Nobody seems to mention the ref. I’ve never seen so many time our players get pushed in the back yet nothing, and the moment we brushed one of theirs he got his whistle out immediately.
Wycombe were a nasty, dirty, cheating side. Yes, we were awful but we deserved 0-0 as Wycombe were similarly awful.
I’ve never liked the club, a lot of their fans are dicks on twitter and this has just cemented that view.
Another Rovers Fan
Stop blaming the officials for a performance that was lacking in creativity or ideas.if the players did their job what the officials did would be of no consequence.you are grasping at straws
Dreadful game today lacking in any real quality. We definitely edged it but created little. Delighted with the three points as we’re long overdue that type of result away from home.
The Rovers fans are a whinging lot aren’t they? Whilst strong at the back they lost today because they have absolutely nothing up top. Our tactics are frustrating at times but that’s for them to find a solution to.
Not a classic and certainly not a brilliant performance in a scrappy, mistake-riddled game, but always satisfying to beat the horse-punchers. We definitely set out to frustrate them, even at 0-0 and I suppose I shouldn't complain because it worked, but at the same time with the quality we have in our side I wish we'd sometimes have a bit more of a go at the poorer teams. Rovers were shocking and there for the taking.
Rovers fans did their usual act of booing everything. Win a freekick? Cheating. Take a throwin? Cheating. Ainsworth shouting something over to Gape? Cheating. At least nothing got thrown down onto the terrace this time.
Sido was excellent and took his goal well. For some reason I thought the ref had blown so didn't celebrate that much as I thought it would be disallowed. Great corner to put it right on his head. His audacious flick over a Rovers player's head was peak Sido - If it had gone wrong the player was through one on one.
Sido, McCarthy, Thompson and Samuel all stood out for me. No-one was particularly poor, just not a great game, although Freeman was lucky not to get a second yellow for a blatant shirt-pull.
That puts Rovers back in the bottom four with Argyle, although does mean the PNLs go up to 20th on goal difference. Wycombe back up to 11th. A win and some kind results on Saturday and we could go as high as eighth!
Here's to upsetting our other set of west country friends next Saturday. How great if we could be the final straw for Adams, although on second thoughts the longer he stays there the better!
Plymouth would be a massive scalp at this juncture. Thankfully they are on form - lately we have been beating the form teams and losing to the scufflers!
Just back. A very satisfying win in a far from exciting, if even and thus somewhat engaging, match won by the marginally less poor team. Both teams defended pretty solidly - Wycombe doing so with pleasing consistency - and both teams struggled to create meaningful openings in the final third. Really good corner by JJ for our goal, matched by a committed header by Sido.
I'm somewhat with the small minority of posters on the Rovers site - notwithstanding the example given above, most of their fans have far more to say about the poverty of their team's performance than anything else - who expressed a negative view of our gamesmanship. However, it occurs to me that extremely even games like this are won by very small margins. If one can win 60% of these 50/50 games, one will be well-placed to succeed over a season and there's definitely an art to it, if a dark one, as we saw in reverse last week when Doncaster kept playing fast and loose when 2-0 up. I guess I'll be glad of the three points and continue to consider what's to be learnt about the nature of human existence from the way in which people with a professional dedication to winning football matches go about doing so as successfully as possible.
It might not just be you but I found myself tiring of the many occasions when the trainer was called on to crumpled players.
For sure, there was an enormous inertia about us that meant that prosaic tasks like goal kicks ended up taking close to a minute. As I implied in my initial post, I judge much of it to be the product of deeply ingrained habits that would be hard to spot were one a novice spectator (or, I suppose, one favourably disposed to the team); I agree there was little overt gamesmanship to which to object save, perhaps, for the high level of apparently serious injuries. Some part of me doesn't care for the loss of flow or tempo these minute but numerous actions bring about, being, perhaps, innately predisposed to the excitement of a raw, possibly naive, exposition of sporting endeavour and/or excellence rather than win-at-all-costs pragmatism. But I accept that there are alternative perspectives and that they may carry their own validity.
I remember when McClure came back to play against us and said afterwards that we were very tough to play against. I took that as him meaning along the lines you suggest so I dare say a neutral eye would have a different view to me.
Although on the other hand, these teams that have their pre decided view of us will as likely hype up every incident themselves.
From my years of watching leagues 1 and 2, I only really remember Stevenage under Westley as utterly criminal in their use of clearly organised cheating rituals. The fake injury at a set time to get a little team talk in was one massive example, but one particularl game at Adams Park seemed to be a foul challenge in every 50-50. I remember coming away utterly furious about the game, and I don't generally get like that.
