Keep the Faith

[normal rules]

Rovers have completed 39% of this seasons games.
They are averaging 1.11 ppg.
On that form Rovers will accrue 51 points come season end unless there is a positive change to their form.

[drfchound]

Stats for non penalty goals can be misleading though.
A defender giving away a penalty might have prevented a goal from open play from being scored.

But wouldn't that be the case for all clubs then and even out? Either way, the main issue is creating chances.

Of course it would be the same, but if you disregard  penalty goals from a stat about creating chances then it distorts the issue when a penalty is awarded after a defender fouls a player who is about to score from a chance created.

[Butchers Red]

Butchers Red: You say “The vast majority of negative posters, here and elsewhere clearly don't go to the games - oh and by the way only 12 sides out of 86 playing yesterday managed to keep a clean sheet - are  all their defenders shit as well??”
But I wonder whether you have any evidence of the connection between what you classify as a “negative post” and contributors who never attend matches. It seems unlikely that you have made a detailed analysis of posts or really know who falls into the category.

Your own post here is a well-written summary of the best of recent performances even though, based on my viewing of the match replay, the superlatives are exaggerated. The comments on your post are almost all qualifying your view and therefore less positive, even critical in some respects and could fall into your definition “negative” in some respects. (But perhaps these are from non-attenders.) The fact is that the team is in the bottom half of the lowest division of the EFL and I suspect that the majority of us recognise the need to get better if we are to return to the level above which is a realistic minimum ambition for a club of our stature.

In disparaging the opinions and those who do not attend games I wonder if you have ever put yourself in the position of the exiled supporter. I would suggest that most of us would have regularly attended games when we lived locally and in my case when I still lived near enough to travel to and from Doncaster and still get home at a reasonable hour. Others maintaining a keen interest “who do not attend games” will include those who cannot be there for financial reasons, ill health or simply old age. The majority of those are likely to pick up their knowledge via newspapers, the OS, this forum and most of all, via the highlights, extended highlights, match replays or live streaming. I would suggest that doing all this and keeping the faith demands rather more commitment and loyalty than those who are in the fortunate position of being able to “actually attend games”.

On top of the loyalty factor, having attended as many games as has been practicable and affordable over the years, I, and I imagine everyone who is in the “exiled” category will understand the great experience of “being there”, how it adds an extra dimension and how fortunate you are to be able to look forward and enjoy it every other week. However, we all know that there  are drawbacks because it is not always possible to see exactly what happens in the penalty box or on the other side of the field or at the other end of the ground. Here we are all reliant on video replays either on the big screen (which I believe is now a feature at the stadium), or afterwards on the highlights etc. Indeed we can all go over the key incidents online.

The point I am making is that trying to devalue the opinions of “those who do not attend games” may have little foundation in fact. It is also hurtful and divisive.

Blimey, I'll take that as a bollocking then, but not too seriously.

If you could explain to me how someone's opinion on a game of football they haven't actually seen, can be compared with or regarded as valid as that of someone who did, then I'm all ears. It is neither being "hurtful or divisive" it's just telling it how it is and to play the victim / injured card is a bit strong methinks.

Regarding my negative " disparaging" comments on the negative comments re goals conceded - again I find it staggering that anyone thinks League 2 defenders ( or any league for that matter! ) can sail through game after game without a mistake is laughable, Tom and Joe got slagged off when they let 1 in despite having repelled 20 or 30 crosses as they did away at Stockport - or away at Wrexham when both goals were bad deflections, it's about having some balance and being fair - NOT just being blinded by the stats.



RTID

[i_ateallthepies]

Stats for non penalty goals can be misleading though.
A defender giving away a penalty might have prevented a goal from open play from being scored.

But wouldn't that be the case for all clubs then and even out? Either way, the main issue is creating chances.

Of course it would be the same, but if you disregard  penalty goals from a stat about creating chances then it distorts the issue when a penalty is awarded after a defender fouls a player who is about to score from a chance created.

But if DO's stats are for all teams the the statistic is entirely valid because it is simply the same measure for all those teams.

[scawsby steve]

Let me begin by saying, I know and understand that football is a results business. Results are brought about by building a side who know their jobs, work and fight together and it usually takes a couple of seasons for this to come to fruition.

Yesterday - for 30 mins in the first half - and 47mins in the second, we dominated and swarmed over a Crewe side who for me are the best team I've seen us play this season. Their front 2 have pace, power and awareness of each other.

