Ince, Bent, Martin

[Day]

18 minutes ago, ramsbottom said:

That's because in a 4-3-3 with Martin he'd have been down the touchline instead of in the centre.  Same with the 2nd goal, he starts in a central position.  As for the 3rd, he's wide but Bent was wider creating the space for him to turn and run into.  I still think Martin will be back in for Saturday as his hold-up play will be needed in away games, but it's nice to know we could potentially rotate a bit more at home against (no offence to Brizzle) lesser teams where we know we can control the game.

He was fine last season out wide in a 4-3-3 making runs into the centre. Our most creative player.

Ince hasn't got that space anymore, Bent drags defenders further up the pitch, Martin comes deep dragging players with him.

[DRBee]

10 hours ago, Daveo said:

Bent is a poacher, plays higher up the pitch, this allows Ince to come in more central and cause problems.

Had Martin played tonight he would have dropped deeper trying to hold the ball up, this is how Martin likes to play and would have Forced Ince out wide. 

I'm not saying drop Martin. I just don't think we will see the best out of them together.

You must be really thick if you think the Martin / Bent switch explains what happened to Ince last night - listen to what Ince himself says.

It's well known that out on the right is nit what Ince prefers and he says so.

Ince has been inconsistent at all his clubs except for a spell at Blackpool.

Though I like Bent and think he did well last season, but  last night Bent did not contribute that much over the whole game.Our recent problems do not lie with Martin, rather with formation and midfield combination.

[G STAR RAM]

8 hours ago, reveldevil said:

Bent did nothing tonight, other than making the cross run to pull a defender away for Ince's 2nd, or supplying the pass for his 3rd.

If you watch the goals back, Ince's second went straight through both defenders and the keeper so not sure why everyone is saying it created Ince loads of space.

The pass for the 3rd was scuffed and should have been intercepted by the defender.

At least he was in a good position for both goals though.

[Day]

6 minutes ago, DRBee said:

You must be really thick if you think the Martin / Bent switch explains what happened to Ince last night - listen to what Ince himself says.

It's well known that out on the right is nit what Ince prefers and he says so.

Ince has been inconsistent at all his clubs except for a spell at Blackpool.

Though I like Bent and think he did well last season, but  last night Bent did not contribute that much over the whole game.Our recent problems do not lie with Martin, rather with formation and midfield combination.

For a start, no need for the really thick comment, if you don't agree that's fine, it's all opinions.

Second I do think this explains what happened. Not just tonight but MK Dons game and last season. You will see I have said several times I prefer Ince out wide making runs central, I would keep him central for Ipswich after last night tho.

How many games have we seen Ince at his best with Martin in the team? he's not as effective as Martin drops deeper and occupies the space Ince likes to get into where as Bent plays further up the pitch. Bent will take defenders with him so whilst you might think he doesn't contribute he's creating that space for Ince.

I would keep Bent in for Ipswich.

[AndyinLiverpool]

4 minutes ago, DRBee said:

You must be really thick if you think the Martin / Bent switch explains what happened to Ince last night - listen to what Ince himself says.

It's well known that out on the right is nit what Ince prefers and he says so.

Ince has been inconsistent at all his clubs except for a spell at Blackpool.

Though I like Bent and think he did well last season, but  last night Bent did not contribute that much over the whole game.Our recent problems do not lie with Martin, rather with formation and midfield combination.

As American persons would say, way to go.

Perhaps try being a bit more respectful to our glorious leader.

[eddie]

Ince is an unpredictable, mercurial talent. There is only one other player at the club who could have scored that first goal, and he's been injured all season.

For people to try to belittle his performance last night on the grounds that 'a decent keeper would have saved all three' is snarky to the point of being snide - the sort of comment I might make when discussing our half-match fans.

[ramsbottom]

16 minutes ago, Daveo said:

He was fine last season out wide in a 4-3-3 making runs into the centre. Our most creative player.

Ince hasn't got that space anymore, Bent drags defenders further up the pitch, Martin comes deep dragging players with him.

It's times like this it'd be good to be in the Prem so we could compare Martin & Ince's heat maps.  That would tell us all we need to know...

[Day]

3 minutes ago, ramsbottom said:

It's times like this it'd be good to be in the Prem so we could compare Martin & Ince's heat maps.  That would tell us all we need to know...

This is v Brighton

Martin

Ince

Ince last night v Bristol City

[Curtains]

 

[Day]

v Sheffield Wednesday you will see Ince again stays out wide. I'll try and find some when Ince and Bent played in a 4-3-3

 

[Leicester Ram]

I've droned on a lot that people need to get out of the 'Martin or nothing' mindset we all got scared into under McClaren. McClaren had one system he could use, Clement clearly doesn't.

Bent also gets villianised a lot in the Martin terror, when really he's just a striker who plays differently to Martin, which in a rigid 'WE CAN ONLY PLAY 4-3-3 OR WE WILL CRASH AND BURN' mentality of the past two years doesn't work. But now we're not only experimenting with one but two or three other formations, we're seeing that we can play extremely well with Bent in the side. Tonight we were good going forward and solid at the back, mind you we were playing a pretty dogsh*t team.

