Big Rob

[Davefevs]

Very little mention of his performance tonight on the MDT.

Bar a couple of mis-times headers early doors, he played really well.

Positionally he played as the central man tonight.  Why?  He has played there before (Fulham home 1-1 v Mitrovic one occasion).  For me, it’s because had he played him LCB3, Millwall would launch everything right / right of centre where Vyner and Naismith would be less adept in the air.

Playing him central meant he would be able to cover both Vyner (R) and Naismith (L) without needing to be too far out of the middle.  It meant Millwall couldn’t just go straight down the middle.

This is not dissimilar to Flint with less adept CBs aerially in Ayling and Williams in 14/15.  Some Lg1 teams want to bomb down the middle, but Flint ruled that out.

Well done Rob, little bit of credit to Nige too

[Kid in the Riot]

Yes, hard to believe he'd be a better option than Andy King. 

Edited December 29, 2022 by Kid in the Riot

[RedNachos]

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Very little mention of his performance tonight on the MDT.

Bar a couple of mis-times headers early doors, he played really well.

Positionally he played as the central man tonight.  Why?  He has played there before (Fulham home 1-1 v Mitrovic one occasion).  For me, it’s because had he played him LCB3, Millwall would launch everything right / right of centre where Vyner and Naismith would be less adept in the air.

Playing him central meant he would be able to cover both Vyner (R) and Naismith (L) without needing to be too far out of the middle.  It meant Millwall couldn’t just go straight down the middle.

This is not dissimilar to Flint with less adept CBs aerially in Ayling and Williams in 14/15.  Some Lg1 teams want to bomb down the middle, but Flint ruled that out.

Well done Rob, little bit of credit to Nige too

Don’t see how Nige gets any credit - dropped him due to a personal vendetta. Then through popular demand  recalls him and he peforms.

[JoeAman08]

Played well just like he has all season. Was mad to drop him at all tbf. 

[Port Said Red]

2 minutes ago, RedNachos said:

Don’t see how Nige gets any credit - dropped him due to a personal vendetta. Then through popular demand  recalls him and he peforms.

There was no "vendetta" the issue was how he perceived Rob's game and how Rob saw himself. I think tonight the two things were more aligned and it could be a big turning point defensively.

[Ron W]

9 minutes ago, RedNachos said:

Don’t see how Nige gets any credit - dropped him due to a personal vendetta. Then through popular demand  recalls him and he peforms.

Probably not through popular demand but losing patience with King's poor performances but yes, still entirely a situation of his own making and just as contradictory.

[And Its Smith]

13 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Yes, hard to believe he'd be a better option than Andy King. 

Now now…it’s only one game. Let’s not jump to conclusions!

[Olé]

7 hours ago, RedNachos said:

Don’t see how Nige gets any credit - dropped him due to a personal vendetta. Then through popular demand  recalls him and he peforms.

"Popular demand". Get over yourself FFS. Pearson didn't select Atkinson because RedNachos on OTIB told him to, nor did he drop him for such a spurious reason either. Maybe, just maybe, Pearson makes decisions based on things that happen at the club that none of us have visibility of, that he's not about to share with the rest of us (to protect the players) and which all evidence suggests players don't resent and, respond to.

[Loco Rojo]

6 minutes ago, Olé said:

"Popular demand". Get over yourself FFS. Pearson didn't select Atkinson because RedNachos on OTIB told him to, nor did he drop him for such a spurious reason either. Maybe, just maybe, Pearson makes decisions based on things that happen at the club that none of us have visibility of, that he's not about to share with the rest of us (to protect the players) and which all evidence suggests players don't resent and, respond to.

Very well said. 

[James54De]

Had one game all season where he’s not been decent. Makes Pearson’s choices all the more questionable. 

[Robbored]

7 hours ago, RedNachos said:

Don’t see how Nige gets any credit - dropped him due to a personal vendetta. Then through popular demand  recalls him and he peforms.

You don’t seem to understand what Nige’s rationale was Red. There was no vendetta, no personal finger pointing - just good man management. RA had a decent, hard working game last night. The question is will he be able to repeat that level of performance every game? 

