By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
As supporters I think we've every right to ask this question and receive an answer from the club - who made the decision to give Keith Hill a five-year contract?
Almost all decisions emanate from a single person, whether accredited to 'the board' or 'the club' etc. So, who was it?
It is the single worst decision made in the last 20 years of Rochdale AFC. It has left us unable to afford to sack him while meaning we suffer a hemorrhage of fans and finances due to his shocking player acquisition, tactics and man-management.
Just to point out, to anyone going hoopla about all these 'battling', 'well-earned' nil-nil draws - they're as good as useless. Basically, if a team draws every game through a season, they will be relegated.
Sure, they're better than losing but a couple of slutchy 1-0 wins equates to six battling, well-earned bore-outs.
It's a concern that Hill is currently packing his subs' bench with our most attacking players (and arguably our best in Done, Davies, Slew, Andrew etc), as if he's actively seeking draws.
Rochdale, since time began, has always been a side that plays better off the front foot, going for it rather than consolidating etc. We'll probably revert to type eventually but will lose a lot of points in the meantime.
The defeat at Shrewsbury on Saturday means we have won just six of the last 25 away matches in the League. This means, on average, a Daley has to attend more than four away games to witness a win - hardly a statistic to inspire a trip out every other Saturday, especially with all the inherent costs involved.
It is an abysmal run of form that requires special attention. If it was replicated at home, we'd be relegated. Hill, the same as many managers, seems to favour the 'playing it safe' approach, hoping to nullify the opposition and then 'push on'.
Clearly, this hasn't worked. I'd suggest we become more adventurous and play to our strengths and attack, bearing in mind our current 'defence' couldn't defend a bag of chips from an arthritic seagull.
While obviously not condoning or seeking to legitimise any retribution one player may feel justified to carry out by the actions of another, Peter Clarke really does push it.
Yesterday he picked fights all over the pitch, man-handled players with impunity (was a single foul blown up against him?) and had one of our most senior referees in his pocket.
Many of us - including me - have speculated on the site as to why Calvin acted like he did (and it was cowardly and hugely disproportionate) but my views have altered slightly on seeing Clarke's subtle but nauseating 'gamesmanship'.
I know we've given him some stick over the years for having the audacity to play for Bury but he comes across as a nice chap here, saying positive things about his hometown club. .
I was talking to a work colleague today who is an Oldham fan and a lawn obsessive on a par with the great Hank Hill.
''Saw that your game was off - knew it would be,'' he said.
I asked how he had attained this impressive level of prophesy. It seems - and, believe me, he knows his stuff, OCD-stylee - that the pitch has been relaid too early in the year.
While temperatures are so low, grass simply doesn't grow unless it is heated artificially, which means the constant application of light and heat from banks of mechanised trolleys.
My Oldham sage proffered the notion that Dale's ground staff had 'probably been watering it all day' because a thorough soaking can at least encourage some down-growth.
In the end, he believes the club was left with the worst of both scenarios - the roots hadn't taken but the pitch was soaked through.
''It would have been like playing on a soggy carpet slipping all over t'shop on a polished wooden floor,'' was his last word on the subject.
And what of the chances of us playing on Saturday, I asked. He just smirked.
I didn't go to the match last night because what I had fully expected to happen, happened. In other words, we'd play with a defensive mindset in the hope of securing a 'well-earned' draw or, at best, sneaking a win. And then we'd lose.
Hill has stubbornly employed this tactic to no avail every time we've played away a 'big' club. If it's going to have a chance of succeeding you need width and pace and your 'get out' ball has to be played to a player with pace (think: Mendez-Laing) rather than an out-of-form, old-timer like Henderson.
I know we're missing three very good players in Lund, Davies and Bunney but so is everyone else at this stage of the season. Our strength is in going for it, attacking, so why do we play to our weakness in these sort of games?
By virtue of a local paper that sees its main duties as re-hashing what has already run on the club's website and tediously long match reports three days after the event, we're left with very little news or insight into our beloved club.
The club's official channels, while busy and enthusiastic, are bland and little better. Each week we arrive at the ground to discover so-and-so is injured or, as in the case with Josh Lillis on Saturday, out for a whole season.
I think most of us have got used to this by now but at other clubs websites and newspapers are buzzing with 'Return from Injury' or 'Out for a Month' stories. It means that unlike your average Daley they have at least an idea of what the starting X1 will be on a given Saturday.
