The New Raith Rovers Thread

[Scary Bear]

2 hours ago, SirJimmyofNic said:

From the 2nd January we played 18 league games 8 of which we won, following 2 preceding home games on the 22nd and 30th Dec (Ayr & Arbroath) which were drawn after chucking away points from a winning position, we were beaten again against Arbroath on the 1st march after chucking away a 2 goal lead, 

After beating the Pars on the 2nd we never won a game in January indeed it was the 16th March till we won again with that last gasp Broon rocket against Utd

So all in all yes it is true, it was poor and the league was thrown away, 30 points from a possible 60 since the 22nd Dec

It was 16th February that we beat Dundee United at Starks, after a run of 3 league defeats and 2 cup defeats.

Second half of the season we played 18 league games and gained 28 points, which is still play-offs form. It’s just that first 18 games we managed 41 points, which was title winning form. Christmas period and January we pretty much threw the league away, although that away defeat at Arbroath when we were 2-0 up didn’t help.

Let’s see how many points we get from the first 18 games of this season.

We’re currently at 8 games played won 2, drawn 1, lost 5 and 7 points gained. 

Edited 3 hours ago by Scary Bear

[SirJimmyofNic]

12 minutes ago, Scary Bear said:

It was 16th February that we beat Dundee United at Starks, after a run of 3 league defeats and 2 cup defeats.

Second half of the season we played 18 league games and gained 28 points, which is still play-offs form. It’s just that first 18 games we managed 41 points, which was title winning form. Christmas period and January we pretty much threw the league away, although that away defeat at Arbroath when we were 2-0 up didn’t help.

Let’s see how many points we get from the first 18 games of this season.

We’re currently at 8 games played won 2, drawn 1, lost 5 and 7 points gained. 

Aye my typo, it was 16th Feb, it still doesn't change the facts, and with a bit of luck we may well have it in us to do the reverse this season, but atm it's not looking good

[TxRover]

8 hours ago, Ebanda's Handyman Services said:

Let me get this straight...

You'd love to see an inexperienced young player who currently isn't getting a game for a team in the league below come back to a struggling side and slot in to a high pressure CB role ahead of players like Fordyce, Hanlon, Murray and Dick because he's a big lad?

Please use a bit of self-awareness the next time you think about calling other people's opinions stupid.

Did I say “playing”? Nope, I was suggesting like to see us having Hannah with us for all practices and trying him out at CB in practice and bounce work. Doing that while Montrose is “playing” him at LB would be counter productive, and possibly hamper his limited play there. Disappointingly, it seems that Petrie has decided he has better starting options at LB.

[grumswall]

What I can't get my head around is how we where ahead of schedule with where we finished last season, but it was deemed worthy of sacking Murray. I have seen very little to suggest it was the correct thing to do so far. It isn't Collins team but there is the same quality in the team that had us finishing second last season. The biggest difference seems to be Stanton, vaughan and Brown all having barely played this season.

I also can't get my head around how you are building a team for promotion in future seasons yet fill it with older players on 3 year deals and the young players you do sign don't get a look in. That doesn't sound like we're building for the future. I'd suggest it's more looking for immediate results with that strategy. 

All the shite about starks getting upgraded while we're shite is just that, shite. The ground has been needing renovated for years. 

[pub car king]

4 minutes ago, grumswall said:

What I can't get my head around is how we where ahead of schedule with where we finished last season, but it was deemed worthy of sacking Murray. I have seen very little to suggest it was the correct thing to do so far. It isn't Collins team but there is the same quality in the team that had us finishing second last season.

All of this 

[SirJimmyofNic]

15 minutes ago, grumswall said:

What I can't get my head around is how we where ahead of schedule with where we finished last season, but it was deemed worthy of sacking Murray. I have seen very little to suggest it was the correct thing to do so far. It isn't Collins team but there is the same quality in the team that had us finishing second last season. The biggest difference seems to be Stanton, vaughan and Brown all having barely played this season.

It could be argued though that same quality are the very same ones who threw points away that cost us the league, that at times couldn't buy us a goal and in the end cost Murray his job, the defence of course was strengthend albeit by experienced but ageing players, yet these first 8 games are worse than the last 8 games

[TxRover]

8 hours ago, CALDERON said:

Should ground improvements only be done when the team are playing well?

There we go, now we have some sense.

8 hours ago, CALDERON said:

Everyone involved in setting us up for this season has made an arse of it.  How much blame lies between management and board I'm not sure, but they will both have had a part to play.

Roles, yes, made an arse of it, perhaps over stating it. Fitba is, by its nature, a team sport. And within that is an element that defies plans and intentions. There are “teams” that massively over produce and others that likewise under produce to various extents. The exact same team can have wildly varying results in a season due to seemingly minor factors like weather, events off the pitch, etc. when a team has been doing well, there is geometrically increased pressure to maintain those results, which can cause overreactions on both sides.

7 hours ago, Ding Dang Doo said:

You are honestly just an absolute weirdo 

Sorry you don’t appreciate a good Monty Python quote. Watch out for wooden rabbits.

7 hours ago, CALDERON said:

Interesting that those complaints only really surface when the team start losing tbh.  

What makes the board perennial losers out of interest? Seem to have been fairly successful in making the club more money based on significant increase in prize money and income last season in terms of gate revenue.

Maybe that’s more to the fact that winner attract a larger “fanbase”, with the more, shall we say, petulant types often taking a leading role of complaining that the bandwagon they jumped on isn’t rolling as smoothly?

6 hours ago, FitbaSupporter said:

Agree. 

It’s a fair cop, but society’s to blame.

