After a bright start the first half never really got going. With 10 men and Frecks on we looked much more mobile and effective. Plymouth were organised defensively but never really looked like scoring - a very average side. No complaints with Woods' sending off but other decisions by the Ref were farcical, topped by the incident at the end when no-one knew who he'd awarded a free kick to. JCH looked interested for his 10 minute spell! On balance, not a classic but we didn't deserve to lose and credit to the players for persisting to the end. MOM - Semi.
With 10 men behind the ball, we found it hard to break Plymouth down. They got what they came for and nearly got a bonus thanks to the ineptitude of the ref. Agree cannot complain about sending off, but how ref managed to play advantage when Wiliams was clearly fouled, leading to Taylor's break out and Woods ' tackle, is beyond me.
We did not deserve to lose, but didn't do enough to deserve a win. Correct result.
Plymouth about as bad as we have played against this season. They offered nothing as a threat, even down to ten men we were much the better side. Three points were there for the taking and in the end it is a relief to get the one.
Credit to the players for keeping going and it was great to see how much it meant to them at the end. Wood - from a distance away I thought the first yellow was harsh but he has nobody to blame for the second. They were clumsy challenges. Annoying how the Argyle players surrounded the ref for both, but we did it to get the Shrewsbury lad sent off. Its just an irritating aspect of the modern game.
I thought Emmanuel had his best game as a Miller today and was probably our best player. Ajayi was very good. Ball and Towell had good games although I would have liked to see Towell getting forward more . Frecks improved us massively. Williams had the beating of his full back all day but his decision making once he had gone past him was often poor.
Vaulks and Forde - I still don't get what they bring to the party but they both worked hard for the cause.
I didn't go today but not very often you get BBC report saying "Rotherham had bossed the first half, but struggled to break down a Plymouth side who defended with 10 men behind the ball. "
Can't play two midgets against 6 foot odd defenders and play long balls to them. Second half was improved when JCH arrived to challenge in air. Forde still not good enough but somehow gets the wing over Newell. Towell MOM for me and always puts a shift in.
Someone said that Moore's ban might dictate us playing football and they had a point. Sadly we were still banging high balls into Ball and Yates.
Yates just isn't good enough....even a dead clock is right twice a day....and that's my thought on Yates. Any good stuff is just an haphazard event - he doesn't make things happen or get in dangerous positions. In fact he sometimes duplicates the runs of others then just watches what happens....sorry - in this league give JCH a run because at least he won't be bullied - in fact I hope he would be - he'll react to it.
Pathetic game with two poor teams - league one outfit for forseable future.
Agree totally born ,also why the hell did Warne wait as late to put Newell and Blaster on should have made as soon as Wood went they were not intersted in going forward but we retreated again giving them impetus, what a load of s***e
Warne wasn’t isn’t or going to be the answer.
His comments after the game summed him up clueless.
We played well yeah keep the bull coming Warne.
Nice guy hopeless manager.
Warne eulogies about yesterday presented the wrong message - particularly to the fans who were there and saw a poor game.
He should be saying that we got out of gaol ( jail lol ) there boys we need to be taking teams like that in our stride through creative play and more industry than shown !
He needed to be a tad angry not praising mediocrity.
-- Edited by Bornamiller on Sunday 17th of December 2017 04:23:22 PM
I thought the entertainment value dropped to a new level.Plymouth were the worst side to come here this season.They were there for the taking,yet as bad as they were we weren't much better.The only real quality came when David Ball was involved,he badly needs better players to play with.Coming out of the ground a fan said we should play Ajayi further up the field.On reflection,this could be a good move.He has pace and when in full flight would be a right handful for the opposition.However strengthening the defence is top priority but can we trust the present coaching staff to bring the right players in?
To be fair it isn't always easy to break down a side that just wants to sit with men behind the ball and that is well organised, as they were. My feeling was always that we had to be patient and the first goal was going to come, and that once we got one we would get more. A couple of missed opportunities meant we had to wait until after half time and then Wood's moment of madness changed the complexion of the whole game.
