@Shev said:
Loved Grimmer's co-commentary, especially his support of Macca, even though his position is under threat. Hearing the likes of Darius, Smyth and Grimmer in the booth this season has been a joy!
I was very impressed with Grimmer on the commentary too. Sounds like a really nice bloke, some good insights and like you say, his praise and support for Macca was great to hear.
Reading their manager's piece, it's a chuckle to see our first goal described as fortuitous, yet he acts like their first goal was just down to their tactic of closing the keeper down. Rather than it being a once every decade utter freak job.
And he was certainly watching a different game suggesting they were unfortunate to lose.
Unfortunate to concede so late, but certainly not unfortunate to lose all in.
Most of their passes were across their own back line!
I think Rochdale’s style of play is very brave, but also risky. Even some Premier League teams who try to play out from the back get it wrong occasionally and they obviously have players of superior technical ability.
It’s easy on the eye, but is it really effective, particularly in the lower divisions?
@Gary said:
Having just read through five pages on one of their forums, aside from a pre-match ‘hoof ball’ post, not one of their supporters has criticised us and our style of play. A first for the season?
I suspect Accrington fans probably didn't. Underdogs united and all that!
Even at the top level, playing it out from the back in that style rarely seems to work. Often I see teams being chased and harried and then eventually end up going long anyway. And of course the risk of giving the ball away in a dangerous position is very high. They gave away a ludicrous goal at Newcastle in the week trying the same thing. Seems an utterly futile way to play to me.
@Wycombe85 said:
Even at the top level, playing it out from the back in that style rarely seems to work. Often I see teams being chased and harried and then eventually end up going long anyway. And of course the risk of giving the ball away in a dangerous position is very high. They gave away a ludicrous goal at Newcastle in the week trying the same thing. Seems an utterly futile way to play to me.
Forest Green were the same a couple of seasons ago. Lovely passing but totally ineffective.
Good day overall and I felt that Parker played energetic, attacking intelligent football and was successful in intercepting balls and passing off to our players on several occasions (which is normally a point of Wycombe criticism AFAIC).
Edit: Oh yes and thank you Rob for your faith in Gaz and our (your) team. Get well soon!
Aside from a fantastic 3 points and triumphant end, you have to say the decision to play 442 was a bizarre one.
Having Gape and Thompson in midfield, charging all over the place, left us horrendously exposed and a better team would have used that space to their advantage.
Thought Parker had a good, tireless game, but Freeman is so frustrating - crossing off, shooting wayward, and regularly taking an extra, pointless touch.
Fantastic to see McCarthy back, and at full speed.
there's a surprising amount of nonsense on here about Rochdale's style and their proclivity for playing it out of the back. "Is it really effective at this level?" In the past few weeks we have been well beaten by Coventry and should have been more roundly thrashed by Oxford, who we couldn't get the ball off even with 11 men. They both play in this way.
The Oxford experience was interesting, as I recall a few years ago when Appleton started there, he was manifestly trying to play this way with players who weren't up to it or up for it and they were appalling. Wind the clock forward a few years and a good few quid later and he had them playing both attractively and successfully in that style.
With Rochdale, surely part of the plan is to get players used to playing well in a way that will make them attractive to teams at higher levels. Matheson's maturity, comfort on the ball and all round good play (until those final seconds) suggests that they will reap the benefit of that sometime soon.
I have no spurious moral objection, or indeed commitment, to the way we play. But I still commend Rochdale for choosing to do it theirs.
@prufrock_91 said:
Aside from a fantastic 3 points and triumphant end, you have to say the decision to play 442 was a bizarre one.
Have to disagree with this. We’ve looked very vulnerable down the wings during our bad run (albeit with stand in right backs) so giving the full backs more cover made perfect sense. Obviously that means you lose a player from somewhere else on the pitch so 3 down to 2 in the centre but made complete sense the play 442 to fix our recent weakness.
@prufrock_91 said:
Aside from a fantastic 3 points and triumphant end, you have to say the decision to play 442 was a bizarre one.
