duncanjwitham

Member
  • Content count

    1,125
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About duncanjwitham

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 23/09/80

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  1. Of course they want to come here - we'll pay them a huge wage and they can just swan around only turn up if the like the manager .
  2. The thing is, we didn't. He'd had a fantastic start to the season, but had gone something like 3 months without a goal at the point we signed him. The biggest problem is we signed him with seemingly no idea what we were going to use him for. His purple patch had come playing in exactly the same position as Tom Ince was playing for us (on the right of a front 3), and considering we'd smashed our transfer record to sign Ince 6 months earlier, there's no way he was going to get displaced. So Blackman got shuffled around, playing left wing (where he couldn't do his only trick, cut in on his strong foot and shoot) or playing up front (where he got isolated, the same as Martin, and anyone else that played up there under Clement).
  3. The interesting thing will be whether it's something that has been tolerated for a long time and is now being used as an excuse to get him out, or whether it's something that has genuinely just come to light. I'm honestly not sure which is worse. Option one seems like Morris trying to grab control even more, option two raises serious questions about all sorts of things including what oversight there is for anyone at board level.
  4. Maybe it's just me, but I'm really not that bothered about getting Wisdom back. He's probably worse than Christie or Baird on the ball, both passing and crossing. A big part of the reason Baird has worked so well with Ince is his passing - Wisdom just isn't capable of playing the type of through balls that Baird puts through. And while he's probably better defensively than Christie, and taller and quicker than Baird, he was always prone to having an absolutely car-crash whenever he was up against a tricky, pacy winger. If we're spending £4m on a player, I think it would be much better spent elsewhere.
  5. You're not the first to point that out, and you probably won't be the last.
  6. This is what's confusing me about the whole thing. My take on a 'number 10' is pretty much like yours - someone who plays off the front, is creative and hopefully scores goals too - e.g. Totti, Sheringham, Bergkamp, possibly the likes of Zidane, Iniesta etc if you're really pushing the definition. But then people are listing players like Vydra, Hughes and Butterfield, that are nothing really like that at all. Vydra is just a play-on-the-last-mans-shoulder type who runs onto flick-ons/through-balls, he's not creative and he doesn't get on the ball that much. I can just about see the argument for Hughes and Butterfield (in the same way you could include Iniesta), but it doesn't suit either of them - they're both better off deeper, getting on the ball a lot and pulling strings. Ince is the closest we have IMO, but again, he's not really creative, he mostly just gets on the ball and dribbles towards goal. And also, if you're pushing the definition to include everyone from Hughes and Bryson to Anya and Vydra, then that's every midfielder and striker at the club (bar Thorne and Bent). So it's no wonder people think we've got too many of them. That said, we definitely do have too many of the 'inside forward' types at the club (Russell, Ince, Anya, Blackman, Camara), plus Weimann and Vydra who are more run-in-behind type strikers. But if we're playing 433 or 4231, we probably need 4 or 5 of them, so it's not like we're massively overloaded.
  7. So apparently we've got 'too many number 10's' according to numerous posters on here, Ramage on Radio Derby and many others. However, peoples definition of what a 'number 10' actually is seems radically different to what I've always understood it to be. So two questions: 1 - What do you all think a 'number 10' actually *is*? 2 - Which players at Derby (including those out on loan) are 'number 10s'?
  8. More like a 4-4-0 with Bent and Vydra in there.
  9. It would be pretty unfair to the rest of the league to chuck some kids in against Huddersfield and Sheff Wed when they're both still competing for top 2 and playoffs. Wolves and Rotherham (and us) will have nothing to play for, so I suspect any radical experimenting will happen in those 2 games.
  10. That's pretty much my take on it. He was barely involved for large parts of the game, and I was honestly amazed at the amount of praise he was getting on Radio Derby afterwards. Yeah he was in the right place to take his goal, and he had a couple of good runs in the first half (that he did nothing with) and the odd decent touch or pass but he was anonymous for the rest of it. The stats back that up as well - of the guys that started, he had the lowest number of passes completed, the lowest number of touches, the second worst pass completion and 0 key passes. If he's playing in the middle of that 3, he's got to be a hell of a lot better on the ball.
  11. We don't know, and I'm not going to speculate what it was, assuming it even happened. But there are things that are unacceptable in any workplace - racial abuse, punching another employee, bullying and so on - and would result in an instant sacking at any job anywhere. If anyone at the club crosses one of those lines, then it's they should be sacked on the spot. And likewise, if the person responsible is the direct supervisor of the injured party, it's absolutely acceptable for that person, or someone representing them (like the club captain if it's a player) to go straight to a more senior person at the club and report it. The big problem with all of these things at the club (managerial sackings, rumours about players being upset, getting managers sacked etc), is that we never hear the full story, but we hear enough from both sides for there to be valid reasons for what happened. If a player's gone to Morris because a manager has told him off for eating too many donuts, then that's nonsense, but if it's because of one of the reasons above, then it's absolutely fair.
  12. Assuming there are games against Forest, of course
  13. I'm not going to give a league position, because I want to see clear signs of a club philosophy/style-of-play/whatever being implemented across the whole club. I want it to look like we have some sensible idea of how we're going to play, I want us to be playing players that can do the jobs required of them in that system, and I want us to be signing players that suit our style. I would much rather us finish 10th and show clear signs of that, than scrape 6th with a mish-mash of a squad and a load of players playing out of position.
  14. Speaking of Paul clement, the Swansea forums make very interesting adding at the moment. Apparently they've been dreadful for the last couple of games, very negative, lots of slow sideways passing and no real goal threat. And with the manager seemingly having no clue how to fix it. All sounds very, very familiar.
  15. Which isn't surprising, since we're basically using the players in exactly the same way Pearson was. 2 non-creative players in midfield and 4 out-and-out forwards up front. It will never, ever work with this group of players.