His failure to deliver consistent performances is why Nige left him out. Most of it is down to his personality traits. I assume that RA gets cyclothymic mood swings and that determines his attitude towards the game.

Nige, like most proper managers aren’t prepared to accept that hence him treating RA as he has.

[IAmNick]

1 hour ago, James54De said:

Had one game all season where he’s not been decent. Makes Pearson’s choices all the more questionable. 

Given it was Pearson's decision to sign him, Pearson's decision to play him in the way he has and when he has, and Pearson's decision to put him back in the team now, if we've basically only seen good performances maybe that implies he's made quite good choices regarding Atkinson?

[bcfcnick]

1 hour ago, Robbored said:

I assume that RA gets cyclothymic mood swings and that determines his attitude towards the game.

 

Is that on the official site?

[Port Said Red]

2 minutes ago, bcfcnick said:

Is that on the official site?

No it's in his head, he thinks he can analyse someone he hasn't met from the terraces.

The mental side of being a professional footballer is the toughest part of the game though, they could almost be pushed into being manic depressive with the way and speed with which highs and lows come along. Keeping an even keel is often down to their home life and ability to switch off when not playing/training.

[Robbored]

35 minutes ago, bcfcnick said:

Is that on the official site?

Ever thought of comedy as a career?

[GrahamC]

Loads of people have heard that the “trust” issue was more to do with him turning up for training unwell which lead to several other players then picking up a bug, not a fall out or anything about a ******* vendetta.

The King comments are a pretty cheap shot, he’s had good & poor games when filling in & if Kalas was fit I doubt we’d have turned to him, Pearson’s “mate” or not.

I do prefer Atkinson in the middle, it allows Naismith to play in his best position & as Rob is a big old unit reduces the issue of him being done for pace.

For the moment that back 3 & those wing backs are our best options.

[Robbored]

29 minutes ago, Port Said Red said:

No it's in his head, he thinks he can analyse someone he hasn't met from the terraces.

The mental side of being a professional footballer is the toughest part of the game though, they could almost be pushed into being manic depressive with the way and speed with which highs and lows come along. Keeping an even keel is often down to their home life and ability to switch off when not playing/training.

Correct PSR - however bi-polar can and often does involve psychosis and require hospitalisation. RA obviously doesn’t suffer from such a deliberating condition but judging from what Nige indicated RA does experience cyclothymic mood swings that effect his performances.  Andy Cole had similar traits and largely why he and Sheringham had such a poor relationship.

He could probably benefit from some input from a sports psychologist if the club has one on the books.

[chinapig]

9 hours ago, RedNachos said:

Don’t see how Nige gets any credit - dropped him due to a personal vendetta. Then through popular demand  recalls him and he peforms.

And he had a personal vendetta against Pring as well according to some on here. What happened to that I wonder? Did he decide to play him based on what he saw in training? Or did he play him because some people on a forum told him to? We can only guess.

[1960maaan]

Moving RA central and Tanner to WB made us look stronger and much more balanced IMO.

I hope he sticks with it.

[Davefevs]

3 hours ago, Olé said:

"Popular demand". Get over yourself FFS. Pearson didn't select Atkinson because RedNachos on OTIB told him to, nor did he drop him for such a spurious reason either. Maybe, just maybe, Pearson makes decisions based on things that happen at the club that none of us have visibility of, that he's not about to share with the rest of us (to protect the players) and which all evidence suggests players don't resent and, respond to.

OTIB forgets that Rob “lost” his place when he pulled out pre-game Swansea with an illness.  Vyner initially played centrally, then King, who had a couple of decent games and Naismith came back fit too.  This coincided with perhaps a reminder to him that he needed to do a bit better, and as per Nige’s selection policy, King had a dodgy game and a bit, Rob improved in training and he comes back in.

[Lanterne Rouge]

I did think second half that Tanner was able to get forward a lot more after they took that tricky winger off who was causing him a lot of problems.

[freezer]

39 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

Moving RA central and Tanner to WB made us look stronger and much more balanced IMO.

I hope he sticks with it.