Have to disagree with this. We’ve looked very vulnerable down the wings during our bad run (albeit with stand in right backs) so giving the full backs more cover made perfect sense. Obviously that means you lose a player from somewhere else on the pitch so 3 down to 2 in the centre but made complete sense the play 442 to fix our recent weakness.
But our fantastic run earlier in the season was build on a form of 433 - I think the poor recent results is more due to the mixing of defences, we've looked at our best this season with 3 in the middle
Spot on @prufrock_91. Equally as strange was to play that formation and not include Smyth, who’s really our only out and out winger.
Whilst I agree with all the comments that Rochdale’s passing game was pretty ineffective the ease of which they wondered into our half was frustrating at times.
Freeman is infuriating. He’s a lovely footballer but with the positions he gets himself in really needs to contribute to the goals sooner rather than later. If he could do that he’d be a real player at this level.
Parker played OK but he should have scored in the first half, had that been Kashket I’d have put my house on him slotting it away. He got stuck in and on occasion linked well but I didn’t see a lot that made me think he’s moved up the pecking order up top. All three of Kashket, Samuel & Smyth have probably been hoping to be part of a front two with Bayo all season.
Parker was great and was a close second for man of the match in my opinion, he could play a big part in the run in he's an intelligent player great link up play and passing range.
Didn't want to believe McCarthy was coming back in case it wasn't true but what a player he is. Always felt quietly confident we would win as the game played out.
An honourable mention to the ball boy at the home end nearest the Frank Adams stand. An energetic and enthusiastic performance including cheerleading, warm up exercises and so sprints to get the ball. Look out for him a couple of times in the brief highlights.
@our_frank said:
there's a surprising amount of nonsense on here about Rochdale's style and their proclivity for playing it out of the back. "Is it really effective at this level?" In the past few weeks we have been well beaten by Coventry and should have been more roundly thrashed by Oxford, who we couldn't get the ball off even with 11 men. They both play in this way.
The Oxford experience was interesting, as I recall a few years ago when Appleton started there, he was manifestly trying to play this way with players who weren't up to it or up for it and they were appalling. Wind the clock forward a few years and a good few quid later and he had them playing both attractively and successfully in that style.
With Rochdale, surely part of the plan is to get players used to playing well in a way that will make them attractive to teams at higher levels. Matheson's maturity, comfort on the ball and all round good play (until those final seconds) suggests that they will reap the benefit of that sometime soon.
I have no spurious moral objection, or indeed commitment, to the way we play. But I still commend Rochdale for choosing to do it theirs.
With all due respect if there's any "nonsense" being spouted, it's in your post
You can't genuinely believe Rochdale played the same way as Oxford or Coventry.
@our_frank said:
there's a surprising amount of nonsense on here about Rochdale's style and their proclivity for playing it out of the back. "Is it really effective at this level?" In the past few weeks we have been well beaten by Coventry and should have been more roundly thrashed by Oxford, who we couldn't get the ball off even with 11 men. They both play in this way.
The Oxford experience was interesting, as I recall a few years ago when Appleton started there, he was manifestly trying to play this way with players who weren't up to it or up for it and they were appalling. Wind the clock forward a few years and a good few quid later and he had them playing both attractively and successfully in that style.
With Rochdale, surely part of the plan is to get players used to playing well in a way that will make them attractive to teams at higher levels. Matheson's maturity, comfort on the ball and all round good play (until those final seconds) suggests that they will reap the benefit of that sometime soon.
I have no spurious moral objection, or indeed commitment, to the way we play. But I still commend Rochdale for choosing to do it theirs.
With all due respect if there's any "nonsense" being spouted, it's in your post
You can't genuinely believe Rochdale played the same way as Oxford or Coventry.
Playing out from the back is all well and good into space, trying short passes and dribbles into crowded areas by your own corner flags is suicidal. Also I don't think this is them bedding in this style of play, they've done it for a couple of years.
Matheson looked tidy on the ball, wonder if he'd be better in midfield.
@our_frank said:
there's a surprising amount of nonsense on here about Rochdale's style and their proclivity for playing it out of the back. "Is it really effective at this level?" In the past few weeks we have been well beaten by Coventry and should have been more roundly thrashed by Oxford, who we couldn't get the ball off even with 11 men. They both play in this way.
