A story of two weak defences but we take the ball to the other end of the pitch better according to stats.
It's down to who makes least mistakes in this one - our holding midfielders have a big responsibility to cover our central defence so Vaulks MOM performance and Millers 3-1....
Better scoreline to the team that score first...although it took 93 / 103 minutes to break Donni down - now was that patience or Donni taking their mental foot off the pedal.
Then we scored 93 / 103....we got out of jail there...and as Fergie said...it was a foul for me on their defender so riding our luck a bit but kept going.....a good thing but a "GOOD" team should have put a poor Donni side to bed and switched the light off earlier and easier than that !
-- Edited by Bornamiller on Wednesday 7th of March 2018 02:40:07 PM
in regards the foul as fergie put it i have watched the match in slow motion along with several neutrals and they saw no foul only the usual jostling in the box
I would have blown the whistle on that tackle tbf and was surprised the ref didn't but hey ho - we get our share of referee's **** ups - but - anyway that was a defensive error as that ball should have been in corner of the pitch the Donni fans were in for a throw in.....poor on Donni that so not our "Good" it was their "Bad".
As for the poor defence - a sharper attack would tear our defence to shreds - it's a poor league. And the two central defenders have mistakes in their lockers for sure....if pressed properly they crumble.
we've only conceded 5 goals since beginning on January!!! Our defence was an issue earlier on, but NOT on current form, quite the opposite, we've been winning partly BECAUSE we've not been conceding many.
I was screaming for Mattock to be replaced last year, but he's improved no end lately, and Wood has been great, apart from the odd mistake our back-line is a strength just now. Rodak has been part of that too, he's got better in my opinion.
.... and saying it's because the other teams in the League are a bit rubbish is a strange argument.
Long may our current Rubbish defending continue, and our opposition be terrible....LOL
UTM :)
-- Edited by Davidedin on Wednesday 7th of March 2018 03:48:08 PM
There was an Owls fan on another Millers messageboard called Ben Haddon or something who pretended to be a Miller and basically said exactly what Bornamiller says. Why do Bornamiller and T71 constantly say it was the opposition being bad rather than us being good and why do they both constantly say "It's a poor league." Poor compared to what? Ask Man City how poor they think it is. The spread of clubs in L1 includes many who have seen much better days and have the potential to achieve more. Clubs like Blackburn, Wigan, Peterborough, Charlton, Plymouth, Shrewsbury and Portsmouth strike me as just as good as in any other L1 season.
I don't expect people to be ultra-loyalists but this constant drip, drip, drip of "We should be better..." etc is simply dispiriting. I think these two posters have an agenda which is not clear but not supportive either.
-- Edited by ridgeway kid on Wednesday 7th of March 2018 04:16:12 PM
If I have it right, we have conceded 9 goals in the last 14 games and not more than a single goal in any of them. We have the fourth best goals conceded record in the division, despite leaking soft goals being a concern in the early part of the season.
Talk of it being a poor division is lazy. It is no stronger or weaker than usual. There are some decent sides around. It took SUFC several years to find a way out of it. Naturally it is not as good as the Championship but Peterborough, MK Dons, Charlton and others have come down from the Championship and found that getting back up is tough. We are giving it a good go.
Rochdale are dangerous as their result at Walsall on Tuesday showed, but we should be fresh and too strong for them. I can see a 2-0 Millers win on the horizon.
"Why do Bornamiller and T71 constantly say it was the opposition being bad"
Because I have eyes in my head...
The "Quality" at this level is poor - watched Shrewsbury in the checkatrade what's his name trophy and my God....very poor indeed.
Many of the points we have picked up this year a decent opposition would have buried us in both boxes.
The ball bouncing around in the penalty area and no one pouncing is amateurish - but you can only play what's in front of you can't you - and we're fitter and run run run....a very functional and profitable attribute AT THIS LEVEL.
T71 has been known to say "I say it as I see it" well that's his opinion - we are all happy with how we see the games. Some are more critical than others. That's football and this is a football forum.
I write my opinion but I have never said....
"Why does poster 'A' - 'B' - or 'C' say this - that or the other....it's their opinion - end of!
This board is getting MM-ish - running around with their pitch forks and chewing wheat pointing at things they don't understand.
Some people watch the football not eulogise the results - there in lies the way to slow progress and satisfaction of the average - we want better.
