Positives

[Spanish]

12 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:

Blimey, these are the positives!?

erm I didn't start the thread, I was reacting to what I thought was a far too negative response, I can see no positives from the game

[toddy]

We can only get better......

[curb]

1 hour ago, RamNut said:

It is early days but there are things which don't seem to be working and maybe Gary would admit that.

4231 suits the players better than a 433 but 4231 has an inherent weakness. We have no orthodox midfielders in that system.

We saw this before under Clement in the infamous home game v Reading - which we drew 1-1 - (after which MM entered the dressing room). In that game PC changed to 4231 with Ince in the no10 role. There are 2 defensive midfielders who sit deep and 3 who are basically strikers deployed in a slightly deeper role. The 42 and the 31 can become detached with a big gap between the 2 and the 3 - conceding the midfield to the opposition. Thats what happened v Reading. They totally ran the game after about 15-20 mins, and whenever we got the ball we just passed it around at the back.

We now seem to have gone back to that system with a 2 that sit deep - "holding our shape" as GR calls it - and a 3 who are well up the pitch. But we now have Huddlestone (in the 2) hitting 50 yard passes to find the 3, particularly the two wide players who are looking for pockets of space behind the full backs.  That is a legitimate tactic but i think we will struggle to cope with a good opposition midfield. For me that was the problem v wolves. If our 3 are true midfielders then they can happily drop deeper - but weiman, vydra and russell aren't. The tactic of hitting long balls necessarily creates - and even requires - a big gap. The downside of this tactic is that we risk conceding the midfield. 

We have struggled to fit our orthodox midfielders - hughes, butterfield, and bryson - into this system. Perhaps Gary likes players with more physical attributes but it was a huge leap of faith to discard our best central midfield player. we seem to have simultaneously gone from a possession-based  short passing game on the deck, to a counter attacking long ball game with no midfield. I can't see this system suiting Chris Martin anymore than it suited bryson or hughes. Perhaps for the 4231 to work the 3 have got to drop deeper; the 2 have got to push further up; and the 1 probably needs to be a highly mobile pacy striker. But then you don't have the luxury of a quarter back slinging 50 yard balls forward for wide runners to chase and a fish-out-of-water no9 who tends to want to drop deep and receive the ball to his feet. (Or johnson who just seems like a total passenger). It still looks like an ill assorted bag of bits at times.

When we do succesfully get the ball forward then the four strikers probably can create problems, particularly if we give them more freedom, and find a 3 that are comfortable to take players on (which is not weiman's game).

For me, the inherent problem is that - with this way of playing and with these players -  we just haven't got a midfield.

Hopefully i'm wrong and somehow it all falls into place.

 

Very good post, and you need the three to be intelligent, adaptable players, which ours aren't. They aren't very good dropping into midfield, they aren't very good when defending, and they aren't even very good when attacking. 

[cheron85]

18 hours ago, DontTrustTheDevilInside said:

If you honestly want to put your hopes this season on passion and enthusiasm be my guest. Can't fault keoghs effort and a lot of his ability but his lapses of concentration and 'unpredictable' playing style have been our Achilles heel for a while. Out of all our defence he's the last person I'd want there because a good defence isn't about individual talents, it's consistent organisation which Keoghs unpredictability goes directly against.

He springs to mind as the direct opposite to Maldinis theory if he had to make a big impact (tackle) on the game he's done something wrong.

People saying he's the scapegoat... how many people have been scapegoated at his expense so far? Generally most haven't come from or left to bad clubs like the premiership team who many disappeared or ended up in league 2. Scapegoats in every other area of the defence are now into double figures before the fans who don't think keogh is the solution get the chance to see one way or the other.

Personally think he'd be a better dm than cb due to his ability with the ball and being slightly error prone and erratic. 

Id love to have a player at cb who is dependable and less erratic with his passion but in the absence of that I'd take Curtis Davies and Andre wisdom who although they don't go barrelling into areas they have no business being in they look relatively composed and organised at the back. 

 

Just checking - Do you actually go to the games? Or are you basing this off what you hear on the radio?

I think you're phone in Derek...

[Spanish]

19 hours ago, DontTrustTheDevilInside said:

 

Id love to have a player at cb who is dependable and less erratic with his passion but in the absence of that I'd take Curtis Davies and Andre wisdom who although they don't go barrelling into areas they have no business being in they look relatively composed and organised at the back. 

 

Davies has been slightly flaky in comparison to Keogh from what I've seen in the last 3 games

[SKRam]

2 hours ago, toddy said:

We can only get better......

Studying our league position the response to this has to be no we could get a lot worse. Still top half and as has been mentioned better start than previous two. Give it 10 games 

[Jack Willow]

4 hours ago, RamNut said:

It is early days but there are things which don't seem to be working and maybe Gary would admit that.