What the old 'putting players in their natural position' sort of tactic. Groundbreaking. 

[Kolsch]

22 minutes ago, Lanterne Rouge said:

I did think second half that Tanner was able to get forward a lot more after they took that tricky winger off who was causing him a lot of problems.

He only got passed him once and then did the same to Zak second half so he’s clearly lightning quick. We defended well as a unit overall against him.

 

Aa for Rob, excellent performance and I hope he stays in the middle of the three. Very dominant and that block first half was outstanding.

[Charlie BCFC]

10 hours ago, JoeAman08 said:

Played well just like he has all season. Was mad to drop him at all tbf. 

Think it was because he was ill for the Swansea game and Pring was playing well at LCB. Makes a lot more sense having him there instead of King that’s for sure

[Robbored]

2 hours ago, GrahamC said:

Loads of people have heard that the “trust” issue was more to do with him turning up for training unwell which lead to several other players then picking up a bug, not a fall out or anything about a ******* vendetta.

Anyone could brought the bug in. Players, coaches, backroom staff. It’s nonsense to point the finger at RA. 

Before players show up for training they have to fill in a comprehensive app on their phones reporting how they slept, etc, etc.

 

[Mike Stone]

11 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Very little mention of his performance tonight on the MDT.

Bar a couple of mis-times headers early doors, he played really well.

Positionally he played as the central man tonight.  Why?  He has played there before (Fulham home 1-1 v Mitrovic one occasion).  For me, it’s because had he played him LCB3, Millwall would launch everything right / right of centre where Vyner and Naismith would be less adept in the air.

Playing him central meant he would be able to cover both Vyner (R) and Naismith (L) without needing to be too far out of the middle.  It meant Millwall couldn’t just go straight down the middle.

This is not dissimilar to Flint with less adept CBs aerially in Ayling and Williams in 14/15.  Some Lg1 teams want to bomb down the middle, but Flint ruled that out.

Well done Rob, little bit of credit to Nige too

 

Just now, Mike Stone said:

 

Oops

[Ron W]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

OTIB forgets that Rob “lost” his place when he pulled out pre-game Swansea with an illness.  Vyner initially played centrally, then King, who had a couple of decent games and Naismith came back fit too.  This coincided with perhaps a reminder to him that he needed to do a bit better, and as per Nige’s selection policy, King had a dodgy game and a bit, Rob improved in training and he comes back in.

The manner of Nigel's 'reminder' definitely didn't need to be that abrasive. That's just him at times, but most other managers wouldn't have reacted publicly in the same way he did.

That said, it was nice to see him raise a wry smile after the game last night as he said Atkinson "showed what a good player he can be".

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, Lanterne Rouge said:

I did think second half that Tanner was able to get forward a lot more after they took that tricky winger off who was causing him a lot of problems.

I actually think it was his and Zak’s start to the second half that forced the change…because we we well on top, creating situations if not chances…mainly down our right side.  Some good link up with Andi and Antoine.

We did create the best chances after that, but they weren’t from our right side as Millwall blocked it up with Styles.

31 minutes ago, Ron W said:

The manner of Nigel's 'reminder' definitely didn't need to be that abrasive. That's just him at times, but most other managers wouldn't have reacted publicly in the same way he did.

That said, it was nice to see him raise a wry smile after the game last night as he said Atkinson "showed what a good player he can be".

Agree.

(Some managers might’ve been worse…)

[Merrick's Marvels]

13 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Yes, hard to believe he'd be a better option than Andy King. 

Yes, King made a couple of costly mistakes. 

But Pearson knows more than a bit about what it takes to be a top class centre half. And as important as kicking it and heading it in that position is the ability to communicate with those around you - to organise and to lead.

Top class players and top class teams communicate. None of our defenders do, not even the best ones like Kalas and Baker.

So last summer he introduced a talker, an organiser, a leader. Naismith - who also happened to be a good ball player - introduced to talk, organise, get us in control of the ball more, improve our possession stats.

When Naismith got injured, Pearson decided the team still required a talker, an organiser, a leader at CB. One who could also pass out from the back and continue the job Naismith was tasked with.