Worse than the injury news black-out are the occasions when the club is duty bound to tell us what is going on but declines to do so. It's nearly three months now since Calvin Andrew's assault on Peter Clarke and none of us has a clue as to why this usually placid bloke acted so out of character.
I can understand that Keith Hill and the club might like this situation and could argue it works in the club's favour but as someone who travels the country often reading local papers, its a privilege afforded to no other manager. Besides, the benefits of keeping us all informed and, thus, interested, easily out-weighs the negatives.
Can't believe Danny is getting such unreasonable and unfair mither from the club. All explained here: The club needs to encourage and harness this level of enthusiasm, not discourage it. Keep at it, Danny.
Anyone heard of this lad or seen him play? There was a piece in the Football League Paper on Sunday saying Hill was considering starting the 15-year-old Academy midfielder in a Crackerjack Trophy match.
I know it's still a week or so away, but I wondered if anyone knew what the 'policy' is at Coventry next Saturday.
The home fans are staging a boycott as a protest against the club owners' lack of investment. Apparently fans are going to turn up at the stadium but not go onside.
Where does that leave us Daleys? Are we to lend our support up until kick off or might we be under pressure to also boycott the game? If that's the case I'd rather do it by staying at home than undertaking a 300-mile round trip to do so.
Let's hope Hill adopts this policy on Saturday. Playing the kids (admittedly out of necessity) and our more attacking players such as Andrew, Davies and NML has really paid off on this winning run.
I can understand he may bring in Lund for young Morley considering it should be a white-hot derby but re-shuffling the team to accommodate an out-of-form Henderson would be a mistake.
I almost ran over a bloke in Littleborough yesterday who was, I'm sure, the ex-Dale manager, Peter Madden. He looked older, obviously, but was lithe and manouvred his tall frame with aplomb amid the passing cars.
I know he once ran a pub in Smithy Bridge but presumed he'd moved out long ago. Got me thinking: how many other ex-managers and players have remained in the town after their football careers ended?
Disappointed to see the club waste cash appealing Henderson's suspension. I can only imagine they were bullied into it by Hill and possibly our hot-headed club captain, on the grounds of him needing unequivocal support in his self-inflicted hour of need. We'll be much better off without him. He's been mediocre at best all season and we can now trust in the chosen 11 disciplined professionals to see us through the next few games.
Wasn't happy seeing Joe Bunney giving it large to the Bradford fans on Saturday after scoring. He's clearly a very lovely, well-brunged up lad, so what's he playing at? And does he really want to bring extra pressure on himself? We all know he doesn't have to fit in playing for Dale between modelling assignments, so we can all guess at the possible retorts to his actions.
I hate it when opposing scorers go all cupped ears on us when they score, or worse (Jermaine Beckford last season at Preston etc), so it's not acceptable when our lot do it. It's not banter or fun but very, very annoying and shows a lack of class.
If match programme sales were low last night (and I'm sure they were) it might be because the seller(s) hared off (past lots of possible punters) about 15 minutes before the kick off. This was at the Sandy Lane end of the ground.
At half-time someone walked around the pitch waving them but at such a speed it was impossible to negotiate the stairs and folks carrying pie and peas to actually flag him down.
This might have been covered before...but why is the Rochdale branch of Sport Direct at Kingsway selling such an extensive range of Oldham Athletic gear - and no Rochdale AFC? Perplexing.
...it is perfectly acceptable at any level of football to grumble, moan, boo (within reason) when footballers routinely ignore three or four forward passes to turn and pass back to their goalkeeper 50 yards away. You are not being disloyal. You are not refusing to 'buy into a plan'. You are not 'the enemy within.'
Once you've had your little grumble, you do not thereafter have to grovel to anyone or fret that you might disillusion your star player or the manager and cause them to leave the club.
And you shouldn't fear a witch-hunt from fellow fans who are more managerial-compliant and neither should it stop you making your feelings know whenever you wish - again, within reason.
All you've done, brothers, is merely encourage your beloved team to play with a little bit more enterprise and made it known that you won't tolerate indefinitely backwards-football. Shut out the noise. Be proud.
Wondered if anyone knows what Jim McNulty was laughing at when he missed the 'chance' near the end of the game. I'm still struggling to raise a half-smile nearly three hours afterwards.
Also, on a theme, what did Hill mean by stating before kick-off that the match was a 'free hit'. It sounds as if he considered the game of significantly less importance than a League game - his team certainly played that way.
If I were Dunphy I'd have him in for a stern chat tomorrow morning. It won't happen, of course, because he's too in awe of his man, probably a bit scared, too. Who's running the club?
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.