Martin Woods

[CusworthRovers]

Just been catching up from the game. To be honest peeps I'm really surprised at the negativity towards M Woods. I thought he was the only player on the pitch who looked like a footballer. I thought he was one of only a few players in a Rovers shirt who looked fit and well.

To suggest he's crap because he stands or finds space is absurd. Isn't that the hallmark of a a decent player.

He was the only one wanting the ball
He was the only one putting his foot on it and looking for his options rather than hoof it anywhere in a panic
He was the only one spraying balls about (pardon the pun)


............unfortunately, the team decided to abandon Woods in the 2nd half and resort to bypassing the midfield altogether.

However some of you may be right and he is better off on the bench or out the club. What's the point in having midfielders who can pass and hold the ball if we're not going to use them. Let's just have a team of stoppers in midfield.

If we're going down the road of an 'up and at em' team then we need 11 super fit and strong players on the pitch.............and with our budget that isn't going to happen.

Fair play to Deano, he is utilising Woods thus far and he has brought in Blake who is a footballer.

[PaulRover08]

Just been catching up from the game. To be honest peeps I'm really surprised at the negativity towards M Woods. I thought he was the only player on the pitch who looked like a footballer. I thought he was one of only a few players in a Rovers shirt who looked fit and well.

To suggest he's crap because he stands or finds space is absurd. Isn't that the hallmark of a a decent player.

He was the only one wanting the ball
He was the only one putting his foot on it and looking for his options rather than hoof it anywhere in a panic
He was the only one spraying balls about (pardon the pun)


............unfortunately, the team decided to abandon Woods in the 2nd half and resort to bypassing the midfield altogether.

However some of you may be right and he is better off on the bench or out the club. What's the point in having midfielders who can pass and hold the ball if we're not going to use them. Let's just have a team of stoppers in midfield.

If we're going down the road of an 'up and at em' team then we need 11 super fit and strong players on the pitch.............and with our budget that isn't going to happen.

Fair play to Deano, he is utilising Woods thus far and he has brought in Blake who is a footballer.

Virtually every pass Woods played was out wide and behind a forward running player rather than into their path, thus slowing attacks down. Probably why they started to not use him. Nowhere near good enough at the moment. I'd play Harper with Syers.

[RobTheRover]

I have to agree with Cussy, I thought Woods was good overall and outstanding in the 1st half.

To say it wasnt working and we by-passed Woods in the second half seems a strange justification seeing as we absolutely controlled the game in the 1st half and let them back into it in the 2nd.  We only went in at 0-0 due to wasteful finishing and their keeper getting lucky on 2 occasions and the ball hitting him at point blank range.   If (particularly) that close range Paynter effort from Cotterill's low cross had gone in then it would have been a completely different game. 
 

[oliver]

Must agree with paulrover08 Woods prances about on his toes like Billy elliot and as you say his passes are for the most part sideways and behind the runners ,did`nt see him make one tackle in the game.

[hoolahoop]

Seems to me that it will take time for these players to get used to each other and getting on the backs of certain players this early on is counter-productive at this early stage.
We need to remember that most of these players have probably had less than half a dozen training sessions together so far.
I agree with Cussie, Woods on his game is class and to write him off at such an early stage of the season is just plain daft. Remind me now, just how many competitive games has Woods played in the last few seasons few if any .

If however the tactical ploy is to bypass the midfield as some suggest then of course we quite plainly are not set up for that sort of game and that does need looking at pronto. Either change the tactics or bring in personnel to carry this particular style out that decision lies with the .....manager.

[Donnywolf]

I have to agree with Cussy, I thought Woods was good overall and outstanding in the 1st half.

To say it wasnt working and we by-passed Woods in the second half seems a strange justification seeing as we absolutely controlled the game in the 1st half and let them back into it in the 2nd.  We only went in at 0-0 due to wasteful finishing and their keeper getting lucky on 2 occasions and the ball hitting him at point blank range.   If (particularly) that close range Paynter effort from Cotterill's low cross had gone in then it would have been a completely different game. 
 

Agreed .... how many times do strikers hit balls too well and see it saved by the Keeper and thats what BP seemed to do. A scuffed one off a stud would have scored.

I think he also had 2 saved which DID take deflections against Bury as well ... and yet the Crawley winner sneaks in via 2 changes of direction - which is "footy" I suppose

[RobTheRover]

Exactly Wolfie.  So, we got beat 1 nil in a game we controlled for the most part.  Thats football.  It doesnt require micro-dissecting at this stage.