The combinations of Bailey /Nixon on the right, and Senior and Maxwell on the left were outstanding, with Zain and Closey linking it all together leaving Molly to roam at will. Mo was unplayable at times and Ironside's header was outrageously good for the equaliser.

The one handed save Jones made yesterday in the first half was unbelievably good.

Every player looks comfortable on the ball and all want it - the energy and effort levels yesterday were outstanding - matched by the Fans who never stopped singing even after the last minute sickener.

The ovation we gave the lads at the end says it all - this team is getting better and better, are a joy to watch ( even in defeat ) and it won't be long before someone get's 5 or 6 pumped past them.

The vast majority of negative posters, here and elsewhere clearly don't go to the games - oh and by the way only 12 sides out of 86 playing yesterday managed to keep a clean sheet - are  all their defenders shit as well??

How many conceded 3 or more for the 5th time in 18 games?

How many have done that?  It might be more than you think.

I've had a look into the defensive stats.

In terms of goals conceded, our defence is joint 14th in the league with 30 goals conceded (equal with Crawley). Sides that have conceded more include Notts County (6th place, 35 conceded) and Swindon (10th place, 33 conceded), and then mostly other bottom half teams, albeit some of these teams, including Swindon and Notts, have played 19 vs our 18.

We have conceded on average 1.67 goals per game. This is 18th best in the league, which is pretty poor, but again is better than Swindon and Notts County, who are proving that it is possible to be open and concede goals and still be in play-off contention, as long as you have the firepower to compensate.

On the question of how many teams have conceded 3+ goals 5 times or more, here is the answer. Eight sides have. Colchester (5 times), Rovers (5 times), Grimsby (5), Notts County (5), Salford (5), Newport (6), Swindon (6) and Sutton (7). Exactly one third of the division.

A further 5 teams have conceded 3+ goals on four occasions. Amongst them are Wrexham and Accrington.

These numbers suggest to me that, whilst it is more common in poorly performing teams to have conceded 3+ goals in games than better performing teams, this particular statistic probably isn't the best measure of the overall effectiveness of a team, as it focuses on a somewhat arbitrary cut-off of 3+ goals.

It is also actually quite a common thing to happen in this division, with over half of teams (13) conceding 3 or more goals on 4+ occasions. This includes a mixture of good teams, average teams and poor teams. Additionally, there are some relatively average to poor teams who have conceded 3 or more goals on fewer occasions, such as Harrogate, and Tranmere.

Attacking-wise - we rank 20th for goals scored, with only 22 from 18 games. Bradford, Forest Green, Gillingham and Harrogate are the only sides worse off in terms of goals scored.

This suggests to me that while our defence is below average, our attack is further below average. So there may be a case for McCann prioritising looking for more firepower in the January window.

Good post, Pib. I'd just add that GM didn't say that he needs more firepower up front in the January window, he said that he needs more cover, as he only has 2 senior strikers available at the moment because of the long term injuries of Miller and Marsh.

Odd though that Grant calls the young lad Marsh a senior striker but doesn’t mention Goodman.

Marsh is far more experienced than Goodman though, mate. As well as umpteen appearances and goals for the Blades development side, which for some reason we don't have anymore, he's been on the bench for Premier League games, and has played for the Blades first team in the EFL Cup.

[drfchound]

Stats for non penalty goals can be misleading though.
A defender giving away a penalty might have prevented a goal from open play from being scored.

But wouldn't that be the case for all clubs then and even out? Either way, the main issue is creating chances.

Of course it would be the same, but if you disregard  penalty goals from a stat about creating chances then it distorts the issue when a penalty is awarded after a defender fouls a player who is about to score from a chance created.

But if DO's stats are for all teams the the statistic is entirely valid because it is simply the same measure for all those teams.

Just being a bit picky here.
When a pen is awarded it isn’t always denying a scoring chance, some of them are for handball or even when a player is moving away from goal.
Some pens though are awarded when a player in an obvious scoring position is fouled.
Are DOs stats including scoring chances that are being denied which result in a pen being scored.

[DonnyOsmond]

Stats for non penalty goals can be misleading though.
A defender giving away a penalty might have prevented a goal from open play from being scored.

But wouldn't that be the case for all clubs then and even out? Either way, the main issue is creating chances.

Of course it would be the same, but if you disregard  penalty goals from a stat about creating chances then it distorts the issue when a penalty is awarded after a defender fouls a player who is about to score from a chance created.

