Official: Tom Ince joins Huddersfield Town

[Nuwtfly]

15 minutes ago, Lokidoki said:

how many did he play the full game?

 

Bamford only played 90 minutes on four occasions for Derby...

http://www.squawka.com/players/patrick-bamford/stats#performance-score#derby-county#football-league-championship#10#season-2013/2014#93#all-matches#1-49#by-match

Ince has played 90 minutes 29 times this season alone, for those maybe wondering.

http://www.squawka.com/players/tom-ince/stats#performance-score#derby-county-(current)#football-league-championship#10#season-2016/2017#657#all-matches#1-44#by-match

[DEL]

5 minutes ago, Nuwtfly said:

Ince has played 90 minutes 29 times this season...

http://www.squawka.com/players/tom-ince/stats#performance-score#derby-county-(current)#football-league-championship#10#season-2016/2017#657#all-matches#1-44#by-match

Think he was on about Bamford?

[Nuwtfly]

Just now, Derby_EnglandLoyal said:

Think he was on about Bamford?

Have added that in on post above, mate.

[DEL]

Just now, Nuwtfly said:

Have added that in on post above, mate.

Good job there is edit button. 

[Lokidoki]

11 minutes ago, Nuwtfly said:

Bamford only played 90 minutes on four occasions for Derby...

Thanks @Nuwtfly I didn't think it was many.

[cheron85]

22 minutes ago, Nuwtfly said:

Bamford only played 90 minutes on four occasions for Derby...

 

9 minutes ago, Lokidoki said:

Thanks @Nuwtfly I didn't think it was many.

Wasn't that the season though where we only got about 12 full 90 mins out of ANY of our wingers? One or both were taken off in every game

[Comrade 86]

51 minutes ago, Lokidoki said:

how many did he play the full game?

 

No idea. He played 21 games in total with 8 off those appearances coming off the bench. What's your point?

[Andicis]

1 hour ago, Lokidoki said:

His mannerisms and body language are the giveaways.

As for the apparent laziness - it's a bit late to watch him next match; if he is now going but if he stays and we play 433 then watch his position after a failed attack, compared to the left winger (usually JR), He is always stuck somewhere in the middle of nowhere, marking no one. The two players should be mirrored almost across the pitch positionally. Perhaps understanding and analysing the shape throughout a match is not everyone's forte but that is what good punters and Managers do and I wish some folks on here would try it  and not shout and take offence just because he is this weeks chosen one.

For the record I actually don't think he is lazy, I actually think that he is a poor positional player; (and hence why I want to be rid of him) on the flip side of this Johnny R is a great positional player but lacks the final ball. i.e. it's what folks like Ramage call a better football brain. That is why other clubs had problems with TI, he plays a fixed position poorly and that does not help the team as it pulls the team out of shape so the midfield has to defend early, which can result with quick break against a Derby attack.

Categorically he does not. If you sat next to the technical area as I do you can hear the managers (all of them) vent their frustration out on him nearly every match - these are the periods he looks lost and they are undeniable.

What Tom is good at, is being a great impact player because he does not need to concentrate on being in the right areas and just going for it.

BTW just how many air shots can you count from Russell and how many from Ince?

Finally, Let's face the facts this team have failed to deliver under numerous managers it is no use trying to rework the same problem; best tear it up and start afresh.

PS: buying him back on the cheap was tongue in cheek; they'll probably give him back

Simply not true about Ince not being back helping the defence. More often than not it is Tom Ince who would stop a counter attack by sprinting back into position to make a crucial interception or a tackle. Maybe the reason they're not mirrored isn't down to Ince? As stated by others, Ince does have a free role. He is able to move around the forward line of the pitch to create chances for the team. This is due to his superior final ball in comparison to other attackers we possess.

I don't sit and count the number of air shots players have, that's quite an irrelevancy, perhaps if Ince did have more air shots it is down to him getting himself in better positions to shoot? The problem other clubs had with Ince is he didn't fit their style of play. Many quality players have 'failed' in the sense where they didn't fit the club they moved to, and when moved on they looked back to their best.

Ince fits with Baird behind him very well, since Baird doesn't get in Tom's way, like Christie does when he pushes on, Ince with Baird behind him produced many goals and assists and generally played well.

