Andicis Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 We spent McClaren's whole first reign saying ''we need a plan B'' we finally have two different strikers in Martin and Nugent, and now some pull out the ''Martin isn't a Rowett player, get player x who is more like Nugent''. What do people want!? I'd personally start Martin at home and Nugent away, and think we need BOTH. What's the point in stacking the squad full of the same players? Variety helps the squad look more balanced, Martin offers this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lrm14 Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 3 hours ago, QuitYourJibbaJivin said: To be honest I think he’s the ideal striker to start games when teams come to “park the bus”. Nugent isn’t anywhere near as effective when there’s no space to run into. Martin offers a platform to build off, we can try and play in between the lines. Away from home I would play Nugent every time, we get far less of the ball, teams open more and that’s where Nuge comes into his own. People coming to the conclusion that he weakens our team due to wages they’ve made up in their head is simply laughable. This is absolutely spot on and is precisely the reason why Martin has been playing in the past few home games. He's our answer to teams that park the bus, which our defensive, counter-attacking style simply cannot score against. I also think it's laughable people are using him not playing that well with Vydra as a criticism. Really? Martin and Vydra don't have the same understanding on the pitch as Nugent and Vydra after only what, 120 minutes? Weird that. It took us quite a few games to adjust to Rowett's style, which we're still getting better and better at. It's only common knowledge that it'll take a little longer to get used to fully utilising Martin in this system. It's depressing how people are so willing to give other players in the squad 'time to adapt' and 'get back up to scratch' but not to someone like Martin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mistaram Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 57 minutes ago, JoeDerby said: Were you at the Leeds game? He didn't do anything for 90 minutes, I'd like to see where the posts are about Martin only playing away, I don't think that's even true. When have we looked better with Martin in the side? We have looked far better with Vydra and Nugent combining together. Yep I agree if we are looking to play football and keep possession, Martin should play, i do think though that this will more than likely be at home when teams sit in and defend. Great post he was invisible at Leeds Winnall did all the work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andicis Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 Just now, Mistaram said: Great post he was invisible at Leeds Winnall did all the work Absolute nonsense. I was at the Leeds game, Martin did a fine job. Were you at Leeds? Martin held the ball well, and got people involved in the play in the second half. As usual though, people will find any excuse to get at Martin, whereas Nugent would never be criticised for it. I like Nugent, but the double standards between Nugent and Martin is stark. If Nugent has a bad game, it doesn't matter cos he smiles, whereas if Martin has a bad game it's because he's a lazy, fat oaf according to some. Absolutely ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rynny Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 24 minutes ago, Mistaram said: Great post he was invisible at Leeds Winnall did all the work Touches Martin 37 Winnall 34 (inc penalty) Passes Martin 28 Winnall 21 Loss of possession Martin 1 Winnall 4 Shots Winnall 4 (inc penalty) Martin 2 Tackles Attempted Winnall 2 Martin 1 Dribbles Martin 1 Winnall 1 Clearances Martin 1 Winnall 1 Looks like Winnall did all the work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeDerby Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 3 minutes ago, rynny said: Touches Martin 37 Winnall 34 (inc penalty) Passes Martin 28 Winnall 21 Loss of possession Martin 1 Winnall 4 Shots Winnall 4 (inc penalty) Martin 2 Tackles Attempted Winnall 2 Martin 1 Dribbles Martin 1 Winnall 1 Clearances Martin 1 Winnall 1 Looks like Winnall did all the work There's very little difference in them stats to be honest and Winnall won us the game. How from the stats above can you make a sarcastic comment that 'Winnall did all the work'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andicis Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 4 minutes ago, JoeDerby said: There's very little difference in them stats to be honest and Winnall won us the game. How from the stats above can you make a sarcastic comment that 'Winnall did all the work'. Because it's bogus. They had an equal shift, Winnall scored a penalty which Martin could have easily done. The only bit of work that Winnall did that Martin didn't was score a tap in, and since he was anonymous in the first half, it was the least he could have done. You can't say Martin was poor in that game, without saying saying how bad Winnall's overall play was (neither were bad). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rynny Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 3 minutes ago, JoeDerby said: There's very little difference in them stats to be honest and Winnall won us the game. How from the stats above can you make a sarcastic comment that 'Winnall did all the work'. Agreed they are similar, the only difference is Winnall scored a tap in and a penalty and gave the ball away a lot more. Well how can Winnall do all the work and Martin be invisible if Winnall touched the ball less, made less passes? My sarcastic response was to a ridiculous post. Say Martin took the penalty and scored, would it still have been "invisible at Leeds Winnall did all the work"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lrm14 Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 41 minutes ago, JoeDerby said: There's very little difference in them stats to be honest and Winnall won us the game. How from the stats above can you make a sarcastic comment that 'Winnall did all the work'. He's illustrating the bias people clearly have against Martin. Winnall 'won us the game' by scoring a penalty which anyone could have done, yet Martin (who statistically had an equal if not slightly better game) was 'invisible'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Ram Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 1 hour ago, rynny said: Touches Martin 37 Winnall 34 (inc penalty) Passes Martin 28 Winnall 21 Loss of possession Martin 1 Winnall 4 Shots Winnall 4 (inc penalty) Martin 2 Tackles Attempted Winnall 2 Martin 1 Dribbles Martin 1 Winnall 1 Clearances Martin 1 Winnall 1 Looks like Winnall did all the work To be fair I was not at Leeds, cant comment.. However I am pretty sure @Mistaram would have been, so his opinion is as valid as anyones. As far as stats go, dont read too much into those either. Touches.. What kind of touches? Same for passes, forward, backwards, sidewards? Winnalls might have been more direct and affected the game more.. Winalls less passes might mean he was driving forward and trying to create and that could explain the loss of possession. He might have been more of a risk taker, Martin might have been more conservative. It's all bollx. Who knows, but the headline stats you have there are only part of the equation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeDerby Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 1 hour ago, rynny said: Agreed they are similar, the only difference is Winnall scored a tap in and a penalty and gave the ball away a lot more. Well how can Winnall do all the work and Martin be invisible if Winnall touched the ball less, made less passes? My sarcastic response was to a ridiculous post. Say Martin took the penalty and scored, would it still have been "invisible at Leeds Winnall did all the work"? 