4 hours ago, CountryBumpkin said:

indeed both John and his wife are investing in the infrastructure at Starks Park. Probably why we can safely say that the playing budget is not being impacted by the renovations. Much to the likely disappointment of some who want it to fit their narrative. 

That’s likely the newer portion of the “fanbase” that only is here because of last year’s well above expectation performances.

4 hours ago, FitbaSupporter said:

Sim has been Stark’s Park properties for decades. It’s obviously taken the new board coming in to get him to invest properly in the football stadium. That’s welcome, but doesn’t remove the years of neglect. So I’ll save any credit for the new board who persuade him. 

This is perhaps the most interesting comment. Will we ever know the interplay and give and take going on around Starks Park? Probably not, but it’s certainly a huge factor. The new Board is clearly either spending a decent amount  to improve the SP experience, or perhaps in at least some cases has worked out a way that it’s getting done in exchange for other considerations (advertising, sponsorship, etc). This seemingly benefits Sim, as we believe he still fully owns SP, but we really don’t know the details.

Heres a thought, the new Board are businessmen, and it seems unlikely they’d toss their money into SP for no return. They’ve already said improvements scheduling will be somewhat contingent upon income from the Rovers, which implies they are not diverting money from the footballing aspect of the team, and also that they at least even, if not pounds ahead by doing it.

The complex web that is the Rovers stock holdings was identified by Sim as an aspect he was working on when the new Board came in, and is really necessary if there is a plan to either sell off a portion (such as Sim’s SP Holdings) or gather the whole shebang under one umbrella. Sim has already suggested SP Holding's is an investment for his family, so that makes sense. As he’s an accountant, I could certainly see Sim reaching an accord to support the investments in SP in return for granting some interest in the eventual sale of the same (much as those companies these days will offer you X pounds for your home, while promising to renovate it and then sell it on for Y pounds, and then giving you a portion of the increased second sales price). If any of this is true, the wailing and gnashing of teeth about money spent on SP vs the team is misguided at best.

 

In the end, this season is disappointing so far to many Rovers fans, and the over the top complains and clamouring for heads is par for the course in this game, but overwrought. The absolute knee-jerk tears, snotters and pants wetting over a manager who has had little time to make any difference is, I would suggest, a bit harsh yet. Of course, the fact that fitba includes relegation makes that spasmodic response that much more likely, but it doesn’t make it any more useful or correct. The Board’s decision cannot be judged without the full details, details we will likely not know for at least another seven or eight months, if ever. And so, options and venom are on the menu.

[philpy]

Murray is gone, he's no coming back,  there's f**kall we can do about it, so stop greeting about it. Move on, get behind the team. Yes, the football is brutal Just now, but just remember,  we've seen the rovers in worse situations over the years...

[grumswall]

25 minutes ago, SirJimmyofNic said:

It could be argued though that same quality are the very same ones who threw points away that cost us the league, that at times couldn't buy us a goal and in the end cost Murray his job, the defence of course was strengthend albeit by experienced but ageing players, yet these first 8 games are worse than the last 8 games

Of course but it's literally going round in circles because we just don't know who's actually making the signings. I do think handing out 3 year deals is already showing to be a bad policy when it comes to transfers. We've potentially got players signed up beyond this season who quite honestly don't look up to it anymore. They're also playing ahead of the likes of Gibson who has shown promise. Then you have Jamieson who has quite honestly looked like a pointless signing from day 1 getting a game. He is just callum Smith with a left foot. Just while I'm at it, Freeman is quite clearly left footed. Why is he a RB? He's good with his right, but it's obvious he's naturally left footed. 

@philpyI'm not crying about Murray being gone, I'm highlighting a quite obvious mistake our board have made. 

[Been going too long]

5 minutes ago, philpy said:

Murray is gone, he's no coming back,  there's f**kall we can do about it, so stop greeting about it. Move on, get behind the team. Yes, the football is brutal Just now, but just remember,  we've seen the rovers in worse situations over the years...

Exactly this 

[CountryBumpkin]

1 hour ago, TxRover said:

Did I say “playing”? Nope, I was suggesting like to see us having Hannah with us for all practices and trying him out at CB in practice and bounce work. Doing that while Montrose is “playing” him at LB would be counter productive, and possibly hamper his limited play there. Disappointingly, it seems that Petrie has decided he has better starting options at LB.

Well he does though, Hannah went there because their first choice picked up an injury, he's now back from injury and regained his place. Hannah will need to bide his time and push to get the shirt back.

[Specky Ginger]

2 hours ago, TxRover said:

Did I say “playing”? Nope, I was suggesting like to see us having Hannah with us for all practices and trying him out at CB in practice and bounce work. Doing that while Montrose is “playing” him at LB would be counter productive, and possibly hamper his limited play there. Disappointingly, it seems that Petrie has decided he has better starting options at LB.

Hannah trains full time with the Rovers, as well as part time with Montrose. How can you possibly know what training drills he's involved in and where he plays in a bounce game?

[CountryBumpkin]

6 hours ago, raith1974 said:

Have been thinking about formation and do think that 3 at the back could work now we have 3 fit CBs and a rightback keen to get forward however I would go with a 4 1 4 1.

Babo Fordyce Hanlon Stevenson

Brown 

Gibson Easton Stanton Pollock. 

Hamilton 

This allows Brown to sit and protect the back 4. Easton and Stanton have to support Hamilton by running past him for flick ons. Pollock and Gibson will need to work but could swap sides to give fullbacks a headache.

I'd agree with that if we didn't expect the fullbacks to push forward as well. It leaves us very unbalanced with feasibly only Brown back with the centre backs. Flashbacks to the Murrayball escapades there.