Can we define teams that 'failed to deliver'. In 13/14 we made it to Wembley, had one poor 90 minutes or even just a poor 2 minute lapse of concentration, is that the team failing to deliver? In my opinion, no. 

The season after we were top of the table until we were hampered by injuries to the holding midfield role, Chris Martin and Jake Buxton. We didn't have the depth, and after that point started to perform worse. That's not the players under performing, that was us not having a deep enough squad.

Last season we finished 5th and made the playoffs. Is this under performing? Not in my book. We've not been in the Premier League for 10 years, let's face facts here, we're a Championship club, and that's basically what we would expect.

This season our squad was hampered early by poor management or would likely have made the playoffs. 

So, why would we rip up all we have done to start afresh, when we have the makings of a squad and just need a few key additions to transition us. We haven't failed to deliver.

[Lokidoki]

9 minutes ago, 86 points said:

What's your point?

There isn't one really; I was asked what I thought to Bamford by @cannable my reply was that I thought he was most effective when used as an impact player by SM I also thought this of Ince. The stats appear to back up what my memory of him was; we have to also remember that both Ince and Bamford were a lot younger then, they should be more of a player now.

[Lokidoki]

10 minutes ago, Andicis said:

Simply not true about Ince not being back helping the defence

I beg to differ and have a different opinion so let's leave it like that. Perhaps it may be down to just as I see football but then I have been watching Derby for 55 years or so and seen many teams come and go. Most players have faults but it is my view that for a championship team Ince is a luxury and has too many poor areas simply to coach out. Given the space and movement in the premiership he may do well but he will need to develop a killer touch in front of goal and learn to play with a true wingback such as Christie and it could still be this impediment that stops him being a great player. it just goes back to what I said before about positional play. 

 

I do not deny that we did well in getting to Wembley; in fact if it wasn't for some really crass substitutions, we may well have made it across the line. It could be that we have been trying to emulate this one success far too much.

Since then though, abject failure, we get there and then we bottle and it is this gutlessness that pervades the present team. It is obvious that GR has identified this and he will I hope, change this. 

29 minutes ago, Andicis said:

The season after we were top of the table until we were hampered by injuries

Agreed but it is up to management to deal with this and also to play things tactically different but we had a team that could only play one way and a manager that could not think around it.

The following year faced with similar, Clement was trying to do something positive and we all know what happened next. It was obvious though that Clement had identified where some of the issues were routed and was trying to make the required changes.

35 minutes ago, Andicis said:

let's face facts here, we're a Championship club

 

And here is the problem totally identified. We were a Division (Prem) club in the 70's and always thought that we belonged there and we still do. You may not remember some of these days, on the other hand you may but if you did I would find it very difficult to write that comment as our DCFC COYR heart is with getting back to what we believe is our rightful place.

40 minutes ago, Andicis said:

This season our squad was hampered early by poor management or would likely have made the playoffs

Correct on the first point but not on the latter. The team lacks blend, period. We have serial failures in the team, I will not name the names. And there is no leadership within the team. If you mean replacing 5 with 5 others, you may be right, that is more than just a few additions, mind.

[DEL]

Ince does actually help the defences and does actually track back. 

[Ninos]

Enjoyed reading @Lokidoki and I dare say Rowett and @Lokidoki have the exact same view of Ince: thus the willingness to let him go, coupled with Inces ambition.

[Mr Tibbs]

2 hours ago, Lokidoki said:

does that constitute a threat?

Obviously not, just putting the other side of the spectacles across to you. 

 

[Topram]

32 minutes ago, Derby_EnglandLoyal said:

Ince does actually help the defences and does actually track back. 

One thing he's ceertainly got better at, gets stuck in

[cannable]

I do think Ince may be a bit too ball-to-feet for Rowett but this idea that he single-handedly ruins a team's balance is nonsense. Different players suit different systems and partners, it's a fact of life. Baird feeding Ince worked and was at no detriment to the team, nor was Ince having freedom. Not having a midfield runner, a forward pivot or a DM capable of  handling the ball AND providing a shield is what's killed us.

