Busting the injury excuse

[DonnyBazR0ver]

The club is doomed to failure unless we seriously reset our expectations.

Even if say Blunt 'retires' and Schofield is relieved of his duties to be replaced by a mote 'experienced' manager, what have they got to do to be deemed competent?

If a new manager doesn't get an immediate impact, some fans will already be on the case and will frame the club up for further failure citing whatever reasons for why we're not getting champagne football week in week out.

Excuse me for generalising but we have worked ourselves into a zero tolerance situation and too quickly folk will look to opportion blame. This all leads to an environment where players and managers alike will find it difficult to develop and be allowed to make mistakes. Who will want to come to our club the longer this persists?

Ok let's assume Schofield is still in charge next season. He's already set up for failure by many of us so, what does he have to do before folk accept we may have misjudged him?

If it's another head coach (assuming there's very few out there that would be a unanimous first choice) what results have to be achieved to prevent him getting the 'f*ck off back to ??"

There's many who have expressed their right to walk with their feet but it would also be good to hear from them what it would take to get them back into the stadium.

It just seems to be too much deep rooted scepticism to give anyone, owner, HoF, Head Coach and players a fair chance going forward.

[StocksArmy]

We’ve done badly the last few seasons for three reasons in order of impact:

- consistently appalling recruitment
- managerial churn and turnover
- modest budgets

The latter reasonable people can argue over what is and isn’t a decent budget, but the first two elements are absolutely undeniably failures of the club. We’ve recruited the wrong players and the wrong managers. These are self-enforced errors.

Nobody sentient expects us to be in the Championship. Mid-table League One is not unreasonable yet we are now bottom half League Two and going backwards.

Agree with this completely. Rather than having a debate over injuries we need to cut the bull and just agree that the club has made this happen since they gave it Butler til the end of the season. Poor recruitment, medium budget. We may well have been in touching distance of the playoffs for some time during the season but we have been dire since the very first game. Anyone denies that has their blinkers on.

[adamtherover]

I was clearly citing the Harrogate game on 7th March.

2 games later against Harrogate Schofield selected: Mitchell; Brown, Anderson, Olowu, Nelson, Rowe; Close, Biggins, Molyneux, Hirst; Lavery. G Miller and Lakin came off the bench. Maxwell apart (and why didn't he sign another LB as cover in January?!) that constitutes Rovers best players based on Schofield's selections over time.

We lost that game abjectly 0-2 at home against a team struggling for survival.

At this point Rovers had won 10 points from their prior 10 games which is relegation form. They were now 9 points off the play offs and no longer in "touching distance" with 12 games to go.

Yes after they beat Wimbledon on 11th March (Rovers only win in the last 14 matches) they were 6 points off Salford in 7th with a game in hand. But they were 9 points off 6th placed Bradford and crucially 5 points off 8th place Mansfield who had 2 games in hand on Rovers (and 3 on Salford only 1 point above them).

At this point to get into the play offs they were needing c. 26 points from 11 fixtures (based on Mansfield's ppg then which is in line with what would be needed looking at the table now). That is not in touching distance of the play offs!

Whatever way you want to twist it, if we’d beaten salford in our next game we would’ve been right in touch of the playoffs.

Oh good grief! No we wouldn't!

Look at the table after the Wimbledon game www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/64845444. Rovers had 50 points with 11 games left

On a points per game basis Mansfield were the target for the play offs. They had 55 points from 33 matches. Bit of Maths (55/33 x 46 matches) gives an estimated points total for Mansfield (and 7th spot) of 76 points (rounded down if you're checking my workings).

Look at the table now www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/league-two/table. 76 points still looks a decent estimate for points needed to make the play offs.

Therefore as Rovers had 50 points with 11 games left. They needed about 26 points in 11 games to make the play offs. That is not touching distance.

If they had beaten Salford they would still have needed 23 points from 10 games - equivalent to getting 106 points in a season. Which is not touching distance!

forget right now what the target was, or what anyone else has done, at 3pm before the Salford game, we were 6 points behind 7th place with a game in hand. Ergo, we win Salford, 3pts behind 7th with a game in hand.  How can that not at that specific moment in time not be considered touching distance.   

[Branton Red]

I was clearly citing the Harrogate game on 7th March.