4231 suits the players better than a 433 but 4231 has an inherent weakness. We have no orthodox midfielders in that system.

We saw this before under Clement in the infamous home game v Reading - which we drew 1-1 - (after which MM entered the dressing room). In that game PC changed to 4231 with Ince in the no10 role. There are 2 defensive midfielders who sit deep and 3 who are basically strikers deployed in a slightly deeper role. The 42 and the 31 can become detached with a big gap between the 2 and the 3 - conceding the midfield to the opposition. Thats what happened v Reading. They totally ran the game after about 15-20 mins, and whenever we got the ball we just passed it around at the back.

We now seem to have gone back to that system with a 2 that sit deep - "holding our shape" as GR calls it - and a 3 who are well up the pitch. But we now have Huddlestone (in the 2) hitting 50 yard passes to find the 3, particularly the two wide players who are looking for pockets of space behind the full backs.  That is a legitimate tactic but i think we will struggle to cope with a good opposition midfield. For me that was the problem v wolves. If our 3 are true midfielders then they can happily drop deeper - but weiman, vydra and russell aren't. The tactic of hitting long balls necessarily creates - and even requires - a big gap. The downside of this tactic is that we risk conceding the midfield. 

We have struggled to fit our orthodox midfielders - hughes, butterfield, and bryson - into this system. Perhaps Gary likes players with more physical attributes but it was a huge leap of faith to discard our best central midfield player. we seem to have simultaneously gone from a possession-based  short passing game on the deck, to a counter attacking long ball game with no midfield. I can't see this system suiting Chris Martin anymore than it suited bryson or hughes. Perhaps for the 4231 to work the 3 have got to drop deeper; the 2 have got to push further up; and the 1 probably needs to be a highly mobile pacy striker. But then you don't have the luxury of a quarter back slinging 50 yard balls forward for wide runners to chase and a fish-out-of-water no9 who tends to want to drop deep and receive the ball to his feet. (Or johnson who just seems like a total passenger). It still looks like an ill assorted bag of bits at times.

When we do succesfully get the ball forward then the four strikers probably can create problems, particularly if we give them more freedom, and find a 3 that are comfortable to take players on (which is not weiman's game).

For me, the inherent problem is that - with this way of playing and with these players -  we just haven't got a midfield.

Hopefully i'm wrong and somehow it all falls into place.

 

Excellent analysis of the problem. You simply can't play with 4 forwards on the pitch, it can't be. It's a tactical suicide. One more advanced midfielder is needed (31) and one deep-lying midfielder (42). Although Tom Lawrence can fill one of the positions and Matej Vydra can the other one (31). Third one position (31) could be for Bryson or a someone completely new.

Several nights ago one of the craziest ideas popped into my head, maybe Gary should try playing Keogh next to Huddlestone in the deep-lying role. Keogh could be like our Franz Beckenbauer style libero.

[AshfieldRam]

None of our fans have had a fight over the last pie.......

[RiddingsRam]

I too am ever the optimist . Good post @BurtonRam7  and it nice to see some positivity from at least one of our fans. I think we're on the right path , were not going to fix Rush's spending spree (yes I blame Rush not the revolving door of managers through his tenure) and in all fairness who do we really think we are ? Why have we got any God given right to think that we should be challenging for the top two let alone play offs ? Because we made it to Wembley? Because we spent some money? We need stability and a stable mange who will build his own squad with the backing of our brilliant chairman! We are heading in the right direction a fmdefeat at home to a decent wolves team and a bit if a freak loss away at Sheffield United are not reason to suddenly start posts like is "Rowett up to the job? ". Let's not ruin what we have in a brilliant set up and manager. There's going to be how and downs! 

[thederbyram]

Another thing, which no one seems to have said yet, is that you can look at Saturday's "performance" both ways.

 

Obviously we played badly, but all 3 of the goals conceded were easily avoidable. I'm going to discount the last one actually, as we all know the risks you run when you send the goalkeeper up at the end of a game. But the daft pass from Carson and the daft own goal were the only differences on the scoreline. For as bad as we were we didn't actually concede from being torn apart at all.

 

It might be a very simplistic way to look at it, but I'm taking that as a little glimmer of positivity from what was a bad day all round.

[cheron85]

2 hours ago, SKRam said:

Studying our league position the response to this has to be no we could get a lot worse. Still top half and as has been mentioned better start than previous two. Give it a season

FTFY

Patience grasshopper

[Mistaram]

6 hours ago, RamNut said:

It is early days but there are things which don't seem to be working and maybe Gary would admit that.

4231 suits the players better than a 433 but 4231 has an inherent weakness. We have no orthodox midfielders in that system.