The Oxford experience was interesting, as I recall a few years ago when Appleton started there, he was manifestly trying to play this way with players who weren't up to it or up for it and they were appalling. Wind the clock forward a few years and a good few quid later and he had them playing both attractively and successfully in that style.
With Rochdale, surely part of the plan is to get players used to playing well in a way that will make them attractive to teams at higher levels. Matheson's maturity, comfort on the ball and all round good play (until those final seconds) suggests that they will reap the benefit of that sometime soon.
I have no spurious moral objection, or indeed commitment, to the way we play. But I still commend Rochdale for choosing to do it theirs.
With all due respect if there's any "nonsense" being spouted, it's in your post
You can't genuinely believe Rochdale played the same way as Oxford or Coventry.
Playing out from the back is all well and good into space, trying short passes and dribbles into crowded areas by your own corner flags is suicidal. Also I don't think this is them bedding in this style of play, they've done it for a couple of years.
Matheson looked tidy on the ball, wonder if he'd be better in midfield.
Rochdale spent most of the game playing it along their back line. Cov and Oxford may prefer to pass it, but it's a totally different emphasis and style.
Our problem like someone mentioned earlier was for once we had a midfield two, so at times their tall sweeper-esque player just wandered through the centre unopposed.
@StrongestTeam said:
We've been walloped a few times recently, can't keep doing the same thing. Made sense to make some kind of change.
I agree with this and that is why I can’t understand Rochdale’s insistence on playing the way they do considering the results they’ve had.
Another poster referred to this style of play being successful for Oxford and Coventry and that’s true, but only because they’re better at it than Rochdale.
We have 19 more points than Rochdale despite our much criticised style of play. We are 2nd, they are 6 points above the relegation places. There’s a great deal of snobbery talked about football ‘style’, it’s a results business and always has been.
Comments
I was very impressed with Grimmer on the commentary too. Sounds like a really nice bloke, some good insights and like you say, his praise and support for Macca was great to hear.
Reading their manager's piece, it's a chuckle to see our first goal described as fortuitous, yet he acts like their first goal was just down to their tactic of closing the keeper down. Rather than it being a once every decade utter freak job.
And he was certainly watching a different game suggesting they were unfortunate to lose.
Unfortunate to concede so late, but certainly not unfortunate to lose all in.
Most of their passes were across their own back line!
I think Rochdale’s style of play is very brave, but also risky. Even some Premier League teams who try to play out from the back get it wrong occasionally and they obviously have players of superior technical ability.
It’s easy on the eye, but is it really effective, particularly in the lower divisions?
I suspect Accrington fans probably didn't. Underdogs united and all that!
Rochdale played good football...but only scored a crazy goal...go figure
Is it good football or just aesthetically pleasing football?
Their obsession with playing it out from the back was absolutely ridiculous and got them into trouble time and time again.
Lovely scenes at the end today, just when I'd reconciled myself to the fact that our 2nd half performance wasn't going to bring us a deserved win.
And just wonderful to have Jason McCarthy back. What a player he is. He loves us and we love him
We 'won' the second half by a mile so we deserved the points. I kept expecting Rochdale to step it up and they never really did.
Even at the top level, playing it out from the back in that style rarely seems to work. Often I see teams being chased and harried and then eventually end up going long anyway. And of course the risk of giving the ball away in a dangerous position is very high. They gave away a ludicrous goal at Newcastle in the week trying the same thing. Seems an utterly futile way to play to me.
Forest Green were the same a couple of seasons ago. Lovely passing but totally ineffective.
Sounds like we have Rob to thank for getting Jase back:
Great celebration from Jase. So good to have him back.
Good day overall and I felt that Parker played energetic, attacking intelligent football and was successful in intercepting balls and passing off to our players on several occasions (which is normally a point of Wycombe criticism AFAIC).
Edit: Oh yes and thank you Rob for your faith in Gaz and our (your) team. Get well soon!
That's a very phlegmatic reaction towards Allsop's blunder.
Smyth, Akinfenwa and Parker consoling their young fullback is genuinely one of my highlights of an amazing season. What a great club to support.
