TelTheRam Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 I like Ince BUT I think that's wrong... It was another game where we totally failed to smash them through choice... Just sat back after 20 mins and said "already got this won... no point in embarrassing them"I have to disagree with you here - Ince was possibly the best player on the pitch. He completely took over and stopped us playing. Without him they would have been embarrassed even more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 I have to disagree with you here - Ince was possibly the best player on the pitch. He completely took over and stopped us playing. Without him they would have been embarrassed even more.Er stopped us playing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CornwallRam Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Er stopped us playing?Rohan, not Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramsbottom Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 13/14 season. Away to QPR. He was best player on pitch by a country mile.But at the same time he was a passenger in the play off final. Thorne bossed him all game... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curtains Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 But at the same time he was a passenger in the play off final. Thorne bossed him all game...Should of played Eustace right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramsbottom Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 It's quite funny that people seem to think we should sign players in order of priority.The amount of daft ******** that have said: 'I'm not sure we need Weimann/Ince/Bent, it's the defence we need to sort out' and 'I'm worried the defence isn't being sorted out' is in the 100s.We've got two months left until the season kicks off - three months just shy of the transfer window being open.I swear to god I've met blocks of cheese with more common sense that some Derby fans.I'll be e-damned if i'm going to sit here and let you insult my fellow supporters in such a manner... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animal is a Ram Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 It's quite funny that people seem to think we should sign players in order of priority.The amount of daft ******** that have said: 'I'm not sure we need Weimann/Ince/Bent, it's the defence we need to sort out' and 'I'm worried the defence isn't being sorted out' is in the 100s.We've got two months left until the season kicks off - three months just shy of the transfer window being open. I swear to god I've met blocks of cheese with more common sense that some Derby fans.The one that winds me up most is signing Ince, because of the defence. What people fail to realise is we have one, and only one, first team 'wide player'. Even he has been linked with a move elsewhere.On top of this, we don't even know what Clement has in mind with regards to formation. Leave him to it ffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheron85 Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 I have to disagree with you here - Ince was possibly the best player on the pitch. He completely took over and stopped us playing. Without him they would have been embarrassed even more.But then I thought he got completely bypassed in the playoff game the year before... totally dominated...I think we just eased off and weren't that bothered as long as they weren't attacking... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsilks Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Of course we're going to have a defensive midfielder. Everybody plays with a defensive midfielder.Yes, you're right.Every single professional side plays with a specific defensive midfielders role.How silly of me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1977 Ram Raider Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 It's quite funny that people seem to think we should sign players in order of priority.The amount of daft ******** that have said: 'I'm not sure we need Weimann/Ince/Bent, it's the defence we need to sort out' and 'I'm worried the defence isn't being sorted out' is in the 100s.We've got two months left until the season kicks off - three months just shy of the transfer window being open. I swear to god I've met blocks of cheese with more common sense that some Derby fans.And some just as smelly. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RLACML Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Yes, you're right.Every single professional side plays with a specific defensive midfielders role.How silly of me.Find me a side similar to us that don't use a defensive midfielder. New manager doesn't mean we're going to switch to 4-4-2 hoofball. It'll be the same nucleus with a few tweaks, I'd bet anything on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsilks Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Find me a side similar to us that don't use a defensive midfielder. New manager doesn't mean we're going to switch to 4-4-2 hoofball. It'll be the same nucleus with a few tweaks, I'd bet anything on that. No, I won't 'find you a side to us that doesn't use a defensive midfielder'. What I will say is that we have a strong enough side to play to our strengths and rather than try to play players out of position to stubbornly stick to a rigid system, we should play to a system that suits our squad.Nobody suggested we would switch to a 4-4-2. Is that the only formation you know that doesn't require a DMC. You clearly need to watch a little more football.What is it with the fascination of the word 'hoofball' on this forum and why would you apply it to a 4-4-2. If you mean playing more long ball football then quite honestly, I'm all for it.One of the things I would like Clement to introduce is a bit more variety in our play and if that means occasionally getting it to our forward(s) a little quicker then I'm all for that. I can just imagine your team talks if you were in charge. "ok lads, we're going to play a 4-5-1 with a DMC because everyone else does....oh...and no hoofball cause I fink it don't work". