managers who have seen him in training every day over the years and haven’t played him. If it was as black and white as he just needs the service, I’m certain [as terrible as some of those managers have been] they’d have figured it out if we just need to get the ball to him.
 

I’m sure if we had this hidden gem that we “weren’t using right”, another promotion chasing team would have surely snapped him up. For whatever reason - he doesn’t do it for good football teams, hence why he’s thriving again now. Very happy for the guy. I’m not sure we can just say finally he’s been used right though, I really don’t think it’s that simple. 

[trev]

6 minutes ago, T Hardy said:

Agree with most of that.

 

What has stood out for me most with Rhodes is that he hasn’t ever scored goals regularly for a good team. He thrived at Huddersfield in League One, and Blackburn in the Championship who never looked like doing anything. He went to Middlesbrough when they got promoted, didn’t add anything to them that they didn’t have and wasn’t even considered for them in the Premier League. He then comes to us and is completely ineffective, until now when we are the worst we’ve been since he signed us - it might simply be that he’s just a player who is good at scoring goals for rubbish teams, kind of like Wilfred Bony, good goal scorer at Swansea, couldn’t cut it at Man City.

 

It’s not a popular opinion on here, but I also trust the many managers who have seen him in training every day over the years and haven’t played him. If it was as black and white as he just needs the service, I’m certain [as terrible as some of those managers have been] they’d have figured it out if we just need to get the ball to him.
 

I’m sure if we had this hidden gem that we “weren’t using right”, another promotion chasing team would have surely snapped him up. For whatever reason - he doesn’t do it for good football teams, hence why he’s thriving again now. Very happy for the guy. I’m not sure we can just say finally he’s been used right though, I really don’t think it’s that simple. 

 

Nah. It's the type of forward those managers want.

 

Some want a big strong player who runs about and is a nuisance. Plays up top in their own and just holds up the ball (Fletcher).

 

Some like quick mobile players to run the channels. (Windass).

 

Some like poachers who are there to score and link up play (Hooper).

 

Rhodes is the last one and Moore is the first manager since he's been here which likes his striker to be a striker and actually plays him in a 2 up front.

 

Rhodes probably needs 3 decent chances a game and will score at least 1.

 

Which is incredible for this league.

 

That finish yesterday was just a classic strikers finish. Loads of players would miss that.

 

It's a shame he is leaving as he could be the right striker for our new style of play. We will struggle to find someone of his ability at putting the ball in the net.

[Indoor Owl]

31 minutes ago, trev said:

 

Nah. It's the type of forward those managers want.

 

Rhodes is the last one and Moore is the first manager since he's been here which likes his striker to be a striker and actually plays him in a 2 up front.

 

Rhodes probably needs 3 decent chances a game and will score at least 1.

 

That finish yesterday was just a classic strikers finish. Loads of players would miss that.

 

It's a shame he is leaving as he could be the right striker for our new style of play. We will struggle to find someone of his ability at putting the ball in the net.

 

Rhodes is a classic poacher, like Owen or van Nistelrooy, and that is a disappearing type of player these days.

The problem with Rhodes, and with any of the poachers, is the amount of work that has to be done outside of the box to get them to be productive:  Rhodes hasn't even proved productive the handful of times he's played with two up top here, much less when he's left isolated on his own.

 

The last run of games has shown exactly what it takes for Rhodes to find success, and that is two partners up top filling in the gaps in his game - a taller, stronger forward dropping deeper and competing for the ball (Paterson), and a forward with exceptional pace that can get in behind and put the chase on, and then distribute the odd ball (Windass).  The problem with dedicating so many resources to getting your poacher going is that it leaves you vulnerable in the other areas of the pitch, which is why pretty much all of football has moved away from such one dimensional players. 

 

In short, from what we've learned Rhodes will find continued success, as long as:

• The ball is distributed forward deftly from midfield and the link play is good
• He's not expected to beat a man with pace or technical ability
• He has help up top in the form of a body man who can nudge and jump for the ball, and press a bit
• He has help up top in the form of a pace man who can get in behind and create some space in the middle
• He has service from the wings directly into the box and to him
• He's not generally expected to contribute from a free kick
• He's not expected to help much, if anything, in defence
• He's not expected to create opportunities
• He's not expected to take a penalty
• The service he does get is repeated, and he gets the odd free pass on skying the ball from 5 yards out on a clear chance as long as he buries at least one a game

... but that's an awful lot of things that have to go right to get the most out of a £10 million player in this day and age in my opinion.

 

Happy we get to finally wring something out of him in the last gasps of his contract and this stint in the Championship, and I hope we keep the current personnel and formation and ride it out as long as possible, but one has to feel pretty disappointed with how it's all worked out when it comes to Rhodes when you take a look at it without the recent rose coloured tint of the last few games.

 

 

[Indoor Owl]

1 hour ago, T Hardy said:

It’s not a popular opinion on here, but I also trust the many managers who have seen him in training every day over the years and haven’t played him. If it was as black and white as he just needs the service, I’m certain [as terrible as some of those managers have been] they’d have figured it out if we just need to get the ball to him.

 

I share this opinion with you.