But if DO's stats are for all teams the the statistic is entirely valid because it is simply the same measure for all those teams.

Just being a bit picky here.
When a pen is awarded it isn’t always denying a scoring chance, some of them are for handball or even when a player is moving away from goal.
Some pens though are awarded when a player in an obvious scoring position is fouled.
Are DOs stats including scoring chances that are being denied which result in a pen being scored.

It was just non penalty goals for the whole of our league to illustrate our inability to score goals in open play, you don't need to be so pedantic about it. Either looking at goals scored or non penalty goals scored shows were in the bottom handful in the league and we need to address it, prioritised against our fairly average goals against standing.

[In the box]

Great post. I believe we are 2 commanding centre halves & a midfielder away from being an excellent side, the rest is in place.

Totally agree with this.
Great opening post too, totally behind Grant and Cliff. More frustration to come BUT I’m sure it will come good in next 12 months or so.
Onto Tuesday…..

. We quite rightly slated McSheffrey for his full unattractive style of play and over all poor results and squad inadequacies!! Please tell me where this season has been improved ! On Results , on Performances or squad capability. I’m struggling to see it where after building a new team ! Why are we still a struggling mid-table side, struggling to even do mid-table!! . .. performance matters but results matter more .

[dickos1]

Rovers have completed 39% of this seasons games.
They are averaging 1.11 ppg.
On that form Rovers will accrue 51 points come season end unless there is a positive change to their form.

They have already improved though,
Ppg over the 1st 10 games will be significantly lower than the next 9 games.

[dickos1]

Great post. I believe we are 2 commanding centre halves & a midfielder away from being an excellent side, the rest is in place.

Totally agree with this.
Great opening post too, totally behind Grant and Cliff. More frustration to come BUT I’m sure it will come good in next 12 months or so.
Onto Tuesday…..

. We quite rightly slated McSheffrey for his full unattractive style of play and over all poor results and squad inadequacies!! Please tell me where this season has been improved ! On Results , on Performances or squad capability. I’m struggling to see it where after building a new team ! Why are we still a struggling mid-table side, struggling to even do mid-table!! . .. performance matters but results matter more .

How people can’t see improvement this season compared to last season is honestly unbelievable

[BillyStubbsTears]

Good performance tonight.

Faal is starting to remind me of a young Chris Brown. Some of his touches tonight were way above this level.

[normal rules]

Rovers have completed 39% of this seasons games.
They are averaging 1.11 ppg.
On that form Rovers will accrue 51 points come season end unless there is a positive change to their form.

They have already improved though,
Ppg over the 1st 10 games will be significantly lower than the next 9 games.

Yep. Can’t argue that. But increasing ppg is hard when you start so badly. 
Tonight’s win has increased Rovers ppg by just 0.1. To 1.21 ppg.
And if they win against Stanley it only goes to 1.3 ppg.
And god forbid they go on a run of three, beating Morcambe that would equate to 1.38ppg.

Gillingham in 7th are currently on 1.55 ppg.
I reckon rovers would need to go on a 4 game win streak to match them.
Not out of the question.
But unlikely.

[normal rules]

Good performance tonight.

Faal is starting to remind me of a young Chris Brown. Some of his touches tonight were way above this level.

Up to the substitutions I thought it was very, very average. I feared the worst after they levelled by virtue of our non existent defence. Of around 20 crosses, only 3 or 4 were successful. The midfield was largely absent. 15 shots. Just 5 on target. That’s the first time Colchester have scored at the Keepmoat/ eco power. And up to 73 mins were were hanging our hat on an own goal.
Thank god for Luke Molyneux. And Jones who made some key saves.
I wouldnt say good performance. More like good result. But that’s just my take on it.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Good performance tonight.

Faal is starting to remind me of a young Chris Brown. Some of his touches tonight were way above this level.

Up to the substitutions I thought it was very, very average. I feared the worst after they levelled by virtue of our non existent defence. Of around 20 crosses, only 3 or 4 were successful. The midfield was largely absent. 15 shots. Just 5 on target. That’s the first time Colchester have scored at the Keepmoat/ eco power. And up to 73 mins were were hanging our hat on an own goal.
Thank god for Luke Molyneux. And Jones who made some key saves.
I wouldnt say good performance. More like good result. But that’s just my take on it.

We are a Tier 4 side.

