Rotherham United (H)

[Farnywhite]

2 minutes ago, Eddie said:

Forget the formation bollocks, you are absolutely delighted to see our 2 match winners sat with their fucking joggers on.

You could say you wouldn’t  be happy seeing those two coming on and running at you from the bench once your knackered . And both have scored late goals in games this season 

[desperado]

9 minutes ago, Eddie said:

If you’re facing us and you see ACD and Gale on the bench then you’re buzzing.

Forget the formation bollocks, you are absolutely delighted to see our 2 match winners sat with their fucking joggers on.

Personally I don’t think too much is wrong with it, but would go with the midfield 3 of Sheehan, EE and Simons and let Gale / ACD do the job of getting close to Burstow (and expect him to get back to early season form where he can actually hold the ball up for more than half a second).

Thank God for that, I was starting to think I’m seeing things others aren’t! 

8 minutes ago, Farnywhite said:

Problem is  he a continues to do excacly the same  thing every away game formation wise .

No he doesn’t 🤦‍♂️

You do realise there’s a difference between 4-2-3-1, 4-1-2-3 and 4-3-3 (with a more defensive minded number 10 - Dempsey), all of which we’ve adopted this season away.

Personnel changes too within all that to bring in different types of attributes.

Even though I don’t agree with this dropping a winger tactic, I’m giving it merit and debate because it’s reasonable and we are fans searching for answers to sort our away form out.

But don’t try and make out that he’s done exactly the same thing for every away game, because he hasn’t. 

 

[gonzo]

1 hour ago, desperado said:

Knew it 😂

While your ridiculously exaggerated point has some merit, sides with 10 men have and always will cause problems for teams with 11 men, denying them 3 points.

Anyway it’s slightly away from the main topic of conversation. Regardless of the merits of that 3 points, that side is the closest SS has come to dropping a winger and bolstering up the midfield behind, the type of tactic and formation lots are calling out for on this thread.

What’s your answer/suggestion to sort our away form out? 

Arsenal at Chelsea, DMBs home to Everton recent high profile examples.

[Johnnyrotten]

2 hours ago, Whitesince63 said:

They’re only the most likely to score because we’re giving them the ball more though. Why not drop one winger and instead play two strikers together playing more through the middle? I think that would actually suit Randall better because he could thread his through balls to them without getting battered up top by big defenders and we’d still have the wide threat from say ACD on the wing. Attacking through both the centre and wide would possibly open up more opportunities to score and certainly put more pressure across opposition defences. 

All valid points and I don't have any answer in terms of what formation may or may not work on a given day.

But my instinct is that in playing any 2 of our 3 strikers, we are playing 2 out of form and/or ineffective players straight away.  When we only have maybe 4 "attacking" players on the pitch at any one time, I'd want decent justification for 2 of them being out of form (to be polite) whilst leaving at least one on the bench that are a genuine threat every game or 2, not every 4th or 5th game.

If this was the era of Blake, McGinlay, Paatelinan, Coyle I would be all over the 2 up front theory.  Or even JDB, Charles, Bakayoko, because I'd expect at least 1 of those lot to score or assist in most games.  We don't have that quality, so we have to find other ways to score.  But I do agree we need 1 of Burstow or Dalby for some physicality, I wouldn't personally have them both because we'd be losing pace and invention.

[Whitesince63]

1 hour ago, Johnnyrotten said:

All valid points and I don't have any answer in terms of what formation may or may not work on a given day.

But my instinct is that in playing any 2 of our 3 strikers, we are playing 2 out of form and/or ineffective players straight away.  When we only have maybe 4 "attacking" players on the pitch at any one time, I'd want decent justification for 2 of them being out of form (to be polite) whilst leaving at least one on the bench that are a genuine threat every game or 2, not every 4th or 5th game.

If this was the era of Blake, McGinlay, Paatelinan, Coyle I would be all over the 2 up front theory.  Or even JDB, Charles, Bakayoko, because I'd expect at least 1 of those lot to score or assist in most games.  We don't have that quality, so we have to find other ways to score.  But I do agree we need 1 of Burstow or Dalby for some physicality, I wouldn't personally have them both because we'd be losing pace and invention.

Can’t disagree when you compare our current strikers to the past ones you’ve named but whichever way we look at it they are the players we look to to score the majority of goals and for whatever reason they’re not doing that. Whether it’s system or they’re just not good enough I can’t say but until it’s resolved we’ll struggle to maintain a challenge for top six let alone the top two. If it’s quality then hopefully SS will resolve that next month and if it’s system then sooner.