2 games later against Harrogate Schofield selected: Mitchell; Brown, Anderson, Olowu, Nelson, Rowe; Close, Biggins, Molyneux, Hirst; Lavery. G Miller and Lakin came off the bench. Maxwell apart (and why didn't he sign another LB as cover in January?!) that constitutes Rovers best players based on Schofield's selections over time.

We lost that game abjectly 0-2 at home against a team struggling for survival.

At this point Rovers had won 10 points from their prior 10 games which is relegation form. They were now 9 points off the play offs and no longer in "touching distance" with 12 games to go.

Yes after they beat Wimbledon on 11th March (Rovers only win in the last 14 matches) they were 6 points off Salford in 7th with a game in hand. But they were 9 points off 6th placed Bradford and crucially 5 points off 8th place Mansfield who had 2 games in hand on Rovers (and 3 on Salford only 1 point above them).

At this point to get into the play offs they were needing c. 26 points from 11 fixtures (based on Mansfield's ppg then which is in line with what would be needed looking at the table now). That is not in touching distance of the play offs!

Whatever way you want to twist it, if we’d beaten salford in our next game we would’ve been right in touch of the playoffs.

Oh good grief! No we wouldn't!

Look at the table after the Wimbledon game www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/64845444. Rovers had 50 points with 11 games left

On a points per game basis Mansfield were the target for the play offs. They had 55 points from 33 matches. Bit of Maths (55/33 x 46 matches) gives an estimated points total for Mansfield (and 7th spot) of 76 points (rounded down if you're checking my workings).

Look at the table now www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/league-two/table. 76 points still looks a decent estimate for points needed to make the play offs.

Therefore as Rovers had 50 points with 11 games left. They needed about 26 points in 11 games to make the play offs. That is not touching distance.

If they had beaten Salford they would still have needed 23 points from 10 games - equivalent to getting 106 points in a season. Which is not touching distance!

forget right now what the target was, or what anyone else has done, at 3pm before the Salford game, we were 6 points behind 7th place with a game in hand. Ergo, we win Salford, 3pts behind 7th with a game in hand.  How can that not at that specific moment in time not be considered touching distance.

Because, as I've previously explained, you're conveniently ignoring that Mansfield in 8th were only 1 point behind Salford with 3 games in hand on them.

Therefore Mansfield were the target club for 7th place and the play offs at that point. Their ppg projection then was 76 points over the season which as confirmation ties into roughly what you'd expect 7th place to achieve now.

[ncRover]

The club is doomed to failure unless we seriously reset our expectations.

Even if say Blunt 'retires' and Schofield is relieved of his duties to be replaced by a mote 'experienced' manager, what have they got to do to be deemed competent?

If a new manager doesn't get an immediate impact, some fans will already be on the case and will frame the club up for further failure citing whatever reasons for why we're not getting champagne football week in week out.

Excuse me for generalising but we have worked ourselves into a zero tolerance situation and too quickly folk will look to opportion blame. This all leads to an environment where players and managers alike will find it difficult to develop and be allowed to make mistakes. Who will want to come to our club the longer this persists?

Ok let's assume Schofield is still in charge next season. He's already set up for failure by many of us so, what does he have to do before folk accept we may have misjudged him?

If it's another head coach (assuming there's very few out there that would be a unanimous first choice) what results have to be achieved to prevent him getting the 'f*ck off back to ??"

There's many who have expressed their right to walk with their feet but it would also be good to hear from them what it would take to get them back into the stadium.

It just seems to be too much deep rooted scepticism to give anyone, owner, HoF, Head Coach and players a fair chance going forward.

I don’t think we’re expecting champagne football every week.

Just a style that is congruent with the players we have, where we are as a club and the division that we are in.

If someone asked me what the ideal football style of the Rovers head coach was I’d struggle to put it in to words. Dominate possession across the back 3?

Danny will have a top 6 budget in the summer. If he is as brilliant a coach as is made out, and to make this horrible season worthwhile we should be pushing for autos next year.

Hopefully he makes me eat my words, but I can’t see it and would rather the club played it safe. That being said, it’s too late for a decision now if he’s recruiting so we will just have to bite the bullet and see how it plays out.

[Prez]

On the subject of injuries haven’t Northampton had an horrendous injury crisis this season?