[ForsolongaRover]

Butchers Red: You say “The vast majority of negative posters, here and elsewhere clearly don't go to the games - oh and by the way only 12 sides out of 86 playing yesterday managed to keep a clean sheet - are  all their defenders shit as well??”
But I wonder whether you have any evidence of the connection between what you classify as a “negative post” and contributors who never attend matches. It seems unlikely that you have made a detailed analysis of posts or really know who falls into the category.

Your own post here is a well-written summary of the best of recent performances even though, based on my viewing of the match replay, the superlatives are exaggerated. The comments on your post are almost all qualifying your view and therefore less positive, even critical in some respects and could fall into your definition “negative” in some respects. (But perhaps these are from non-attenders.) The fact is that the team is in the bottom half of the lowest division of the EFL and I suspect that the majority of us recognise the need to get better if we are to return to the level above which is a realistic minimum ambition for a club of our stature.

In disparaging the opinions and those who do not attend games I wonder if you have ever put yourself in the position of the exiled supporter. I would suggest that most of us would have regularly attended games when we lived locally and in my case when I still lived near enough to travel to and from Doncaster and still get home at a reasonable hour. Others maintaining a keen interest “who do not attend games” will include those who cannot be there for financial reasons, ill health or simply old age. The majority of those are likely to pick up their knowledge via newspapers, the OS, this forum and most of all, via the highlights, extended highlights, match replays or live streaming. I would suggest that doing all this and keeping the faith demands rather more commitment and loyalty than those who are in the fortunate position of being able to “actually attend games”.

On top of the loyalty factor, having attended as many games as has been practicable and affordable over the years, I, and I imagine everyone who is in the “exiled” category will understand the great experience of “being there”, how it adds an extra dimension and how fortunate you are to be able to look forward and enjoy it every other week. However, we all know that there  are drawbacks because it is not always possible to see exactly what happens in the penalty box or on the other side of the field or at the other end of the ground. Here we are all reliant on video replays either on the big screen (which I believe is now a feature at the stadium), or afterwards on the highlights etc. Indeed we can all go over the key incidents online.

The point I am making is that trying to devalue the opinions of “those who do not attend games” may have little foundation in fact. It is also hurtful and divisive.

Blimey, I'll take that as a bollocking then, but not too seriously.

If you could explain to me how someone's opinion on a game of football they haven't actually seen, can be compared with or regarded as valid as that of someone who did, then I'm all ears. It is neither being "hurtful or divisive" it's just telling it how it is and to play the victim / injured card is a bit strong methinks.

Regarding my negative " disparaging" comments on the negative comments re goals conceded - again I find it staggering that anyone thinks League 2 defenders ( or any league for that matter! ) can sail through game after game without a mistake is laughable, Tom and Joe got slagged off when they let 1 in despite having repelled 20 or 30 crosses as they did away at Stockport - or away at Wrexham when both goals were bad deflections, it's about having some balance and being fair - NOT just being blinded by the stats.



RTID

You ask “How someone's opinion on a game of football they haven't actually seen, can be compared with or regarded as valid as that of someone who did?”  The answer is that they can’t, but I did not say that, which means that you cannot have read my comments carefully. Put briefly, I said we see what is streamed live or available on line.

Regarding what you describe as “negative disparaging comments on the negative comments re goals conceded….” and the rest of your final paragraph, I cannot relate that to my post at all.

Your belief that you are “telling it as it is” is therefore completely mistaken.

There is no way that you or anyone else can say without research into facts which you cannot possibly know or even find out, that your proposition about your opinions and others “who actually attend games” are superior. In making this assertion have you considered the quality of your own judgement I wonder?

[danumdon]

Would of been interesting tonight to have seen GM's preferred middle two creative midfielders playing in this match with the security of Bailey behind them.

Both Close and Westbrooke playing slightly further up the field and adding some much needed creativity could of been the making of this match.

We had TR straight back in after his sub appearance on sat, i would of made it another sub appearance again for him.

[Plumbster]

Agreed Bailey was a bit disappointing tonight but worth trying again with Close and Westbrooke

[Butchers Red]

Butchers Red: You say “The vast majority of negative posters, here and elsewhere clearly don't go to the games - oh and by the way only 12 sides out of 86 playing yesterday managed to keep a clean sheet - are  all their defenders shit as well??”
But I wonder whether you have any evidence of the connection between what you classify as a “negative post” and contributors who never attend matches. It seems unlikely that you have made a detailed analysis of posts or really know who falls into the category.