Aside from a fantastic 3 points and triumphant end, you have to say the decision to play 442 was a bizarre one.
Having Gape and Thompson in midfield, charging all over the place, left us horrendously exposed and a better team would have used that space to their advantage.
Thought Parker had a good, tireless game, but Freeman is so frustrating - crossing off, shooting wayward, and regularly taking an extra, pointless touch.
Fantastic to see McCarthy back, and at full speed.
there's a surprising amount of nonsense on here about Rochdale's style and their proclivity for playing it out of the back. "Is it really effective at this level?" In the past few weeks we have been well beaten by Coventry and should have been more roundly thrashed by Oxford, who we couldn't get the ball off even with 11 men. They both play in this way.
The Oxford experience was interesting, as I recall a few years ago when Appleton started there, he was manifestly trying to play this way with players who weren't up to it or up for it and they were appalling. Wind the clock forward a few years and a good few quid later and he had them playing both attractively and successfully in that style.
With Rochdale, surely part of the plan is to get players used to playing well in a way that will make them attractive to teams at higher levels. Matheson's maturity, comfort on the ball and all round good play (until those final seconds) suggests that they will reap the benefit of that sometime soon.
I have no spurious moral objection, or indeed commitment, to the way we play. But I still commend Rochdale for choosing to do it theirs.
Have to disagree with this. We’ve looked very vulnerable down the wings during our bad run (albeit with stand in right backs) so giving the full backs more cover made perfect sense. Obviously that means you lose a player from somewhere else on the pitch so 3 down to 2 in the centre but made complete sense the play 442 to fix our recent weakness.
But our fantastic run earlier in the season was build on a form of 433 - I think the poor recent results is more due to the mixing of defences, we've looked at our best this season with 3 in the middle
Spot on @prufrock_91. Equally as strange was to play that formation and not include Smyth, who’s really our only out and out winger.
Whilst I agree with all the comments that Rochdale’s passing game was pretty ineffective the ease of which they wondered into our half was frustrating at times.
Freeman is infuriating. He’s a lovely footballer but with the positions he gets himself in really needs to contribute to the goals sooner rather than later. If he could do that he’d be a real player at this level.
Parker played OK but he should have scored in the first half, had that been Kashket I’d have put my house on him slotting it away. He got stuck in and on occasion linked well but I didn’t see a lot that made me think he’s moved up the pecking order up top. All three of Kashket, Samuel & Smyth have probably been hoping to be part of a front two with Bayo all season.
We've been walloped a few times recently, can't keep doing the same thing. Made sense to make some kind of change.
Parker was great and was a close second for man of the match in my opinion, he could play a big part in the run in he's an intelligent player great link up play and passing range.
Didn't want to believe McCarthy was coming back in case it wasn't true but what a player he is. Always felt quietly confident we would win as the game played out.
An honourable mention to the ball boy at the home end nearest the Frank Adams stand. An energetic and enthusiastic performance including cheerleading, warm up exercises and so sprints to get the ball. Look out for him a couple of times in the brief highlights.
With all due respect if there's any "nonsense" being spouted, it's in your post
You can't genuinely believe Rochdale played the same way as Oxford or Coventry.
Playing out from the back is all well and good into space, trying short passes and dribbles into crowded areas by your own corner flags is suicidal. Also I don't think this is them bedding in this style of play, they've done it for a couple of years.
Matheson looked tidy on the ball, wonder if he'd be better in midfield.
Rochdale spent most of the game playing it along their back line. Cov and Oxford may prefer to pass it, but it's a totally different emphasis and style.
Our problem like someone mentioned earlier was for once we had a midfield two, so at times their tall sweeper-esque player just wandered through the centre unopposed.
I agree with this and that is why I can’t understand Rochdale’s insistence on playing the way they do considering the results they’ve had.
Another poster referred to this style of play being successful for Oxford and Coventry and that’s true, but only because they’re better at it than Rochdale.
We have 19 more points than Rochdale despite our much criticised style of play. We are 2nd, they are 6 points above the relegation places. There’s a great deal of snobbery talked about football ‘style’, it’s a results business and always has been.