For what it is worth - not a lot, I suppose - the majority view expressed by fans on forums seems to be that some measure of "game management" by opponents is par for the course and to be expected, and planned for, by their own team. I am not sure that most of those fans are likely to be the sort of objective judges upon whom one might rely to judge whether the acceptable standard has been exceeded. It is an interesting question to me - as I get older, perhaps more pragmatic and more interested in understanding the ways in which humans seek to progress in a competitive world - to wonder about the extent to which behaviour that is by definition intended to stretch the laws regulating an artificial endeavour to their breaking point, and certainly beyond if one can get away with it, is legitimate or at least justifiable in the pursuit of victory. Is there a point beyond which a victory secured at least in part by such means, as today, can on some level be judged to be lost by the means by which it was secured? What is the role of honour and self-respect in this and in what circumstances, if any, are those things irrelevant?
I’ll have a five thousand word essay ready for you by tomorrow, after I’ve recovered from the undoubted inertia caused by my increasing prosaic drinking habit ?
@HCblue , I'll take the semi "disliked" status we have now when we have our best team for ages, versus the "liked" nice guys losers tag we've had other times over the years.
Hard working win. Could pick a few holes here and there but way up on Burton and Coventry in terms of work rate and commitment all over the pitch.
Can't think of many worse teams this season than Rovers. Terrible going forward.
Looking forward very much to Plymouth.
@Malone said: @HCblue , I'll take the semi "disliked" status we have now when we have our best team for ages, versus the "liked" nice guys losers tag we've had other times over the years.
That's my instinct too. How about if we were not being successful but displayed the same tactics? Is it legitimate to take an ends-justifying-the-means view of such behaviour? I think it might be but there must be limits to that, I would have thought. And where those boundaries might lie, if they even exist, is a stimulating question.
Comments
Samuel and Kashket together up front. Interesting!
Upon reflection, not so interesting, so far.
Sido o o o he's magic ya know
Beware horses of Bristol!
Looked to be climbing all over their defender ?
Very hard fought win. Class!
Brilliant win
Look forward to the pub tomorrow lunchtime my Gas mates will be distraught. LOL!
Great win!
Perhaps Sido should play as a Forward . A great Result COYB's
Found this whilst travelling through the Gas forum after the final whistle...
https://streamable.com/vpr6m
a Rovers Fan's view of the game
Nobody seems to mention the ref. I’ve never seen so many time our players get pushed in the back yet nothing, and the moment we brushed one of theirs he got his whistle out immediately.
Wycombe were a nasty, dirty, cheating side. Yes, we were awful but we deserved 0-0 as Wycombe were similarly awful.
I’ve never liked the club, a lot of their fans are dicks on twitter and this has just cemented that view.
Another Rovers Fan
Stop blaming the officials for a performance that was lacking in creativity or ideas.if the players did their job what the officials did would be of no consequence.you are grasping at straws
So there are some reasonable Rover Supporters
A beautiful result and table looking good tonight
no climbing on that clip, a fantastic win for our third away win. After Accy Away its Gas 0, Gasroom 1
Dreadful game today lacking in any real quality. We definitely edged it but created little. Delighted with the three points as we’re long overdue that type of result away from home.
The Rovers fans are a whinging lot aren’t they? Whilst strong at the back they lost today because they have absolutely nothing up top. Our tactics are frustrating at times but that’s for them to find a solution to.
Great result...... love sido and he's become our best defender this season
Not a classic and certainly not a brilliant performance in a scrappy, mistake-riddled game, but always satisfying to beat the horse-punchers. We definitely set out to frustrate them, even at 0-0 and I suppose I shouldn't complain because it worked, but at the same time with the quality we have in our side I wish we'd sometimes have a bit more of a go at the poorer teams. Rovers were shocking and there for the taking.
Rovers fans did their usual act of booing everything. Win a freekick? Cheating. Take a throwin? Cheating. Ainsworth shouting something over to Gape? Cheating. At least nothing got thrown down onto the terrace this time.
Sido was excellent and took his goal well. For some reason I thought the ref had blown so didn't celebrate that much as I thought it would be disallowed. Great corner to put it right on his head. His audacious flick over a Rovers player's head was peak Sido - If it had gone wrong the player was through one on one.
Sido, McCarthy, Thompson and Samuel all stood out for me. No-one was particularly poor, just not a great game, although Freeman was lucky not to get a second yellow for a blatant shirt-pull.