[Leebtyler]

i dont get these people mocking Paynter, hes been brilliant at times, hes been denied 3 goals now by point blank saves that were down to luck not skill... he's going to be an asset for us, he really is.

i agree with the above poster, we stopped passing to feet and started long balling it again, and it didnt work... we need to get back to passing, thats what we do well, otherwise why did we pick this midfield

[Red wizard]

Imo we got drawn in to a  very scrapy game. M Woods is a class player and is working hard on the pitch. Paynter will score goals. Just needs to get off tge mark.

[Donnywolf]

He looks a reasonable Striker to me ... has had the chances mentioned 3 of which produced brilliant saves from the Crawley keeper x1 and the Bury Keeper x 2 plus long range grass cutters which both seemed to go close

2 mates who support Leeds say he cant hit a Barn door though ... but one added he will be good at that level *

* I suspect he only mentioned that though to emphasise that Leeds were now higher in the pyramid than Rovers

[RoversAlias]

My reaction to Woods in three league matches so far has ranged from a bit annoyed to downright infuriating, he has not been playing well. He was the only player who was not up to standard in the Walsall game, proving he couldn't pass, tackle, jump, head a ball or even break into a sprint. Prancing around is a good term for what he did, and in that game and the two home matches he seemed to keep doing his best to make sure he was in a useless position both on and off the ball for a good three quarters of the match.

We know Woods has talent but he sorely needs to work out how to use it again, or else I would be trying to send him on his way. Harper would be in to the midfield on Tuesday were it up to me.

[Capmeister]

Just been catching up from the game. To be honest peeps I'm really surprised at the negativity towards M Woods. I thought he was the only player on the pitch who looked like a footballer. I thought he was one of only a few players in a Rovers shirt who looked fit and well.

To suggest he's crap because he stands or finds space is absurd. Isn't that the hallmark of a a decent player.

He was the only one wanting the ball
He was the only one putting his foot on it and looking for his options rather than hoof it anywhere in a panic
He was the only one spraying balls about (pardon the pun)


............unfortunately, the team decided to abandon Woods in the 2nd half and resort to bypassing the midfield altogether.

However some of you may be right and he is better off on the bench or out the club. What's the point in having midfielders who can pass and hold the ball if we're not going to use them. Let's just have a team of stoppers in midfield.

If we're going down the road of an 'up and at em' team then we need 11 super fit and strong players on the pitch.............and with our budget that isn't going to happen.

Fair play to Deano, he is utilising Woods thus far and he has brought in Blake who is a footballer.

What game are you reprising here? The midfield was rarely used to build attacks. It was long ball after long ball, either to Brown, Bennett or Cotterill. Chiefly, Brown and the impact was lessened when Brown was subbed. If Woods going and collecting the ball off Woods the goalie is your idea of 'wanting it', when he got it he did little with it. This was partly due to a lack of movement, co-ordination in midfield but for the main part, Woods actually believing he's better than he is. He's one of the few championship players I'd realistically not expect us to offload to anyone. Certainly not to a championship club. I'd agree we do need a playmaker but he aint it. Not sure Harper's it looks more like a ball winner but we've got one of those in Syers.

[Colin C No.3]

Let's not forget that this was only the player's 4th competitive match together.

I've no doubt that our ball possession will improve once the players 'grow' to know where their team mates are likely to take up position/ make runs etc., & so we'll see less balls played into 'hopeful areas' where the opposition can snap them up & more productive passing interchanges which will make us look more like a team.

It'll come. Be patient, it's still early days & we have 6 points from a possible 9.

[mushRTID]

Woods was awful on Saturday but he wasn't the only one.

[Colin C No.3]

Woods was awful on Saturday but he wasn't the only one.

I refer the gentleman to my earlier post.

[mushRTID]

Yes I agree with you. I just don't think he was any better/worse than half the others so not sure why he is been singled out.

[Sheepskin Stu]

Acquiring one more member of the "Unholy Trinity" would settle Woods down.

[DonnyNoel]

For me Woods has always been a player who ranks as either a 6/10 or 8/10 and I think thats where some of the frustration towards him comes in. He's definitely got the technical ability but could never influence a game as consistently as Stock did. I think he's been unlucky with injuries but when he's had good runs of fitness he's grown into the role so I wouldn't write him off just yet.

[bobjimwilly]

I thought woods had a brilliant 1st half on sat and an avg 2nd half. I sometimes wish the whole team can put the sort of effort into a game before the 90mins, instead of waiting until after 90 mins 

speaking of extra time, I am always baffled where they make their time up? We only got 4 mins extra time on sat - there were 3 subs, which I've previously been told on here class as a minute each, and their player with the head injury was down for at least 4 minutes? 