 

One manager that comes in, is positive about Rhodes and his abilities, but then doesn't give him an extended run in the team and starts leaving him off the bench altogether is a head scratcher.

... three or four managers from different backgrounds and with different outlooks on the game who all repeat that same pattern and keep leaving him out? 

 

Not a coincidence.

 

[0742]

1 hour ago, OwlBiSeeinThi said:

If you have a striker like Rhodes and play to his strengths he will score regularly. It's not absurd at all. His record shows just that.

The fact no one played to the strengths of a prolific striker is absurd.

 

I know, crazy isn't it, all those managers, even the one's at Boro and Norwich and none of them bothered to play to his strengths...

 

[trotter]

3 hours ago, Bassetts Allsorts said:

Pound for pound, probably the worst signing we've ever made and that's crackers considering it is Jordan Rhodes.  That's not entirely on him, we've not played to his strengths and it was such a bizarre signing at the time considering the strikers we had. 

 

Not even close for me....Jonk, De Bilde, Abdi, Jeffers, Bothroyd.....All massive earners in their time and Rhodes has scored more than all of them combined.  Still disappointing though.

[catdog1121]

The difference is this year we dont have any other choice so Rhodes has managed to get a good run of games.  The stats dont say it all though as Rhodes unfortunately offers little more than goals in my opinion where as other players provide more to the team..  Its a shame as I think he would potentially rip league one next season however he will likely get a better offer and i dont blame him and wish him all the best.

[westy365owl]

3 hours ago, punkskaphil said:

What amazes me about that table is that Adam Reach has scored six goals. I honestly assumed yesterday's goals were his first for the season - I literally have no recollection of any of the others.

 

I just looked on Soccerbase to see when he scored and I can't visualise any of them. I can visualise his handball to save a certain goal at home to Reading though...

Blackburn curled into top corner from outside box 

 

Wycombe hit from edge of area massive deflection to beat keeper

 

Exeter volley from about 8 yards out from bannans quick ball over top

 

Swansea corner pulled to edge of box reach runs from back post to near to guide it home 

[Holmowl]

2 hours ago, OwlBiSeeinThi said:

If you have a striker like Rhodes and play to his strengths he will score regularly. It's not absurd at all. His record shows just that.

The fact no one played to the strengths of a prolific striker is absurd.

Agreed.

 

You don’t buy a limo and use it off-road.

[westy365owl]

I don't think it would be that crazy an idea that if we go down Rhodes will still be here next season 

 

If Moore keeps playing him and he seems to be enjoying his football again .I think he would be the type of player that would probably agree to a new contract on reduced terms 

 

Not saying its something that we should do or even will do just think it's an option that's there as we will have a massive rebuild on our hands come the summer

[Holmowl]

1 hour ago, T Hardy said:

Agree with most of that.

 

What has stood out for me most with Rhodes is that he hasn’t ever scored goals regularly for a good team. He thrived at Huddersfield in League One, and Blackburn in the Championship who never looked like doing anything. He went to Middlesbrough when they got promoted, didn’t add anything to them that they didn’t have and wasn’t even considered for them in the Premier League. He then comes to us and is completely ineffective, until now when we are the worst we’ve been since he signed us - it might simply be that he’s just a player who is good at scoring goals for rubbish teams, kind of like Wilfred Bony, good goal scorer at Swansea, couldn’t cut it at Man City.

 

It’s not a popular opinion on here, but I also trust the many managers who have seen him in training every day over the years and haven’t played him. If it was as black and white as he just needs the service, I’m certain [as terrible as some of those managers have been] they’d have figured it out if we just need to get the ball to him.
 

I’m sure if we had this hidden gem that we “weren’t using right”, another promotion chasing team would have surely snapped him up. For whatever reason - he doesn’t do it for good football teams, hence why he’s thriving again now. Very happy for the guy. I’m not sure we can just say finally he’s been used right though, I really don’t think it’s that simple. 

Regarding the managers, do you not think it possible that Monk, Pulis and Thompson were just plain wrong, and Moore is right?

[Teddy Nickelarse]

IMO Rhodes gas been ill used but that said he has added something to his fame recently. Not just improved form because of more game time but he's added a bit of extra physicality and nous.

[SiJ]

He was a vanity purchase made by a club who had ideas above its station. 

 

We had a plethora of strikers at the time and there was no need to bring in Jordan when we did. 

 

We then persisted in not playing to his strengths and seemed to almost refuse accepting him for the player he was/is. He's a goalscorer, who comes alive in the 18 yard box. Don't expect the intricate hold up play of say a Hooper, the attacking spark of a Nando or the hustle and bustle of a Fletcher. That's not his game, but he was arguably the best finisher out of all of them. 

 

Finally, we have a manager who sees what he is good at and we are seeing what he is capable of. I think Jordan has really tried to work on aspects of his game and I think his link up play and work outside the box has come on a bit. 

 

He's a good lad is Jordan and it is nice to see him finally getting the goals. Shame he probably leaves in the summer on a free, but it is what it is. 

[Teddy Nickelarse]

Just now, Teddy Nickelarse said:

IMO Rhodes gas been ill used but that said he has added something to his fame recently. Not just improved form because of more game time but he's added a bit of extra physicality and nous.

... has been ill used .............. his game!!!