Mel Q&A with Marketing Derby

[Van der MoodHoover]

46 minutes ago, Mafiabob said:

The main reason was one player we missed sorely during that time. John Eustace.

Yet we all got ourselves whipped up in a frenzy over Newcastle.....

To blame Ince and Bent is pure folly. 

Very importantplayer for us was John eustace.

Anyone else recall the scathing reaction Nigel clough got when he was pursuing him as our marque signing for most of one transfer window? 

He could spot a player for a system for sure. If only we could hire the ******* love -child of cloughie and maclaren we'd have the makings of a top top manager. 

OK. ...perhaps a bit of 'arry as well....

[Ambitious]

52 minutes ago, Mostyn6 said:

 

we've had this out numerous times, so I'll leave my thoughts here now you've both had yours, Darren Bent (and Tom Ince for that matter) were not responsible for Lee Grant throwing the ball into his own net, Will Hughes giving Albentosa a dodgy pass, and Richard Keogh going to ground at the wrong time. We threw our league place away for a combination of reasons. Darren Bent was probably about 2%.

I do like the argument though, because it bewilders me some people see it as that black and white. 

I guess you could go the other way and see what happens when you take Bent's and Ince's goals out from that latter part of the season.

We go from winning 2-0 v Blackburn to drawing 0-0. Two points dropped.
We go from drawing 2-2 v Bournemouth to losing 2-0. One point dropped.
We go from drawing 3-3 v Rotherham to losing 3-0. One point dropped.
We go from drawing 2-2 v Birmingham to losing 2-1. One point dropped. 
We go from drawing 2-2 v Watford to losing 2-0. One point dropped.
We go from drawing 1-1 v Brentford to losing 1-0. One point dropped.
We go from drawing 4-4 v Huddersfield to losing 4-2. One point dropped.
We go from drawing 3-3 v Millwall to losing 3-2. One point dropped.

I'd make that a total of nine points dropped, although, due to the gulf between the top eight and everyone else - we would have finished in the same position. 

I don't see how you can blame Bent and Ince for conceding goals, though. Ince made more ball recoveries during his time at Derby that season than any other winger we had, and most of the wingers in the division. Bent, well, if you're depending on him to stop conceding goals then you need a head check. 

You can blame almost every single other player in the side that season, Keogh, Grant, Christie.... However, Ince and Bent are not the issue. It's like blaming Ronaldo for Real Madrid not winning La Liga last season. 

[Bris Vegas]

1 hour ago, Ambitious said:

I do like the argument though, because it bewilders me some people see it as that black and white. 

I guess you could go the other way and see what happens when you take Bent's and Ince's goals out from that latter part of the season.

We go from winning 2-0 v Blackburn to drawing 0-0. Two points dropped.
We go from drawing 2-2 v Bournemouth to losing 2-0. One point dropped.
We go from drawing 3-3 v Rotherham to losing 3-0. One point dropped.
We go from drawing 2-2 v Birmingham to losing 2-1. One point dropped. 
We go from drawing 2-2 v Watford to losing 2-0. One point dropped.
We go from drawing 1-1 v Brentford to losing 1-0. One point dropped.
We go from drawing 4-4 v Huddersfield to losing 4-2. One point dropped.
We go from drawing 3-3 v Millwall to losing 3-2. One point dropped.

I'd make that a total of nine points dropped, although, due to the gulf between the top eight and everyone else - we would have finished in the same position. 

I don't see how you can blame Bent and Ince for conceding goals, though. Ince made more ball recoveries during his time at Derby that season than any other winger we had, and most of the wingers in the division. Bent, well, if you're depending on him to stop conceding goals then you need a head check. 

You can blame almost every single other player in the side that season, Keogh, Grant, Christie.... However, Ince and Bent are not the issue. It's like blaming Ronaldo for Real Madrid not winning La Liga last season. 

I disagree, but I don't see the striker as purely a goal scorer, but also a teamplayer.

It's an interesting debate, but I'm convinced that Bent's inclusion in the squad changed our pattern of play which in turn had a major negative effect on certain players in the first-team.

It's not a case of saying - Bent scored two goals against Blackburn, without him we would have only picked up one point, How do you know that with say Kenweyne Jones upfront, we wouldn't have won 4-0?

Harry Kane scored more goals than Jamie Vardy last season. Do you believe that Leicester City would have won the league with Kane upfront instead of Vardy? I'd say most certainly not, as Vardy's style of play was perfect for the way in which Leicester wanted to play while Kane - a focal centre-forward - is a completely different player.

You add that I for instance see it as black and white, yet you suggest with Bent's goals we would be nine points worse off? 

I'll use the Kuqi example again. Did we play better as a team with Kuqi upfront or Luke Moore? Because the latter had a better goals-per-game ratio than the former while in Derby colours.

You have to have the right type of player to fit the profile of the team. Bent, regardless of his scoring abilities, simply didn't fit and his presence made us suffer and vulnerable to quick counterattacks.

I lost count of the amount of times a defender or midfielder looked up, saw nobody dropping deep in the number 10 position between the lines and thus resorting to either lumping it upfield in the hope of playing Bent in behind or playing a risky ball and losing it.