[Krimzon]

Some decent footage from the Rotherham end . Skip the first 8 mins its just road trip footage......

 

[wakey]

1 hour ago, Whitesince63 said:

until it’s resolved we’ll struggle to maintain a challenge for top six let alone the top two. 

Will we bollocks.

This thread's gone proper twilight zone.

[gonzo]

9 minutes ago, wakey said:

Will we bollocks.

This thread's gone proper twilight zone.

We'd have to absolutely implode to not make top 6

[Krimzon]

Footage from a young lad doing a BWFC Channel . Gale "MAY" have been offside when I thought he was no where near ....

 

[Krimzon]

whinging yorkies ...

 

[Wanderlust]

1 hour ago, Krimzon said:

Footage from a young lad doing a BWFC Channel . Gale "MAY" have been offside when I thought he was no where near ....

 

At the time I thought it was tight but you can see from that Gale was definitely offside ….but I’m not convinced he was obstructing the goalie’s view or interfering. There were other decisions that might have gone our way, still, we dodged another bullet.

[bwfc4ife]

For me I think the option of being more solid first 60 mins away from home with the prospect of bringing Gale and duberry on to win the game would be a good one to have and I think they’d both have potential to have a massive impact as second half subs. 

[gonzo]

Gale fucked it v Blackpool in a similar position 

[Leyther_Matt]

3 hours ago, gonzo said:

We'd have to absolutely implode to not make top 6

We said that in March….

[Traf]

56 minutes ago, Leyther_Matt said:

We said that in March….

We were right to say it back then, but sadly we did implode.

[Tonge moor green jacket]

5 hours ago, Krimzon said:

Some decent footage from the Rotherham end . Skip the first 8 mins its just road trip footage......

 

That fella's voice reminds me of Milburn:

 

[DirtySanchez]

4 hours ago, Krimzon said:

whinging yorkies ...

 

"There's clearly no conversation to be had, but I need to see it again to be sure"

[wakey]

5 hours ago, Krimzon said:

whinging yorkies ...

 

if you look closely is that Lusty next to the bloke in the back seat?

[ZiggyStardust]

15 hours ago, gonzo said:

We'd have to absolutely implode to not make top 6

 

12 hours ago, Leyther_Matt said:

We said that in March….

I said that 10 seconds before I saw Frredman was starting Rob Hall.

[Ani]

16 hours ago, Wanderlust said:

At the time I thought it was tight but you can see from that Gale was definitely offside ….but I’m not convinced he was obstructing the goalie’s view or interfering. There were other decisions that might have gone our way, still, we dodged another bullet.

He was not interfering and therefore not offside. There is another angle from behind the goal and it is their player trying to block the shot the gets in keepers eye line

 

Edited December 29, 2025 by Ani

[Zico]

37 minutes ago, Ani said:

He was not interfering and therefore not offside. There is another angle from behind the goal and it is their trying to block the shot the gets in keepers eyelids. 

He knew he was in a questionable position so kept himself quiet when we scored, as if not to draw attention to himself, by carrying on walking back rather than running off cheering 

[Traf]

1 hour ago, Zico said:

He knew he was in a questionable position so kept himself quiet when we scored, as if not to draw attention to himself, by carrying on walking back rather than running off cheering 

But then did come over to listen in to their players moaning at the ref/lino

[desperado]

16 minutes ago, Traf said:

But then did come over to listen in to their players moaning at the ref/lino

Bet he was shitting it after his cock-up at Blackpool 😂

He really does need to make sure he’s getting out quicker, not in that position to begin with or completely out of the way of the keeper giving no fuel for a debate.

[Eddie]

56 minutes ago, Traf said:

But then did come over to listen in to their players moaning at the ref/lino

I was convinced he was going to rule it out at that point, almost inevitable once they do that. Very pleasantly surprised when he gave it

[Traf]

33 minutes ago, Eddie said:

I was convinced he was going to rule it out at that point, almost inevitable once they do that. Very pleasantly surprised when he gave it

It was farcical really.
Lino didn't flag, ref had a good view and gave the goal immediately.

I'd initially assumed the ref had gone over to ask the lino what their keeper had ranted at him with a view to booking him.
How he never booked him is beyond me, especially as he had a pop at the ref after he confirmed the goal.