They sit 2nd in the league.

[Donnybax]

If you keep giving contacts out to players that can’t stay fit you can’t then be surprised when they get injured…

[Prez]

If you keep giving contacts out to players that can’t stay fit you can’t then be surprised when they get injured…

Yep 2 of our most recent, Anderson and Lavery, both have a history of being injured throughout their career.

As much as I liked big Tom, regardless I’d his injuries I wouldn’t have gave him a new contract.

Complete shadow of himself since that fateful night at Fleetwood.

[Lesonthewest]

We've been shite all season. People saying we were only a win or only two wins outside the play offs. Aside from one weekend in August we were not in the play offs at any point all season. The reason for this is that we are shite and at no stage accrued points at the required level to get into and stay in the play offs. It wasn't a matter of us yo-yoing in and out of the play offs, we were never in them.

This. Anyone can try & be as positive as they want, but over his 30 games, apart from 2 or 3 games at a push, it has been, without question, the worst football I have EVER witnessed in 50 odd years watching. The rubbish players/injuries doesn't wash with me. It's 100% the coach who has managed us into 17th in league 2.

[Branton Red]

Billy

"We haven't been serious playoff contenders all season."

On 1st January Rovers were 8th one point off the play offs. With good management, astute January signings to overcome some of the deficiencies in the squad you identify, and luck with injuries of course we were serious play off contenders!

We haven't had the luck with injuries since mid-March. In hindsight we would never had made the play offs. But what happened between 1st January and the injuries kicking in?

"you CAN still have a successful side....... You need good luck with injuries so that the best XI or close to it plays week in week out"

The core of Rovers 1st team squad - the 15 players Schofield would first consider selecting for the starting XI if fit: Mitchell, Brown, Maxwell, Rowe, Williams, Nelson, Anderson, Olowu, Close, Biggins, Lakin, Hurst, Molyneux, Miller, Lavery.

In the 10 games after 1st January Rovers starting XI's included only those 15 core players - except Knoyle's last appearance at Orient and Seaman playing twice instead of Brown (vive la difference!).

Indeed except for Orient away at least 13 of those 15 players were selected in the squad every match.

The best XI  or close to it were playing week in week out for these 10 matches.

Rovers attained 10 points in those 10 games.

The descent into relegation form began before the injuries. The end of any realistic play off push was before the injuries.

Rovers were seriously underachieving on the pitch, when Schofield could field a close to best XI consistently, before the injuries.

Schofield had transformed the team from one of play off contending form to one of relegation threatened form before the injuries.

It is indisputable fact.

(Oh and no apology for the "invective" jibe I notice)

[BillyStubbsTears]

On the subject of injuries haven’t Northampton had an horrendous injury crisis this season?

They sit 2nd in the league.

They've had 8 players appear in 80% or more of their games, including a good goalkeeper, key defenders, midfielders and a key goalscorer.

Whatever injuries they have had, it hasn't stopped them turning out the strong core of the side week after week.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Branton.

1) We were 1 point off the play-offs on 1 January because our position all season long has been skewed by a huge overachievement of results in the first month or so of the season. We gained 14 points from the first 6 games, in which only against Northampton were we comfortably the better side. That sort of imbalance evens out over a season, but over shorter periods, it will skew the overall picture. We might have been one point off the playoffs at that date, but over the previous 18 matches, under 2 managers, we'd picked up 23 points. That was a better reflection of the quality of squad we had available at that time, with key players like Rowe, Anderson and Olowu missing long periods, Tomlin leaving and Clayton's form going backwards much faster than he could run.

2) You focus on that specific run  of 10 games. I disagree that injuries and fitness were unimportant over that run - Olowu and Rowe coming back from long term injuries (Rowe brought back too soon to fill a defensive gap), Anderson missed a couple, Laykin took a couple of weeks to get up to starting fitness, Maxwell who was finding excellent form missed the last three, Williams the last 5. But yes, the injuries weren't as bad as they became.