We went from a team who could control matches with Martin upfront to a team who had absoloutely no control of matches and resorted to trying to outscore the opposition, hence the ridiculous high-scoring games. We lost all sense of discipline.

[brady1993]

18 minutes ago, Bris Vegas said:

I disagree, but I don't see the striker as purely a goal scorer, but also a teamplayer.

It's an interesting debate, but I'm convinced that Bent's inclusion in the squad changed our pattern of play which in turn had a major negative effect on certain players in the first-team.

It's not a case of saying - Bent scored two goals against Blackburn, without him we would have only picked up one point, How do you know that with say Kenweyne Jones upfront, we wouldn't have won 4-0?

Harry Kane scored more goals than Jamie Vardy last season. Do you believe that Leicester City would have won the league with Kane upfront instead of Vardy? I'd say most certainly not, as Vardy's style of play was perfect for the way in which Leicester wanted to play while Kane - a focal centre-forward - is a completely different player.

You add that I for instance see it as black and white, yet you suggest with Bent's goals we would be nine points worse off? 

I'll use the Kuqi example again. Did we play better as a team with Kuqi upfront or Luke Moore? Because the latter had a better goals-per-game ratio than the former while in Derby colours.

You have to have the right type of player to fit the profile of the team. Bent, regardless of his scoring abilities, simply didn't fit and his presence made us suffer and vulnerable to quick counterattacks.

I lost count of the amount of times a defender or midfielder looked up, saw nobody dropping deep in the number 10 position between the lines and thus resorting to either lumping it upfield in the hope of playing Bent in behind or playing a risky ball and losing it.

We went from a team who could control matches with Martin upfront to a team who had absoloutely no control of matches and resorted to trying to outscore the opposition, hence the ridiculous high-scoring games. We lost all sense of discipline.

Whilst I largley agree with you and think it was a mistake to sign Bent permanently. I don't think he was the major issue. Losing both Eustace and Mascarell was far more costly, had they remained fit I think we probably we have still been promoted even without having the same degree of control with Bent uptop.

[jagerbob]

Agreed with you there, not having Eustace and to some degree Mascerell in those closing months basically destroyed the game of Hughes and Bryson as they had to do jobs they werent any good at.

[Dimmu]

10 hours ago, Zag zig said:

 

Morris was right in his distinction between supporter and fan. Quite rightly nobody has to blindly follow and everyone who pays money should be entitled to an opinion, after all we are largely an entertainments business these day, as is the whole of professional football but more supporters are needed between 90 minutes of football to try and raise the players to greater heights, any form of abuse is not likely to produce a positive result.

Hmm John McGovern at Forest does similar right? Think it's an hard one when you have an influential owner, for him not to be dominant in key appointments. Not saying you're wrong, just hard to find someone you trust to make those decisions without getting involved.

Of course he should be involved in some scale. As they would work together, he would have to be. But at least little bit of psychometric testing wouldn't do harm, just to make sure that personal values and behavior doesn't cause clashes straight away. (Which has looked like being the reason with sacking both Pearson and Clement). I'm sure here skulks HR pro, who could clear this process better than I do.

[toddy]

Aren't they are all team players?

Yes, the team has to interact with each other to be sucessful, but.........

Isn't the most important part of a defenders job to defend?

Isn't the most important part of a strikers job to score goals?

[Stive Pesley]

At least now we all know why Mel was so keen that we "give him a break"

[DEL]

On 11 October 2016 at 09:08, David said:

 

You're welcome in South Stand Lower next to away fans Mel. You're only trying what the best for your beloved club. 

[Duracell]

On 11 October 2016 at 22:40, Ambitious said:

I do like the argument though, because it bewilders me some people see it as that black and white. 

I guess you could go the other way and see what happens when you take Bent's and Ince's goals out from that latter part of the season.

We go from winning 2-0 v Blackburn to drawing 0-0. Two points dropped.
We go from drawing 2-2 v Bournemouth to losing 2-0. One point dropped.
We go from drawing 3-3 v Rotherham to losing 3-0. One point dropped.
We go from drawing 2-2 v Birmingham to losing 2-1. One point dropped. 
We go from drawing 2-2 v Watford to losing 2-0. One point dropped.
We go from drawing 1-1 v Brentford to losing 1-0. One point dropped.
We go from drawing 4-4 v Huddersfield to losing 4-2. One point dropped.
We go from drawing 3-3 v Millwall to losing 3-2. One point dropped.

I'd make that a total of nine points dropped, although, due to the gulf between the top eight and everyone else - we would have finished in the same position. 

I don't see how you can blame Bent and Ince for conceding goals, though. Ince made more ball recoveries during his time at Derby that season than any other winger we had, and most of the wingers in the division. Bent, well, if you're depending on him to stop conceding goals then you need a head check. 

You can blame almost every single other player in the side that season, Keogh, Grant, Christie.... However, Ince and Bent are not the issue. It's like blaming Ronaldo for Real Madrid not winning La Liga last season. 

You really believe that playing a striker who can't retain possession in a team built on having the ball has absolutely nothing to do with how many goals that team concedes?

 

[ram1964]

On 11/10/2016 at 09:54, Mostyn6 said:

you say that, but players talk to other players. What do you think Nick Blackman would say to a player who was considering an offer to join?

Who on earth woud want to play with Blackman given the choice