Rams with and without Huddlestone starting

[admira]

LEAGUE GAMES ONLY

WITH

P 14  W 8 D 3  L 3  F 21  A 15  PTS 27  Points per game: 1.93

WITHOUT

P 17  W 6 D 5  L 5  F 22  A 21  PTS 24  Points per game: 1.41

I wish we could clone him and get a younger model but the current model needs to start.

[kash_a_ram_a_ding_dong]

Personally i feel that failing to get Thorne fit enough and integrated back into the team was our error here...

Having both of them in the squad would have allowed us much more breathing space when either got injured/knackered

[David]

17 minutes ago, admira said:

LEAGUE GAMES ONLY

WITH

P 14  W 8 D 3  L 3  F 21  A 15  PTS 27  Points per game: 1.93

WITHOUT

P 17  W 6 D 5  L 5  F 22  A 21  PTS 24  Points per game: 1.41

I wish we could clone him and get a younger model but the current model needs to start.

Older players you have to manage game time more, it’s possible Huddlestone simply can’t play 3 games in a week without running him into the ground.

Lampard right or wrongly probably saw last night as being the better game to reset his legs ready for Saturday.

Had we won last night with Huddlestone, benched him Saturday and played Johnson or/and King, knocked out the cup, he would also come under fire for playing a weaker team. 

Always said team selections are easier on the internet where we assume every player is 100% fit and ready for 90 minutes.

We don’t have a like for like replacement Tom, as you say it’s a shame he’s not younger. Definitely a position that will need to be addressed in the summer.

[TuffLuff]

The Huddlestone debate is pretty pointless to me. When we look back on the season it will be a lack of goals/creating chances that was our undoing. That will fall on the attacking midfielders/wide players at the end of the day and possibly leaves some big question marks over one or two

[Sparkle]

What we lack is anybody to hold the ball up - you know control it instantly and pass it into somebody’s stride - currently only Huddlestone can do that in the team with any consistency 

[rammieib]

6 minutes ago, TuffLuff said:

The Huddlestone debate is pretty pointless to me. When we look back on the season it will be a lack of goals/creating chances that was our undoing. That will fall on the attacking midfielders/wide players at the end of the day and possibly leaves some big question marks over one or two

I think we can all agree that we're a better overall team with Huddlestone in the team.

Frank should have learnt from Stoke away. Bad Management.

[Ghost of Clough]

15 minutes ago, rammieib said:

I think we can all agree that we're a better overall team with Huddlestone in the team.

Frank should have learnt from Stoke away. Bad Management.

See below

48 minutes ago, David said:

Always said team selections are easier on the internet where we assume every player is 100% fit and ready for 90 minutes.

 

[SaintRam]

19 minutes ago, rammieib said:

I think we can all agree that we're a better overall team with Huddlestone in the team.

Frank should have learnt from Stoke away. Bad Management.

Stoke away where Huddz came on at HT, and in the second half Stoke played around us and created 3 or 4 great chances with 10 men, scoring one to win the game?

I really like Huddz and we're definitely a better team with him when he's playing well, but he's not some football god people are making him out to be. He's had poor performances this season, and his presence does not protect us from having a poor performance as a team.

Equally, we're capable of playing well without him.

Our entire squad, down to the individual, with the exception of Keogh and Tomori, are inconsistent. Hence, the team is inconsistent. 

[RadioactiveWaste]

33 minutes ago, rammieib said:

I think we can all agree that we're a better overall team with Huddlestone in the team.

Frank should have learnt from Stoke away. Bad Management.

I agree he should have learned from Stoke, I don't think it's as simple as dropping/resting Huddz (think that played a part, no mistake), it's more of a trying to match Ipswich at what they're good at by being physical rather than trusting what we're good at to overcome them.

[Parsnip]

Yeah exactly what @SaintRam just said.

If we weren't capable of beating the worst team in the league because one player is missing then we'd be nowhere near the playoffs.

If Frank feels that our best chance of beating Brighton in the cup is to have Bryson & Hudds fresh, then it's a perfectly reasonable decision to use the squad. The team he put out against Ipswich was still a full strength side, it's not as if he put Anya up front.

Frank probably fancies the play-offs and a cup semi final. So do I!