We saw this before under Clement in the infamous home game v Reading - which we drew 1-1 - (after which MM entered the dressing room). In that game PC changed to 4231 with Ince in the no10 role. There are 2 defensive midfielders who sit deep and 3 who are basically strikers deployed in a slightly deeper role. The 42 and the 31 can become detached with a big gap between the 2 and the 3 - conceding the midfield to the opposition. Thats what happened v Reading. They totally ran the game after about 15-20 mins, and whenever we got the ball we just passed it around at the back.

We now seem to have gone back to that system with a 2 that sit deep - "holding our shape" as GR calls it - and a 3 who are well up the pitch. But we now have Huddlestone (in the 2) hitting 50 yard passes to find the 3, particularly the two wide players who are looking for pockets of space behind the full backs.  That is a legitimate tactic but i think we will struggle to cope with a good opposition midfield. For me that was the problem v wolves. If our 3 are true midfielders then they can happily drop deeper - but weiman, vydra and russell aren't. The tactic of hitting long balls necessarily creates - and even requires - a big gap. The downside of this tactic is that we risk conceding the midfield. 

We have struggled to fit our orthodox midfielders - hughes, butterfield, and bryson - into this system. Perhaps Gary likes players with more physical attributes but it was a huge leap of faith to discard our best central midfield player. we seem to have simultaneously gone from a possession-based  short passing game on the deck, to a counter attacking long ball game with no midfield. I can't see this system suiting Chris Martin anymore than it suited bryson or hughes. Perhaps for the 4231 to work the 3 have got to drop deeper; the 2 have got to push further up; and the 1 probably needs to be a highly mobile pacy striker. But then you don't have the luxury of a quarter back slinging 50 yard balls forward for wide runners to chase and a fish-out-of-water no9 who tends to want to drop deep and receive the ball to his feet. (Or johnson who just seems like a total passenger). It still looks like an ill assorted bag of bits at times.

When we do succesfully get the ball forward then the four strikers probably can create problems, particularly if we give them more freedom, and find a 3 that are comfortable to take players on (which is not weiman's game).

For me, the inherent problem is that - with this way of playing and with these players -  we just haven't got a midfield.

Hopefully i'm wrong and somehow it all falls into place.

 

Ramnut  No you are not wrong yo are spot on the average fan can see it just the management who can't Rowett got blinded by the Bolton result who I think are the poorest Championship side I've seen since Rotheram

[Spanish]

1 hour ago, Mistaram said:

Ramnut  No you are not wrong yo are spot on the average fan can see it just the management who can't Rowett got blinded by the Bolton result who I think are the poorest Championship side I've seen since Rotheram

I suggest you write to the DCFC board and offer your services along with all the other average fans, I am absolutely convinced by your argument that you know best.  Lets get those so called professionals out of our club now before this gets any worse

[King Kevin]

This threads 6 pages longer than I thought it would be.

[Guest]

I've watched much worse than what we are currently watching for longer periods of time.

However, I have to say that this is one of the most depressing times as a fan of DCFC.

The whole negativity surrounding the club is absolutely horrific. 

The constant slating of owner, manager, players needs to stop.

The 13/14 season was one of my favourite as a Derby fan but the aftermath makes me wonder if it was all worthwhile. 

[cheron85]

59 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

I've watched much worse than what we are currently watching for longer periods of time.

However, I have to say that this is one of the most depressing times as a fan of DCFC.

Thing is - I'd have been really happy if Rowett had come out and said:

"We're building this season - We have some very good players, a very good ground, great training facilities, a top notch academy - What we need to do is build an ethos, a mentality and a way of playing that everyone in the club understands - This season we'll begin to do that with the hope of challenging but this is a long term project"

He didn't - He said we should be challenging the top 2 - So that's the expectation levels now - Any time his team give a performance which isn't up to that level it's seen as a problem - Fairly I think

[cannable]

9 hours ago, curb said:

Very good post, and you need the three to be intelligent, adaptable players, which ours aren't. They aren't very good dropping into midfield, they aren't very good when defending, and they aren't even very good when attacking. 

The solution is simple. 

Re-sign Commons, Bueno and Cywka!

[Sith Happens]

2 hours ago, cannable said:

The solution is simple. 

Re-sign Commons, Bueno and Cywka!

They were only at their best with kuci so we are going to need him back too.

[cannable]

5 minutes ago, Paul71 said:

They were only at their best with kuci so we are going to need him back too.

It's alright, we have Chrissy Kuqi! 

Maybe get Bailey back to slot in with George or Tommy…

[Sith Happens]

2 hours ago, cannable said:

It's alright, we have Chrissy Kuqi! 

Maybe get Bailey back to slot in with George or Tommy…

Gary Bailey didn't play for us.