30 minutes ago, lrm14 said: He's illustrating the bias people clearly have against Martin. Winnall 'won us the game' by scoring a penalty which anyone could have done, yet Martin (who statistically had an equal if not slightly better game) was 'invisible'. I have nothing against Martin? all I'm doing is comparing two players performances in the Leeds game. I'm not saying Martin would have missed that penalty or he's not a good player. All I'm saying us Winnall won as that game??? Stop getting so defensive over Martin ladies, I'm probably a bigger fan of him than both of you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lrm14 Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 4 minutes ago, JoeDerby said: I have nothing against Martin? all I'm doing is comparing two players performances in the Leeds game. I'm not saying Martin would have missed that penalty or he's not a good player. All I'm saying us Winnall won as that game??? Stop getting so defensive over Martin ladies, I'm probably a bigger fan of him than both of you The stats were posted in response to Mistaram who said he was 'invisible' against Leeds. Stop 'getting so defensive'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wixman1884 Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 2 hours ago, Andicis said: We spent McClaren's whole first reign saying ''we need a plan B" People were saying this when we were top of the league. It took us losing Martin, Thorne, Eustace and Buxton for us to drop. Turns out we just needed more back up for plan A. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andicis Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 Just now, wixman1884 said: People were saying this when we were top of the league. It took us losing Martin, Thorne, Eustace and Buxton for us to drop. Turns out we just needed more back up for plan A. Yeah, but that season the drop was down to more than just injuries, so I'm not sure it can be simplified just to that. My point was that having a variety in strike force is a positive, different players for different games. We don't always need a striker to chase someone's back four, and we don't always need a hold up striker. I was eluding to the whole ''one or the other'' situation being wrong, and that it didn't have to be black or white on the issue, no pun intentional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeDerby Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 4 minutes ago, Andicis said: Yeah, but that season the drop was down to more than just injuries, so I'm not sure it can be simplified just to that. My point was that having a variety in strike force is a positive, different players for different games. We don't always need a striker to chase someone's back four, and we don't always need a hold up striker. I was eluding to the whole ''one or the other'' situation being wrong, and that it didn't have to be black or white on the issue, no pun intentional. Agree with this, different striker for different tactics. Nice to have the options available + opposite sides won't know what they're up against and won't know what to expect before match day! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rynny Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 15 minutes ago, JoeDerby said: I have nothing against Martin? all I'm doing is comparing two players performances in the Leeds game. I'm not saying Martin would have missed that penalty or he's not a good player. All I'm saying us Winnall won as that game??? Stop getting so defensive over Martin ladies, I'm probably a bigger fan of him than both of you It was more at the Martin was "invisible at Leeds Winnall did all the work" that mistaram said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andicis Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 Just now, JoeDerby said: Agree with this, different striker for different tactics. Nice to have the options available + opposite sides won't know what they're up against and won't know what to expect before match day! That's exactly what I'm saying, I see them both as top class strikers, so no reason to sell one or the other, use both and keep a deep squad as far as I'm concerned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannable Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 6 minutes ago, wixman1884 said: People were saying this when we were top of the league. It took us losing Martin, Thorne, Eustace and Buxton for us to drop. Turns out we just needed more back up for plan A. ...and Mascarell... and Whitbread... and Bent... Ward and Dawkins missed a fair bit as well... and Grant was playing through injury... It’s ridiculous that anybody can bash anyone other than the injury Gods for that collapse! The only thing you can say is that we should have gone backs to the wall and ground out the last 13 games! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeDerby Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 2 minutes ago, Andicis said: That's exactly what I'm saying, I see them both as top class strikers, so no reason to sell one or the other, use both and keep a deep squad as far as I'm concerned. The competition is healthy too, If you come in and take your chance you'll more than likely keep your place. I think Nuge and Martin are enjoying fighting for that spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angieram Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 4 hours ago, JoeDerby said: Were you at the Leeds game? He didn't do anything for 90 minutes, I'd like to see where the posts are about Martin only playing away, I don't think that's even true. When have we looked better with Martin in the side? We have looked far better with Vydra and Nugent combining together. Yep I agree if we are looking to play football and keep possession, Martin should play, i do think though that this will more than likely be at home when teams sit in and defend. Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.