Your own post here is a well-written summary of the best of recent performances even though, based on my viewing of the match replay, the superlatives are exaggerated. The comments on your post are almost all qualifying your view and therefore less positive, even critical in some respects and could fall into your definition “negative” in some respects. (But perhaps these are from non-attenders.) The fact is that the team is in the bottom half of the lowest division of the EFL and I suspect that the majority of us recognise the need to get better if we are to return to the level above which is a realistic minimum ambition for a club of our stature.

In disparaging the opinions and those who do not attend games I wonder if you have ever put yourself in the position of the exiled supporter. I would suggest that most of us would have regularly attended games when we lived locally and in my case when I still lived near enough to travel to and from Doncaster and still get home at a reasonable hour. Others maintaining a keen interest “who do not attend games” will include those who cannot be there for financial reasons, ill health or simply old age. The majority of those are likely to pick up their knowledge via newspapers, the OS, this forum and most of all, via the highlights, extended highlights, match replays or live streaming. I would suggest that doing all this and keeping the faith demands rather more commitment and loyalty than those who are in the fortunate position of being able to “actually attend games”.

On top of the loyalty factor, having attended as many games as has been practicable and affordable over the years, I, and I imagine everyone who is in the “exiled” category will understand the great experience of “being there”, how it adds an extra dimension and how fortunate you are to be able to look forward and enjoy it every other week. However, we all know that there  are drawbacks because it is not always possible to see exactly what happens in the penalty box or on the other side of the field or at the other end of the ground. Here we are all reliant on video replays either on the big screen (which I believe is now a feature at the stadium), or afterwards on the highlights etc. Indeed we can all go over the key incidents online.

The point I am making is that trying to devalue the opinions of “those who do not attend games” may have little foundation in fact. It is also hurtful and divisive.

Blimey, I'll take that as a bollocking then, but not too seriously.

If you could explain to me how someone's opinion on a game of football they haven't actually seen, can be compared with or regarded as valid as that of someone who did, then I'm all ears. It is neither being "hurtful or divisive" it's just telling it how it is and to play the victim / injured card is a bit strong methinks.

Regarding my negative " disparaging" comments on the negative comments re goals conceded - again I find it staggering that anyone thinks League 2 defenders ( or any league for that matter! ) can sail through game after game without a mistake is laughable, Tom and Joe got slagged off when they let 1 in despite having repelled 20 or 30 crosses as they did away at Stockport - or away at Wrexham when both goals were bad deflections, it's about having some balance and being fair - NOT just being blinded by the stats.



RTID

You ask “How someone's opinion on a game of football they haven't actually seen, can be compared with or regarded as valid as that of someone who did?”  The answer is that they can’t, but I did not say that, which means that you cannot have read my comments carefully. Put briefly, I said we see what is streamed live or available on line.

Regarding what you describe as “negative disparaging comments on the negative comments re goals conceded….” and the rest of your final paragraph, I cannot relate that to my post at all.

Your belief that you are “telling it as it is” is therefore completely mistaken.

There is no way that you or anyone else can say without research into facts which you cannot possibly know or even find out, that your proposition about your opinions and others “who actually attend games” are superior. In making this assertion have you considered the quality of your own judgement I wonder?

I think you've taken something in my comments personally, which is not the case at all, my views are generalizing what I consider to be unfair and uninformed commentary, based upon results as the only benchmark. Hats off to those who obtain the match information by whatever means and in no way is my opinion worth any more than yours or anyone else - but spouting off, based on no information is never likely to find favour with us true supporters.

RTID

[The Beast]

Great result tonight, the first half was a bit wishy washy but the second half was better, definitely value for the victory. It was never going to be a classic on a Baltic night in an empty stadium but a win’s a win, takes a bit of the pressure off.
Not expecting anything at the Posh in the cup, then 3 winnable league games, if we could get 5/6 points from them 3 would be happy, don’t expect anything at Mansfield or Notts County, be nice to get a point in either. That takes us to January where hopefully we can strengthen a little.

[ForsolongaRover]

Butchers Red: Thanks - I don’t want to fall out with anyone.

[drfchound]

Stats for non penalty goals can be misleading though.
A defender giving away a penalty might have prevented a goal from open play from being scored.

But wouldn't that be the case for all clubs then and even out? Either way, the main issue is creating chances.