Yes and thats the type of behaviour, of banging on about the same points and issues on just about every post that turned, over time, MM into what it became, a morass of abuse and name calling.
Glad I switch over here and hope we are not being infiltrated by 5th columnists, which is what I suspect judging from the activity on here over the last few weeks.
Btw Kid, the last time you were with us, you and I had a little run, seeing who could come up with the most and inventive and interesting avatars, or at least it seemed that way. I had a different name then and used The Tough of the Track and Archie the Robot amongst one or two others. I particularly liked your Fokker (The Focke Wulf 190 I think)
We are playing well, and I seem to think (based on gut memory, no facts looked up) that we usually do OK against Rochdale, funny how some teams are bogey teams and vice versa regardless of form....
Potential banana skin. Dale will be up for it after last night's impressive 3-0 win at Walsall. We should win but remember Dale were the first team to win a league game at NYS with a 3-2 win back in 2012.
Can't see a problem with the defence at the moment. Would like to see Purrington on the bench instead of ***mings. Vaulks & Towell outstanding in midfield. Newell has come good on the left. Got options on the right. Only problem I can see is up front. Not direct enough. Will probably get away with it till the play-offs.
There's just been an article on 'Purrington' and it suggested he would be one of our better earners - therefore to be frozen out by PW to reduce the wage bill further - unless of course he just sits his contract out and takes the money - gets sold or out on loan.
He's never shown the football reasons he was bought for but following an injury he's been frozen out - so that could be his way home - we'll see !
There's just been an article on 'Purrington' and it suggested he would be one of our better earners - therefore to be frozen out by PW to reduce the wage bill further - unless of course he just sits his contract out and takes the money - gets sold or out on loan.
He's never shown the football reasons he was bought for but following an injury he's been frozen out - so that could be his way home - we'll see !
Purrington was bought because Mattock had no competition at left back and was under-performing. In theory therefore if Purrington proved to be better he nailed down the position, or he spurred Mattock on to better, or both.
Notwithstanding his injury, the lad simply hasn't performed well enough when given the opportunity. No more, no less.
If you want to criticise the recruitment and question why we spent what for us was good money on a player who seems not to be worth it, that would be fair enough. I think I might be broadly with that. Also fair enough to question the lad himself and whether or not he has got it in him to fight for a place and do the business.
To suggest that he is being frozen out to try and force him off the wage bill is disingenuous. There is no evidence at all for that. It is a baseless theory that you are putting out there to support your own agenda and narrative. You have made it clear that you are anti-Stewart and anti-Warne and it seems that you will spin whatever you can to reinforce that line.
It must be really galling for you that we are 14 unbeaten, but to be fair you are still giving your anti-Warne rhetoric a good go all the same in the face of all logic. A sterling effort!
There's just been an article on 'Purrington' and it suggested he would be one of our better earners - therefore to be frozen out by PW to reduce the wage bill further - unless of course he just sits his contract out and takes the money - gets sold or out on loan.
He's never shown the football reasons he was bought for but following an injury he's been frozen out - so that could be his way home - we'll see !
Purrington was bought because Mattock had no competition at left back and was under-performing. In theory therefore if Purrington proved to be better he nailed down the position, or he spurred Mattock on to better, or both.
Notwithstanding his injury, the lad simply hasn't performed well enough when given the opportunity. No more, no less.
If you want to criticise the recruitment and question why we spent what for us was good money on a player who seems not to be worth it, that would be fair enough. I think I might be broadly with that. Also fair enough to question the lad himself and whether or not he has got it in him to fight for a place and do the business.
To suggest that he is being frozen out to try and force him off the wage bill is disingenuous. There is no evidence at all for that. It is a baseless theory that you are putting out there to support your own agenda and narrative. You have made it clear that you are anti-Stewart and anti-Warne and it seems that you will spin whatever you can to reinforce that line.
It must be really galling for you that we are 14 unbeaten, but to be fair you are still giving your anti-Warne rhetoric a good go all the same in the face of all logic. A sterling effort!
Bornamiller is not a Rotherham fan he is a messageboard troll, he lives a sad life going from one board to another to get people wound up, he is likely to be a very very overweight middle aged man that lives with his mother, father left years ago. He won't have a woman in his life and spends his nights online looking at **** sites and keeping kleenex in business. Ignore people like this