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RLACML Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 No, I won't 'find you a side to us that doesn't use a defensive midfielder'. What I will say is that we have a strong enough side to play to our strengths and rather than try to play players out of position to stubbornly stick to a rigid system, we should play to a system that suits our squad.Nobody suggested we would switch to a 4-4-2. Is that the only formation you know that doesn't require a DMC. You clearly need to watch a little more football.What is it with the fascination of the word 'hoofball' on this forum and why would you apply it to a 4-4-2. If you mean playing more long ball football then quite honestly, I'm all for it.One of the things I would like Clement to introduce is a bit more variety in our play and if that means occasionally getting it to our forward(s) a little quicker then I'm all for that.I can just imagine your team talks if you were in charge. "ok lads, we're going to play a 4-5-1 with a DMC because everyone else does....oh...and no hoofball cause I fink it don't work".Terrible grammar, shame on me. I believe that our strength is in playing to our system (which really isn't rigid at all). Sure it's dependent on having a certain type of striker and a holding midfielder but most if not all systems require a few specialist roles. I'm sure you'll point to the 'mistake' of sticking to the system last year after losing Martin and Eustace/Thorne/Omar but the mistake came well before that for me. Adequate replacements for the system are necessary (granted we were extremely unlucky in terms of holding midfield and perhaps that would require a chance of system as you can't have unlimited back-ups). We seem to be doing the same thing again by bringing Bent back and I'm very concerned by it. The system is very rarely the problem, it's the implementation. A change of approach is only necessary in very specific circumstances. Play well and we'll win.4-4-2 was the easy example. I can list a few more if it would make you feel better about debating with me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uptherams Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 We don't need another in my view. We have Thorne and Hanson. While I also think that for us to be playing a DM in more than half of our matches this season would be a bad idea. I like the looks of a 4-2-3-1. Hanson played against the two play off final teams last season and he did well. I think he is decent backup to Thorne. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsilks Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Terrible grammar, shame on me. I believe that our strength is in playing to our system (which really isn't rigid at all). Sure it's dependent on having a certain type of striker and a holding midfielder but most if not all systems require a few specialist roles. I'm sure you'll point to the 'mistake' of sticking to the system last year after losing Martin and Eustace/Thorne/Omar but the mistake came well before that for me. Adequate replacements for the system are necessary (granted we were extremely unlucky in terms of holding midfield and perhaps that would require a chance of system as you can't have unlimited back-ups). We seem to be doing the same thing again by bringing Bent back and I'm very concerned by it. The system is very rarely the problem, it's the implementation. A change of approach is only necessary in very specific circumstances. Play well and we'll win.4-4-2 was the easy example. I can list a few more if it would make you feel better about debating with me?I don't for one moment think that our strength is in playing to our system. Yes, it worked well when we had a full strength team but we lost our way last season not only because we had injuries to key players, but also because we refused to change the system when everyone could see it clearly wasn't working.McClaren found a system that accommodated the players brilliantly but he rather rested on his laurels and thought that loan players could adopt to that system.If McClaren were staying then I wouldn't have welcomed Bent as, goals aside, he is ineffective. Rather a daft thing to say as he does what he is supposed to which is score goals but I'm sure you know what I mean. With a change of management means hopefully we have brought in a coach that might just find more than one system of playing and given the pomp and ceremony, hopefully one that can change our system during a game.I hope we continue with the system we had under McClaren as it utilizes for me our best player in Martin. My concern is that he'll try and pair Bent and Martin together and i can only see that resulting in one or both of them being very unhappy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Sheriff Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 We don't need another in my view. We have Thorne and Hanson. While I also think that for us to be playing a DM in more than half of our matches this season would be a bad idea. I like the looks of a 4-2-3-1. Hanson played against the two play off final teams last season and he did well. I think he is decent backup to Thorne. we had thorne eustace mascarell last season and all were injured so to only have thorne because Hanson by the way is a CB who was played out of position is risky. So we need another DM no question at all for me. unless we want to play square pegs in round holes or of course have a flat 4-4-2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uptherams Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 we had thorne eustace mascarell last season and all were injured so to only have thorne because Hanson by the way is a CB who was played out of position is risky. So we need another DM no question at all for me. unless we want to play square pegs in round holes or of course have a flat 4-4-2Yes well I believe we should not be playing a DM often. Hence the 4-2-3-1. I mean my post was very clear. Hanson began as a CB. I said he could become a DM. He got played as one in side and U21 side. Why is he good in that position, because he can pass as well as any. Lad has a great foot and eye which is why he is so great at set pieces. I don't think there is a need for us to play a DM in more than 15 or so league games. Therefor if we got an injury we could bring someone in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rammed79 Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Isn't that dude Koblenz a Defensive midfielder in our under 21's ? and he's German what more do you want Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dimmu Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 I seriously hope we stay clear of trouble Barton.Wouldn't mind us going for Parker if we want to have another former international.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Statham512 Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 This as with a few other threads on here proves a small minority of people spend way too long on football manager games Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.