The main criticism of having Bent in the team is that he takes away our possession game and makes us less solid at the back. This is basically based on our run last season, which gets blamed on the lack of Martin by quite a few. However, as Mel's said, it wasn't that we couldn't score goals last season, it's that we conceded a lot. We had a shockingly rotated back 4 who were either completely out of form and confidence or just not good enough, who had no protection from a holding DM because Thorne, Eustace and even Mascarell were injured. How that equates to being Bent's fault is beyond me.

I get what Daveo was trying to say with Bent complimenting Ince more than Martin. Martin compliments players like Bryson, Russell and who want him to drop and create space behind him, while Ince needs space just outside the box created for him by distracting runs.

I'd like to see a 4-2-3-1 used a bit more often at home, it was attacking and against weaker sides we maybe shouldn't be trying to grind a 1-0. Rotation was good too, Bent deserves more playing time.

[Curtains]

 

[Day]

Here we go, Derby 4-0 Blackpool, 4-3-3 (Ince man of the match) you will see Bent is most active on the edge of the box (2nd pic). Ince has 3 strong heat points, one of which central where he has come in from out wide. See the above screenshots and you will see Martin occupies that area.

 

 

[RiddingsRam]

When Martin plays we seem to be too one dimensional,  because he's such a focal point and rarely leaves the central areas off the pitch that everything has to go through him ! In some games this is perfect but like last night proved it's not the only way we can play . 

[Day]

9 minutes ago, Leicester Ram said:

I've droned on a lot that people need to get out of the 'Martin or nothing' mindset we all got scared into under McClaren. McClaren had one system he could use, Clement clearly doesn't.

Bent also gets villianised a lot in the Martin terror, when really he's just a striker who plays differently to Martin, which in a rigid 'WE CAN ONLY PLAY 4-3-3 OR WE WILL CRASH AND BURN' mentality of the past two years doesn't work. But now we're not only experimenting with one but two or three other formations, we're seeing that we can play extremely well with Bent in the side. Tonight we were good going forward and solid at the back, mind you we were playing a pretty dogsh*t team.

The main criticism of having Bent in the team is that he takes away our possession game and makes us less solid at the back. This is basically based on our run last season, which gets blamed on the lack of Martin by quite a few. However, as Mel's said, it wasn't that we couldn't score goals last season, it's that we conceded a lot. We had a shockingly rotated back 4 who were either completely out of form and confidence or just not good enough, who had no protection from a holding DM because Thorne, Eustace and even Mascarell were injured. How that equates to being Bent's fault is beyond me.

I get what Daveo was trying to say with Bent complimenting Ince more than Martin. Martin compliments players like Bryson, Russell and who want him to drop and create space behind him, while Ince needs space just outside the box created for him by distracting runs.

I'd like to see a 4-2-3-1 used a bit more often at home, it was attacking and against weaker sides we maybe shouldn't be trying to grind a 1-0. Rotation was good too, Bent deserves more playing time.

Exactly this. 

Every single word.

[ramsbottom]

30 minutes ago, Daveo said:

Here we go, Derby 4-0 Blackpool, 4-3-3 (Ince man of the match) you will see Bent is most active on the edge of the box (2nd pic). Ince has 3 strong heat points, one of which central where he has come in from out wide. See the above screenshots and you will see Martin occupies that area.

 

 

Nice one Daveo Neville.  Pretty much proves the point, they occupy each others space...  Now it's PC's job to see if there's a way we can get the best out of both at the same time.  Nice problem to have I guess...

[YorkshireRam]

2 hours ago, ramsbottom said:

That's because in a 4-3-3 with Martin he'd have been down the touchline instead of in the centre.  Same with the 2nd goal, he starts in a central position.  As for the 3rd, he's wide but Bent was wider creating the space for him to turn and run into.  I still think Martin will be back in for Saturday as his hold-up play will be needed in away games, but it's nice to know we could potentially rotate a bit more at home against (no offence to Brizzle) lesser teams where we know we can control the game.

With 433 though, he still has had the opportunity to cut inside, he just never seems to attempt to take men on, last night we saw how lethal he is when he does try it however.

I agree Martin would be a better fit for the battle we're going to get at Portman Road. Also the 433 is more robust, the midfield is a bit lacking in 4231...

[Shang]

Against tougher teams where the attacking threat is high we should play Martin for his hold up play and his knack for getting us set plays in their half.

Against "lesser" teams where they needs unlocking when they park behind the ball we need Bent and Ince to stretch defences. I love Martin as a player, but we are too one-dimensional, everything is too narrow with him on the pitch and he comes short for the ball too often. Bent and Ince stretches back lines allowing for more gaps and they keep their defense pinned back due to their pace.

However, not one system is better than the other. It's amazing we have these two options, where Clement can switch things up and we can be equally as effective. Different tools for different situations.

[Sexydadbod]

Have to agree with Daveo on this. Ince looks better with Bent in the team because he keeps opponent's defender occupied and Ince and exploit this space. When Martin is in the team, he likes to drop off which makes it pretty cramped in the midfield meaning that there is no space whereas defenders know that Bent likes to play on the shoulder and run in behind so naturally they play deeper. Fun fact for you, Ince has scored hattricks in his last 2 games that he has started with Bent(yes I know one was only a friendly ).

[eddie]

Why so many posts saying that Brizzle were rubbish and that no praise is warranted towards Derby because they are a team we should be turning over easily?

Bristol City beat Middlesborough and drew with Hull, therefore they are no mugs. Some of you apply double standards in order to justify your own blinkered opinions. For goodness sake, stop the bloody hand-wringing for once.