But why do you focus on those specific 10 games to make your point that without very major injuries, Schofield was already a dud? Why not extend it a little either side? If you do, we picked up 18 points from a run of 13 games,including 9 matches against sides in and around the promotion/play-off picture when we played them (Carlisle, Orient, Mansfield, Swindon, Tranmere, Barrow, Sutton, Bradford and Stockport). 18 points from those games is not a stellar performance, but it isn't basket case stuff either, especially when taking into account the moderate injury issues we had. It's about what I would say this squad is - maybe 11th-12th place standard.

Or take an even longer period, from Schofield taking over until the midpoint of March, by which time the unravelling of the squad through injuries was really getting into gear. In that period, we picked up 29 points from 21 games - again, about 11th-12th place standard. I'd say that is somewhere close to the real standard of this squad this season, taking into account that key players like Rowe, Anderson and Olowu have been unfit or returning from fitness for about half the season, and the dislocation due to the need to change our style after the failure of the Clayton/Tomlin plan.

Seems to me you are choosing a specific run of games because they provide the answers that you want, and ignoring the wider evidence.

[Campsall rover]

Branton.

1) We were 1 point off the play-offs on 1 January because our position all season long has been skewed by a huge overachievement of results in the first month or so of the season. We gained 14 points from the first 6 games, in which only against Northampton were we comfortably the better side. That sort of imbalance evens out over a season, but over shorter periods, it will skew the overall picture. We might have been one point off the playoffs at that date, but over the previous 18 matches, under 2 managers, we'd picked up 23 points. That was a better reflection of the quality of squad we had available at that time, with key players like Rowe, Anderson and Olowu missing long periods, Tomlin leaving and Clayton's form going backwards much faster than he could run.

2) You focus on that specific run  of 10 games. I disagree that injuries and fitness were unimportant over that run - Olowu and Rowe coming back from long term injuries (Rowe brought back too soon to fill a defensive gap), Anderson missed a couple, Laykin took a couple of weeks to get up to starting fitness, Maxwell who was finding excellent form missed the last three, Williams the last 5. But yes, the injuries weren't as bad as they became.

But why do you focus on those specific 10 games to make your point that without very major injuries, Schofield was already a dud? Why not extend it a little either side? If you do, we picked up 18 points from a run of 13 games,including 9 matches against sides in and around the promotion/play-off picture when we played them (Carlisle, Orient, Mansfield, Swindon, Tranmere, Barrow, Sutton, Bradford and Stockport). 18 points from those games is not a stellar performance, but it isn't basket case stuff either, especially when taking into account the moderate injury issues we had. It's about what I would say this squad is - maybe 11th-12th place standard.

Or take an even longer period, from Schofield taking over until the midpoint of March, by which time the unravelling of the squad through injuries was really getting into gear. In that period, we picked up 29 points from 21 games - again, about 11th-12th place standard. I'd say that is somewhere close to the real standard of this squad this season, taking into account that key players like Rowe, Anderson and Olowu have been unfit or returning from fitness for about half the season, and the dislocation due to the need to change our style after the failure of the Clayton/Tomlin plan.

Seems to me you are choosing a specific run of games because they provide the answers that you want, and ignoring the wider evidence.

Billy the fact is with the core of our squad available we had a run of 10 games with 10 points.
That’s a fact.
That is relegation form.
He has has 30 league games in total and got 31 points. Almost relegation form.
If we lose the last 2 games we will probably finish 19th

Dress it up all you want but the fact is injuries or no injuries it is an awful record and is unacceptable.

You would think we are the only club in League 2 that’s had injuries the way you are making it a case for his defence.

There is no defence. Gary McSheffrey got sacked after 21 points in 14 games this season.
How anyone can justify DS stays with his record is beyond me.
It’s not just results is it. The football has been desperate, dire, turgid, unadventurous, boring.
How many adjectives do I need to use.
On a scale of 0-10 for entertainment i would struggle to give it a 1

[Branton Red]

Billy

1) A team doesn't get 6 consecutive excellent results against mainly very good teams through sheer serendipity.

2) Don't let watching Rovers recently disabuse you of the fact that in most games in League 2 there isn't one team who is comfortably better than the other.

3) Yes form does even out over time. In Rovers case in double quick time. After 14 in 6 they then won 7 points in their next 7 games.

4) Interesting how you accuse me of skewing the data to fit my argument – but then do the self same thing by arguing to ignore the first 6 matches but still consider the next 7 which were so bad the incumbent manager got sacked.