That's why he picked King there. That's the plan.

Not because King was the next best CB available but because he was the next best at providing essential qualities Pearson, a former top class CB himself, knows are required in a top class team. Qualities our team, our squad - someone else's squad he's inherited and has yet had the chance to change - patently lack.

So just like Weimann, King gets shunted around the team to compensate for deficencies in the squad. 

Yes, King made a costly error or two - he played the Naismith role so well, he not only talked and organised and passed, he gave goals away! In Pearson's judgement, the short term damage of those errors can be absorbed while individual players, and the team as a whole, learn valuable lessons about what it takes to be top class which will stand them and us in good stead for the long term. 

Pearson knows full well he has to do this - and address a multitude of other deficiencies besides -  without getting us relegated. He understands the risks. These are big calls and he's well paid to make them. We should respect his judgement for as long as possible, even if the ride gets bumpy and scary.

And if I was Rob Atkinson I couldn't think of anyone better to learn from. Pearson has already stated he sees him playing in the Premier League, there's never been any suggestion he doubts the player's physical ability. What dropping him and playing King did was challenge Atkinson mentally. Challenge him to not be such an introvert, to demonstrate he believes in himself, to push himself to be better every single day. Maybe in training - stuff we never see - he saw Atkinson already coasting, thinking he'd already made it onto easy street at easy BCFC. Maybe Pearson knows that Atkinson can be so much better than that and this was his way of teaching him a valuable lesson for the long term.

It's exactly the same thing he did with Alex Scott. No doubts about his ability - let's stick him at Right Wing Back and see how he reacts mentally. The lad passed that particular examination with flying colours and Pearson found out he had a player made of the right stuff on his hands. Atkinson is learning the same lesson. Tanner is being asked to play RCB, another player whose ability is not in doubt, but who's being challenged mentally to adapt, improve, make the very best of himself, day in day out - because that's what it takes to be top class. Pearson should know, he's been there and done it. He's even started using Pat Lam's mantra - "strive to be the best version of yourself every day".

And Atkinson, Scott, Tanner and others will thank Pearson for it in the long term. 

City fans will thank him for it too, if they haven't already hounded the bloke out with cheap jibes, social media meltdowns and a failure to understand the magnitude of the mess he's clearing up or the way he's going about it.

Even when picking Andy King at CB, there's method not madness, hard as it might be for some to comprehend.

Mind, after the Lincoln shitshow, I'd never have picked King again, anywhere. 

Edited December 30, 2022 by Merrick's Marvels

[Davefevs]

58 minutes ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

Mind, after the Lincoln shitshow, I'd never have picked King again, anywhere

And yet I thought he was ok, and spent most of the first half covering for Dylan Kadji who was miles off the standard required.

[marcofisher]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

I actually think it was his and Zak’s start to the second half that forced the change…because we we well on top, creating situations if not chances…mainly down our right side.  Some good link up with Andi and Antoine.

We did create the best chances after that, but they weren’t from our right side as Millwall blocked it up with Styles.

Agree.

(Some managers might’ve been worse…)

Been really impressed with Tanner recently. He’s got a bit of Naismith about him to me and probably slightly better defensively. Both technical defenders who both want to set the tempo and look to play aggressively and on the front foot.

 

There was one really well weighted pass through to Weimann I think, where it had a bit of backspin or something on it which allowed it to stop just short of the byeline so it could be collected by the attacker and fizzed across. I couldn’t think of any other defender bar Naismith who has that nouse and technical ability.

Edited December 30, 2022 by marcofisher

[Olé]

4 hours ago, Davefevs said:

and as per Nige’s selection policy, King had a dodgy game and a bit, Rob improved in training and he comes back in.

Amen. It's weird, under LJ everyone used to tear their hair out that he basically rolled the dice and rearranged the team every week looking for something that would work. It was a feature of those long losing runs. NP doesn't do knee jerk and gives players a run of games to establish themselves or not (King kept a clean sheet vs Watford, played in the win at Rotherham, had a mare versus Stoke, and was not automatically dropped and got one more game before the change was made). I have a feeling players appreciate their opportunity better by being given a small run without chopping and changing, and the stability it affords the team.