Frecks gave us the drive in midfield that Vaulks can't which is why we looked more threatening with ten and with Vaulks in defence. Also Plymouth had a duty really to try and score against ten, so we had more space to play on the counter. The big wins that we got early in the season were because we scored early and were able to relax a bit and also counter against teams that had to open up.
Sometimes you need the option of a long ball to a big man to mix things up, and we didn't have that option yesterday until JCH came on. He did ok in his little cameo appearance.
At the end of the day we have a number of very ordinary footballers in our ranks so we struggle to create moments of quality. What there was came from Williams but without the end product, and from Ball who is improving with every game.
Some folk are knocking Vaulks but my take on that true bore draw is that Vaulks was following orders to take advantage of Yates / Ball movement - several "chips" into the danger area appeared useless to jeers when the pass was ok it was the "run into space" that was missing.
To underline / or at at least add a little further information on this subject I saw PW and heard him shout at Yates to "Bend your run" with an associated contortion of his hand and arm as if to show someone how to bend a run.....lol
I suppose you had to be there....but my read was to get the forwards to break through the defensive ranks and Vaulks tried to facilitate this !
Overnight and general thought regarding having to tell a professional player to bend his run at that age is ( for me ) mind blowing - because my son did it at 12 years old without a second thought or prompting !
Vaulks: he pumped long balls up, nobody to hit. Towell & Frecks played it on the floor but still no telling forward pass. Those 3 together that's if Frecks is fit will work in midfield. Vaulks is not tall enough for a centre back. Forde & Yates should be nowhere near the side. Emmanuel & Ajayi good see them playing better. Williams is better on the right. JCH got to start next week. We can't play 4-4-2 or 3-5-2 but need 3 in midfield. Work that one out. A winger has to be sacrificed.
Vaulks: he pumped long balls up, nobody to hit. Towell & Frecks played it on the floor but still no telling forward pass. Those 3 together that's if Frecks is fit will work in midfield. Vaulks is not tall enough for a centre back. Forde & Yates should be nowhere near the side. Emmanuel & Ajayi good see them playing better. Williams is better on the right. JCH got to start next week. We can't play 4-4-2 or 3-5-2 but need 3 in midfield. Work that one out. A winger has to be sacrificed.
With respect T71, if there is nobody to hit why was Vaulks 'pumping long balls up'? Often he had better options and we were clearly trying to play more of a short passing game to suit the players we had on the park. The others on the pitch seemed to have got that message. Sometimes you have to bang it aimlessly long just to clear the ball, but he was just wayward with passes. His short passing was not penetrative and often poor, and his long passing (or 'pumps') were aimless, a few times sending it straight through to the keeper or out of play.
You clearly rate him but I have seen nothing to persuade me that he is worth a midfield place. He is cover in there at best which in fairness was the situation on Saturday. It is just that I have seen people argue that he should be first choice and even that we should build a team around him, which I think beggars belief. He isn't technically gifted enough to be a creative influence, and doesn't read the game well enough and isn't athletic enough to be a ball winner. He can strike a ball cleanly - I will grant you that.
To be fair to the lad, he always gives 100% wherever and whenever he is asked to play and I acknowledge and respect that. I am not looking to single him out or scapegoat him. There are worse players than Will Vaulks at the club. But central midfield is such an important area where games are won and lost, and we need better quality in there. Frecks offered it when he came on, and the difference was marked.
I thought Vaulks filled in well at centre back although he did let Ryan Taylor get across him for their goal. For me he might be better suited to playing full back and maybe he is worth a run there to have a look once we are confirmed in mid-table obscurity come February/March and if Emmanuel has gone back or is still just a loanee.
A true "utility" player....and without complaint - as far as we know.....team lacking fluidity to the point where there was no movement ahead of midfield - that - at least has to change !