5) The ppg achieved by Schofield in his first 10 games up to 1st January (1.6) marginally exceeded the total ppg at that point (1.54). Ergo Rovers were play off contenders after 24 games whichever way you want to cut it.

6) The reason I've selected post 1st January is for me it is clearly the point when performances and results turned.

7) Rover were inconsistent before then but have been consistently poor afterwards.

8) They were very good against Carlisle beating a very good team. The game earlier against Rochdale wasn't as good but they still had the attacking intent to score 4 goals. Terrible the game before against Tranmere but very solid in a win at Newport the match before.

9) After Carlisle Rovers have been poor in every game I've seen. Compare the Hartlepool and Harrogate fixtures even against the Rochdale game against similarly poor opponents.

10) Even the games they won they were poor – Barrow and particularly Tranmere which was daylight robbery (I didn't see the Swindon game)

11) You disagree that injuries and fitness weren't important in that run. 12 of Rovers core 15 starters were available for 80% of those 10 games. Northampton, apparently, have had 8 players play in 80% of their games. I suppose the 8 Northampton players were all fit as fleas for all those 80%?? Also, as I said, at least 13 of the 15 were selected in each squad which helped cover any fitness issues.

12) I don't believe I've categorically said Schofield is a dud (though I suspect he may well be). He may be able to turn things round with his own players. I hope he does. I see no evidence that he will. And if he doesn't then I'm very concerned we'll be in relegation trouble next year. You're lack of empathy for those concerns is troubling.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Branton

I'll point out again.

In the first 11 games of this year, we played 9 sides in the playoff/promotion hunt.

We picked up 12 points. Not title-winning form, but not catastrophic. My take is that it's about what you'd expect from the quality of squad that we have.

Around the end of that spell of matches, a series of injuries that you yourself have accepted would have scuttles any serious playoff chances, even if we accept that the squad is better than I think it is.

Take a step back. Ask yourself if you are being reasonable in looking at all the evidence and concluding that Schofield would be likely to take us down next season.

 

[Campsall rover]

Branton

I'll point out again.

In the first 11 games of this year, we played 9 sides in the playoff/promotion hunt.

We picked up 12 points. Not title-winning form, but not catastrophic. My take is that it's about what you'd expect from the quality of squad that we have.

Around the end of that spell of matches, a series of injuries that you yourself have accepted would have scuttles any serious playoff chances, even if we accept that the squad is better than I think it is.

Take a step back. Ask yourself if you are being reasonable in looking at all the evidence and concluding that Schofield would be likely to take us down next season.

So you’re happy just staying up next season then?

We want promotion Billy not survival. This is League 2 not the Championship we are in.

Question Yes or no. No waffle Billy YES or NO
Do you think Scofield has the ability, tactical nous man management skills and motivational skills to get our Club promoted next season?

Just Yes or No.  no if this or if that or whatever OK. 

[Branton Red]

On reflection.

- 15 points in the last 20 games.
- 10 points in the first 10 if those games with a close to best XI
- One win in the last 14 matches
- Only 6 points in the last 14 matches - a worse ppg than achieved by the 97/98 team
- Only 1 point in the last 8 matches and 7 defeats
- Only 1 win in the last 7 home matches
- Deserved defeats at home, with a strong team playing, to Hartlepool and Harrogate
- Comprehensively outplayed and beaten at home by a non-league team 2 divisions below in the FA Cup

Yes I think such a manager could be likely to take us down next year.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Branton

I'll point out again.

In the first 11 games of this year, we played 9 sides in the playoff/promotion hunt.

We picked up 12 points. Not title-winning form, but not catastrophic. My take is that it's about what you'd expect from the quality of squad that we have.

Around the end of that spell of matches, a series of injuries that you yourself have accepted would have scuttles any serious playoff chances, even if we accept that the squad is better than I think it is.

Take a step back. Ask yourself if you are being reasonable in looking at all the evidence and concluding that Schofield would be likely to take us down next season.

So you’re happy just staying up next season then?

We want promotion Billy not survival. This is League 2 not the Championship we are in.

Question Yes or no. No waffle Billy YES or NO
Do you think Scofield has the ability, tactical nous man management skills and motivational skills to get our Club promoted next season?