That puts Rovers back in the bottom four with Argyle, although does mean the PNLs go up to 20th on goal difference. Wycombe back up to 11th. A win and some kind results on Saturday and we could go as high as eighth!
Here's to upsetting our other set of west country friends next Saturday. How great if we could be the final straw for Adams, although on second thoughts the longer he stays there the better!
Oh and if anyone's wondering, Jakubiak did bugger all.
Plymouth would be a massive scalp at this juncture. Thankfully they are on form - lately we have been beating the form teams and losing to the scufflers!
Just back. A very satisfying win in a far from exciting, if even and thus somewhat engaging, match won by the marginally less poor team. Both teams defended pretty solidly - Wycombe doing so with pleasing consistency - and both teams struggled to create meaningful openings in the final third. Really good corner by JJ for our goal, matched by a committed header by Sido.
I'm somewhat with the small minority of posters on the Rovers site - notwithstanding the example given above, most of their fans have far more to say about the poverty of their team's performance than anything else - who expressed a negative view of our gamesmanship. However, it occurs to me that extremely even games like this are won by very small margins. If one can win 60% of these 50/50 games, one will be well-placed to succeed over a season and there's definitely an art to it, if a dark one, as we saw in reverse last week when Doncaster kept playing fast and loose when 2-0 up. I guess I'll be glad of the three points and continue to consider what's to be learnt about the nature of human existence from the way in which people with a professional dedication to winning football matches go about doing so as successfully as possible.
Is it just me who didn't particularly see anything particularly gamesmanshippy today?
Samuel got clogged repeatedly then had a little sit down maybe?
It might not just be you but I found myself tiring of the many occasions when the trainer was called on to crumpled players.
For sure, there was an enormous inertia about us that meant that prosaic tasks like goal kicks ended up taking close to a minute. As I implied in my initial post, I judge much of it to be the product of deeply ingrained habits that would be hard to spot were one a novice spectator (or, I suppose, one favourably disposed to the team); I agree there was little overt gamesmanship to which to object save, perhaps, for the high level of apparently serious injuries. Some part of me doesn't care for the loss of flow or tempo these minute but numerous actions bring about, being, perhaps, innately predisposed to the excitement of a raw, possibly naive, exposition of sporting endeavour and/or excellence rather than win-at-all-costs pragmatism. But I accept that there are alternative perspectives and that they may carry their own validity.
I remember when McClure came back to play against us and said afterwards that we were very tough to play against. I took that as him meaning along the lines you suggest so I dare say a neutral eye would have a different view to me.
Although on the other hand, these teams that have their pre decided view of us will as likely hype up every incident themselves.
From my years of watching leagues 1 and 2, I only really remember Stevenage under Westley as utterly criminal in their use of clearly organised cheating rituals. The fake injury at a set time to get a little team talk in was one massive example, but one particularl game at Adams Park seemed to be a foul challenge in every 50-50. I remember coming away utterly furious about the game, and I don't generally get like that.
For what it is worth - not a lot, I suppose - the majority view expressed by fans on forums seems to be that some measure of "game management" by opponents is par for the course and to be expected, and planned for, by their own team. I am not sure that most of those fans are likely to be the sort of objective judges upon whom one might rely to judge whether the acceptable standard has been exceeded. It is an interesting question to me - as I get older, perhaps more pragmatic and more interested in understanding the ways in which humans seek to progress in a competitive world - to wonder about the extent to which behaviour that is by definition intended to stretch the laws regulating an artificial endeavour to their breaking point, and certainly beyond if one can get away with it, is legitimate or at least justifiable in the pursuit of victory. Is there a point beyond which a victory secured at least in part by such means, as today, can on some level be judged to be lost by the means by which it was secured? What is the role of honour and self-respect in this and in what circumstances, if any, are those things irrelevant?
I’ll have a five thousand word essay ready for you by tomorrow, after I’ve recovered from the undoubted inertia caused by my increasing prosaic drinking habit ?
@HCblue , I'll take the semi "disliked" status we have now when we have our best team for ages, versus the "liked" nice guys losers tag we've had other times over the years.
Hard working win. Could pick a few holes here and there but way up on Burton and Coventry in terms of work rate and commitment all over the pitch.
Can't think of many worse teams this season than Rovers. Terrible going forward.
Looking forward very much to Plymouth.
That's my instinct too. How about if we were not being successful but displayed the same tactics? Is it legitimate to take an ends-justifying-the-means view of such behaviour? I think it might be but there must be limits to that, I would have thought. And where those boundaries might lie, if they even exist, is a stimulating question.