It might be why you only ever hear glowing endorsements from players who have played for NP.

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, Olé said:

Amen. It's weird, under LJ everyone used to tear their hair out that he basically rolled the dice and rearranged the team every week looking for something that would work. It was a feature of those long losing runs. NP doesn't do knee jerk and gives players a run of games to establish themselves or not (King kept a clean sheet vs Watford, played in the win at Rotherham, had a mare versus Stoke, and was not automatically dropped and got one more game before the change was made). I have a feeling players appreciate their opportunity better by being given a small run without chopping and changing, and the stability it affords the team.

It might be why you only ever hear glowing endorsements from players who have played for NP.

Amen back at you Brother Rob.

[Numero Uno]

14 hours ago, RedNachos said:

Don’t see how Nige gets any credit - dropped him due to a personal vendetta. Then through popular demand  recalls him and he peforms.

Managers who hold grudges and get involved in personal vendettas lose a dressing room quicker than they can wipe their arse. Anyone on here who has played anything resembling a decent level of football has seen it and done it tbh. The reason being that players “talk” to each other and the conversation goes “if he’ll do that to him he’ll do it to the rest of us”.

Whatever your view on results Pearson come across as a Manager who puts you on the naughty step but gives you a second chance to do whatever it is you weren’t doing. Pring being an obvious example. To me that’s straightforward management at pro football level and if you want to beat him with a stick you are choosing the wrong one in that instance.

The majority of pro’s and ex-pro’s I’ve met are surprisingly self critical, the first to admit they’ve had a shocker, and as long as they see treatment as fair they’ll take it on the chin.

[Merrick's Marvels]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

And yet I thought he was ok, and spent most of the first half covering for Dylan Kadji who was miles off the standard required.

A debate for another day

When I've stopped seething about the performance!

[Gimme Shelton]

16 minutes ago, Percy Pig said:

Excellent post. The analysis of the tactical decision is spot on. 

The only downside for me is I did very much like Naismith central, playing as the deep pivot and Rob overlapping down the left with his pace and power. I think the make up of that back three should be influenced by opposition style as much as anything. 

I don't think him playing centrally should preclude him going on a run if the space and opportunities are there,him, Naismith and Zac are all capable of doing that.

[Davefevs]

2 hours ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

A debate for another day

When I've stopped seething about the performance!

Another year?

45 minutes ago, Percy Pig said:

Excellent post. The analysis of the tactical decision is spot on. 

The only downside for me is I did very much like Naismith central, playing as the deep pivot and Rob overlapping down the left with his pace and power. I think the make up of that back three should be influenced by opposition style as much as anything. 

Ta. Yes, so did I also.  Think it was definitely a horses for courses selection last night, and we will have to wait and see if it’s the “new norm”.

Very interesting how Voglslammer sat in Naismith’s space, and we therefore went right side in the main to build attacks from deep.

Naismith mainly forced inside by Voglslammer so he couldn’t use Pring, but also meant some raking passes to Tanner.  One delicious one early on, led to Tanner crossing to Semenyo to head over / wide.  Circled in red below.

very little “dialogue” with Pring (5 passes between them)

Vyner - lots of “dialogue” with Tanner (18 passes between them).

26 minutes ago, Gimme Shelton said:

I don't think him playing centrally should preclude him going on a run if the space and opportunities are there,him, Naismith and Zac are all capable of doing that.

hopefully not, we have 3 CBs all capable of moving forward with the ball…gives us versatility.

[Davefevs]

32 minutes ago, Percy Pig said:

Not preclude, no, but the central player has significantly less licence to maraud than the wide CB's. Can't remember Rob doing it once last night, whereas when we were in our best form the beginning of the season it was a constant part of our attacking game plan. 

I'm a massive fan of pivots, I believe they add balance and passing options to retain the ball and manoeuvre overloads in the wide areas whilst also widening the "half spaces" for the likes of AW and Scott.

 

 

I recall him shaping to make one 2nd half and then quickly checked-out, and passed to Zak.