Just Yes or No.  no if this or if that or whatever OK. 

Christ this is hard.

No I'm NOT happy with just staying up. I'm rebutting the fatalists who seem to be convincing themselves that we are likely to go down with Schofield in charge.

[Campsall rover]

Branton

I'll point out again.

In the first 11 games of this year, we played 9 sides in the playoff/promotion hunt.

We picked up 12 points. Not title-winning form, but not catastrophic. My take is that it's about what you'd expect from the quality of squad that we have.

Around the end of that spell of matches, a series of injuries that you yourself have accepted would have scuttles any serious playoff chances, even if we accept that the squad is better than I think it is.

Take a step back. Ask yourself if you are being reasonable in looking at all the evidence and concluding that Schofield would be likely to take us down next season.

So you’re happy just staying up next season then?

We want promotion Billy not survival. This is League 2 not the Championship we are in.

Question Yes or no. No waffle Billy YES or NO
Do you think Scofield has the ability, tactical nous man management skills and motivational skills to get our Club promoted next season?

Just Yes or No.  no if this or if that or whatever OK. 

Christ this is hard.

No I'm NOT happy with just staying up. I'm rebutting the fatalists who seem to be convincing themselves that we are likely to go down with Schofield in charge.

No it’s not hard Billy.
Answer the question. YES or NO    It is not that difficult. Not even multiple choice.

[sedwardsdrfc]

I don’t think we’ll go down. Surely we’ll sign a few better players. But the question is are we more or less likely to go down with DS in charge? Same question again for promotion.

[Branton Red]

Oh sorry yes

- A long term ppg record definitively worse than the manager who was sacked and he replaced (even before the injury crisis)
- A continual deterioration in the quality of football and the results achieved
- Insisting on playing the same failing tactics match after match
- Playing one totally isolated centre forward up front every game who is given practically zero support
- Playing such boring, insipid and ineffectual football that there will be a serious downturn in season ticket sales and already has been in attendances. Effecting Rovers finances and thereby their ability to sign better players.

Think that was about it.

[dickos1]

I was clearly citing the Harrogate game on 7th March.

2 games later against Harrogate Schofield selected: Mitchell; Brown, Anderson, Olowu, Nelson, Rowe; Close, Biggins, Molyneux, Hirst; Lavery. G Miller and Lakin came off the bench. Maxwell apart (and why didn't he sign another LB as cover in January?!) that constitutes Rovers best players based on Schofield's selections over time.

We lost that game abjectly 0-2 at home against a team struggling for survival.

At this point Rovers had won 10 points from their prior 10 games which is relegation form. They were now 9 points off the play offs and no longer in "touching distance" with 12 games to go.

Yes after they beat Wimbledon on 11th March (Rovers only win in the last 14 matches) they were 6 points off Salford in 7th with a game in hand. But they were 9 points off 6th placed Bradford and crucially 5 points off 8th place Mansfield who had 2 games in hand on Rovers (and 3 on Salford only 1 point above them).

At this point to get into the play offs they were needing c. 26 points from 11 fixtures (based on Mansfield's ppg then which is in line with what would be needed looking at the table now). That is not in touching distance of the play offs!

Whatever way you want to twist it, if we’d beaten salford in our next game we would’ve been right in touch of the playoffs.

Oh good grief! No we wouldn't!

Look at the table after the Wimbledon game www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/64845444. Rovers had 50 points with 11 games left

On a points per game basis Mansfield were the target for the play offs. They had 55 points from 33 matches. Bit of Maths (55/33 x 46 matches) gives an estimated points total for Mansfield (and 7th spot) of 76 points (rounded down if you're checking my workings).

Look at the table now www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/league-two/table. 76 points still looks a decent estimate for points needed to make the play offs.

Therefore as Rovers had 50 points with 11 games left. They needed about 26 points in 11 games to make the play offs. That is not touching distance.

If they had beaten Salford they would still have needed 23 points from 10 games - equivalent to getting 106 points in a season. Which is not touching distance!

forget right now what the target was, or what anyone else has done, at 3pm before the Salford game, we were 6 points behind 7th place with a game in hand. Ergo, we win Salford, 3pts behind 7th with a game in hand.  How can that not at that specific moment in time not be considered touching distance.   

Exactly,