Of course it would be the same, but if you disregard  penalty goals from a stat about creating chances then it distorts the issue when a penalty is awarded after a defender fouls a player who is about to score from a chance created.

But if DO's stats are for all teams the the statistic is entirely valid because it is simply the same measure for all those teams.

Just being a bit picky here.
When a pen is awarded it isn’t always denying a scoring chance, some of them are for handball or even when a player is moving away from goal.
Some pens though are awarded when a player in an obvious scoring position is fouled.
Are DOs stats including scoring chances that are being denied which result in a pen being scored.

It was just non penalty goals for the whole of our league to illustrate our inability to score goals in open play, you don't need to be so pedantic about it. Either looking at goals scored or non penalty goals scored shows were in the bottom handful in the league and we need to address it, prioritised against our fairly average goals against standing.

But it was you who brought non penalty goals into the conversation.
I just added my thoughts on why it might influence the potential goals created stats that you had highlighted.
Let’s just leave it at that eh. 

[roversdude]

Great post. I believe we are 2 commanding centre halves & a midfielder away from being an excellent side, the rest is in place.

Totally agree with this.
Great opening post too, totally behind Grant and Cliff. More frustration to come BUT I’m sure it will come good in next 12 months or so.
Onto Tuesday…..

. We quite rightly slated McSheffrey for his full unattractive style of play and over all poor results and squad inadequacies!! Please tell me where this season has been improved ! On Results , on Performances or squad capability. I’m struggling to see it where after building a new team ! Why are we still a struggling mid-table side, struggling to even do mid-table!! . .. performance matters but results matter more .

You for real it’s a joy to watch Rovers again think you might actually be out your boxlol

[sedwardsdrfc]

Bailey wasn’t up to much in midfield imo. The amount of times he was playing too high up the pitch was a big reason we lost control of the game. I get we want to play but if he’s in that it’s to shield the defence and not move much further.

As for the goal he should have just fouled their lad in the middle of the park when he got the better of him.

Might have been better in there with Westbrooke instead of Rowe but personally if playing Bailey in midfield means one of Molly, Nixon or Maxwell doesn’t play I wouldn’t do it. Better in a back 3 because a decent team would be all over wood and Anderson together

[Bailey Vickerage]

I actually thought Bailey had a decent game last night apart from the sloppy pass late on which Jones made a great save for.

Did the dirty work, broke things up quite well to keep us in control and kept it simple giving the ball to Close and letting him play.

Looking at the stats on Fotmob he won the most tackles (4) and most duels (10) in the match and had 11 ball recoveries.

[i_ateallthepies]

Bailey wasn’t up to much in midfield imo. The amount of times he was playing too high up the pitch was a big reason we lost control of the game. I get we want to play but if he’s in that it’s to shield the defence and not move much further.

As for the goal he should have just fouled their lad in the middle of the park when he got the better of him.

Might have been better in there with Westbrooke instead of Rowe but personally if playing Bailey in midfield means one of Molly, Nixon or Maxwell doesn’t play I wouldn’t do it. Better in a back 3 because a decent team would be all over wood and Anderson together

Bailey is a versatile player but he's spent a big part of this season as a central defender and now asked to play midfield you've got to give him time to reset and get his game together, they're very different roles.  What I saw of him I thought he did well.

[Bailey Vickerage]

Bailey wasn’t up to much in midfield imo. The amount of times he was playing too high up the pitch was a big reason we lost control of the game. I get we want to play but if he’s in that it’s to shield the defence and not move much further.

As for the goal he should have just fouled their lad in the middle of the park when he got the better of him.

Might have been better in there with Westbrooke instead of Rowe but personally if playing Bailey in midfield means one of Molly, Nixon or Maxwell doesn’t play I wouldn’t do it. Better in a back 3 because a decent team would be all over wood and Anderson together

Bailey is a versatile player but he's spent a big part of this season as a central defender and now asked to play midfield you've got to give him time to reset and get his game together, they're very different roles.  What I saw of him I thought he did well.

was only that pass late on that I’d say he did wrong, and that’s only the 2nd mistake I think he’s made this season.

[Ronnie Dovers]

Bailey sitting in CDM with Close and Westbrooke playing higher up in a 3 man midfield looks like the combination that could give us protection, control and creativity from midfield. I'm surprised that wasn't the combo GM went for after moving Bailey into midfield last night.