[Rev]

2 hours ago, Andicis said:

 

Ince fits with Baird behind him very well, since Baird doesn't get in Tom's way, like Christie does when he pushes on, Ince with Baird behind him produced many goals and assists and generally played well.

 

It keep seeing this point, so have had a quick gander on the stats to see if they bear it out.

Keep in mind I've not applied the most rigourous approach, just using Whoscored.com and a cut off date of the Wolves game when Cyrus got injured, without going into each game in detail seemed the easiest way, but it points out the direction of travel.

Before Wolves assumed Christie, after Baird.

I've also done the managers, who I'll start with.

Lumping together goals and assists for ease of posting too, only league games apply.

Pearson 0/9 games, nuff said.

Powell 1/2.

Mac 13/26, 50%.

Rowett 4/9, given the smaller sample close enough to Mac.

Now for the Baird/Christie comparison.

Christie 2/15 

Baird 16/31, slightly over a 50% strike rate, and a massive improvement on his contribution with Cyrus.

I'll point out again these aren't guaranteed totally correct, but it certainly highlights the massive difference Baird has made to Ince, and what a Cockwomble Pearson really was.

[Leicester Ram]

Some people are getting a bit carried away with the rebuild and what it entails.

I'm seeing a lot of people start to get hard ons for buzz words and phrases like 'character', 'work rate', 'hunger', 'tracking back', 'grit' and 'attitude'. Those are all great qualities for a player/team to have, but I associate those words just as closely with Conor Sammon as I do Jurgen Klopp's Dortmund side.

Yeah, I want us to sign some players like that, but we shouldn't be taking out our most talented players out. Every team needs players with the x-factor, you can't work rate the ball into the back of the net.

I struggle to see how Ince isn't a good player under Rowett too, if that's your argument. Who else do you want with a one on one with a full-back on a counter attack? Who do you want getting slid in behind the back four if we win possession high up the pitch? It's a boring point but you need goals.

We need to blend our talents like Ince, Hughes and Martin in with a more 'hard working', 'honest', 'hungry' squad. The problem at the moment is that our bench players are sitting their on however much a week without much motivation to try and get in the team. It hurts our wage bill and seemingly our squad morale.

The players who aren't starting and inflating our wage bill are the ones I want to see tha back of, not the players who are actually ******* decent. That's what a rebuild is to me. You keep the vital parts and throw away the (s)crap.

If Ince wants to go then fine, let's bleed them dry, but I find it bizarre anyone would want that to happen. 

[Lokidoki]

43 minutes ago, cannable said:

this idea that he single-handedly ruins a team's balance is nonsense

Even I don't think that. Football is a strategic game and certain players blend in with other players to create teams; it is a sum of the parts. Ince's contribution in some areas is quite high but it is my sentiments and possibly GR's that you cannot get that blend with  the inclusion of Ince in a team for the type of football that is required to win the championship.  It has to be very tight and for all the comments made here about tracking back etc; my own view is that Ince is too loose by his very nature.

That little bit of wandering around when the game is exploding around you is enough to lose a game. Similarly miss-cueing  or poorly distributing balls from defence and I am talking other players now, can lose you games and ultimately finals. To move on we need to mitigate for these limitations and the best way is change the player in that role. 

56 minutes ago, cannable said:

Not having a midfield runner, a forward pivot or a DM capable of  handling the ball AND providing a shield is what's killed us.

Agreed -  but that is a team and management issue because a  good CDM is a fairly rare commodity and it nails your colours to the mast of only playing in one formation. A midfield runner has been sat on the bench for most of the season and/or playing in the youth team and  an outright pivot is only required if a team plays 433. We should have options for taking on any opposition with any shape and again this is what the team lacks.

 

[Sparkle]

I have no issues selling Ince if it is for the greater good and we would all prefer to see the non selected players go first but the reality is that you generally can only move players on who people want. If the team became a more balanced and robust unit with all the qualities needed then great but to this date Ince has struggled to fit in with a lot of different teams trying to incorporate his qualities into a team format so finding the right place for himself is not so easy.

[Van der MoodHoover]

I would be very disappointed if Gary Rowett had concluded that Ince should be sold and that he couldn't fit Tom into his best team. 

Obviously if Tom wishes to leave that's a different scenario and we should thank him and wish him well.