[silent majority]

Subs are 30 seconds of added on time.

[roverstillidie91]

We need to try and keep the ball on the floor more instead of the defence hoofing it in air

Almost every time losing it in the process and giving it back to opposition

[CusworthRovers]

The good thing about this Deano era is that it is up in the air on what we're meant to look like (not meant literally), and it is difficult to see what the tactics are for 90mins, who's meant to do what and how. This in itself will cause a great deal of debate on how we are reading things, where we are going and what we are trying to do. It's very difficult to gauge what we are doing and to 2nd guess Deano's tactics. Once we (Deano/DRFC) get settled I think the opinions will start to concur more. However at this time we are having very healthy and diverse difference of opinion..............hence the differing opinions of M Woods. I'd go with my own theory still and agree, like many of us did around us, that Woods was very very good in the first half and overall was the best footballer on the park.

Then again, I also feel Jamie and Rob as our CH's are doing a decent job at this level simply as stoppers only.

I think G Woods has started the season well overall

I'm not convinced on Quinn (yet)

I think Billy is a quality player for us and will be a good signing

but I guess many will totally disagree with my thoughts on both Woods, Quinn, Billy and our CH's

[ravenrover]

At one point in the 2nd half I clearly heard Mr Saunders shouting "Get on the ball Woodsy, get on the ball", He obviously thinks Woods is a key man in midfield, unlike myself and one or two others by the sound of it. Our Prancing Pony is not the right man in midfield in this league, and should be on the bench with Harper on in his place sat just in front of the back 4. Cotts should also be on the bench with Copps on in his position but the whole midfield as played on Tuesday and Saturday just isn't strong enough at this level. JMHO

[bedale rover]

At one point in the 2nd half I clearly heard Mr Saunders shouting "Get on the ball Woodsy, get on the ball", He obviously thinks Woods is a key man in midfield, unlike myself and one or two others by the sound of it. Our Prancing Pony is not the right man in midfield in this league, and should be on the bench with Harper on in his place sat just in front of the back 4. Cotts should also be on the bench with Copps on in his position but the whole midfield as played on Tuesday and Saturday just isn't strong enough at this level. JMHO

if harper is in front of the back four which is on the six yard line we will be so compressed in our area that the only way out is to lump it as far as possible!

i agree that we are still finding a way of utilising ALL our players in a coherent way and also finding out which players are best in which positions  but that will only happen when we have competion for places

which brings us back to signing some new players!

[Viking Don]

I too can't see why Woods has been singled out for his performance on Saturday. I thought he did exactly what I assume Dean has told him to do and try and fill Stocky's shoes, which for the most part he did pretty well. He doesn't just look for the simple pass but also tries to get it to the wide men to build attacks. I don't think it's his best position as I'd like to see him play a similar role as he did for Rotherham, but I guess he's the best option we've got for the Stock role at the moment.

Also praise where praise is due, the other Woods didn't put a foot wrong I don't think. I know he didn't have much to do but what he did he did very well, including one very assertive punch and an actual catch! I'm not taking the piss, I applauded him for both and hope he has taken some confidence from his performance. The goal was soft(ish) but nowt he could do about it.

Onto the new players...

I'm also yet to be convinced by Quinn. Looks like he might be an OK defender but not too great at going forward and crossing. Not too comfortable on the ball.

Most impressed with McCombe. Not the fastest but still not seen him outrun yet and makes the right decisions almost always. Jones looks like the latest incumbant of the fifty pence piece head but I like his style anyway, and I really don't care too much where it goes so long as it goes away from goal.

Syers I like also and I think he'll be fine at this level and maybe above. Cotterill looks OK too, I'm sure we'll see a few goals from him.

Paynter looks a great signing for this level, works hard and knows where to be, I'm sure he'll be banging them in very soon.

Overall, very pleased with the new players, be good to see how they've gelled in a months time.

[CusworthRovers]

Agreed. At the time of posting this, we are still in a very good position and thus far one has to be pleased.

Again, and for ravenrover, no probs if you want to label Woods a prancing pony (opinions opinions and all that), but you then call for Copps to be in the team and that we need a stronger team in midfield. Now I am Copps' personal fanclub rolled into one, but:

1. Strength is not the first word assocaited with Copps
2. If you want to label prancing ponies (as you call them, although I call them Footballers), then Copps, would be the Frankel of DRFC.