 

[Srg]

57 minutes ago, TuffLuff said:

The Huddlestone debate is pretty pointless to me. When we look back on the season it will be a lack of goals/creating chances that was our undoing. That will fall on the attacking midfielders/wide players at the end of the day and possibly leaves some big question marks over one or two

So the inability to retain possession and allow the forward players to get on the ball in better and more comfortable positions isn't because the defensive midfielder position is absolutely pivotal to playing the passing football we try to play and the system that those forwards strive within.

I understand.

May as well resign Vydra and stick him up top alone and start playing Rowett-ball.

[Tamworthram]

51 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

What we lack is anybody to hold the ball up - you know control it instantly and pass it into somebody’s stride - currently only Huddlestone can do that in the team with any consistency 

I think you're right but, whilst we having this love in for Hudds, let's not forget that even the mighty Tom has been criticised for being too slow, getting caught in possession etc.

I like Huddlestone but think we need a Hudds+ model if we can find one. Until his injuries Thorne looked like a contender (although he is also a little slow at times). It remains to be seen if Thorne can reproduce that form that caused us all to wet ourselves when we captured him from WBA. 

[DRBee]

1 hour ago, David said:

 

Always said team selections are easier on the internet where we assume every player is 100% fit and ready for 90 minutes.

That's a bit of a cop out. I strongly support Frank as manager, but he shown a readiness to tinker with the team ,without there necessarily being injuries as an explanation. What we don't know is the priority he gives to league games versus the FA Cup. To rest both Huddlestone and Bryson and replace them with players who had not played before or recently seemed an error on hearing team selection never mind in hindsight. There is an option of starting a player and bringing them off early , when the game might have been won.

[TuffLuff]

2 minutes ago, Srg said:

So the inability to retain possession and allow the forward players to get on the ball in better and more comfortable positions isn't because the defensive midfielder position is absolutely pivotal to playing the passing football we try to play and the system that those forwards strive within.

I understand.

May as well resign Vydra and stick him up top alone and start playing Rowett-ball.

We retain the ball quite well though overall, like last night I didn’t think either Lawrence or Wilson weren’t getting the ball in good positions. In fact they got it in some great positions but didn’t do enough with it either by passing early/late. It’s the consistency of that decision making that’s an issue.

I have no time for Vydra or the way that Rowett played, please don’t tar me with that brush

[David]

3 minutes ago, DRBee said:

That's a bit of a cop out. I strongly support Frank as manager, but he shown a readiness to tinker with the team ,without there necessarily being injuries as an explanation. What we don't know is the priority he gives to league games versus the FA Cup. To rest both Huddlestone and Bryson and replace them with players who had not played before or recently seemed an error on hearing team selection never mind in hindsight. There is an option of starting a player and bringing them off early , when the game might have been won.

It’s not a cop out, take Jack Marriott for example, nobody could understand why he wasn’t playing, the Dud thread appeared and week in week vocal demands for him to play. Turns out he wasn’t fit enough for the demands of the Championship which Jack himself confirmed.

Even recently when he was missing from the line up “why has Jack been dropped”, turns out he was ill then injured, but at 2pm we didn’t know this having all named him in our team for the game all week online.

So no, it’s not a cop out, we all just assume players are 100% fit and ready to play as if they are machines, if they are not in the 11 Lampard has had a mare.

Asking the question is Huddlestone capable of playing 3 games in a week is a fair one, and one that should be taken into consideration before grabbing the pitchforks.

Likewise with Bryson.

Where was Evans last night? Does anybody know yet, was he fully fit and completely left out or is he carrying a knock. 

I’m not saying Lampard can not ever be questioned on his team selections, I’m sure he has left fully fit players out that some of us may believe would have been game changers. But let’s also remember when being critical we are completely ignorant to players fitness levels, injury status and how much they have trained through the week.

Information that isn’t public so not to give the opposition a heads up. [insert Bielsa joke here].

[Srg]

43 minutes ago, David said:

It’s not a cop out, take Jack Marriott for example, nobody could understand why he wasn’t playing, the Dud thread appeared and week in week vocal demands for him to play. Turns out he wasn’t fit enough for the demands of the Championship which Jack himself confirmed.

Even recently when he was missing from the line up “why has Jack been dropped”, turns out he was ill then injured, but at 2pm we didn’t know this having all named him in our team for the game all week online.

So no, it’s not a cop out, we all just assume players are 100% fit and ready to play as if they are machines, if they are not in the 11 Lampard has had a mare.

Asking the question is Huddlestone capable of playing 3 games in a week is a fair one, and one that should be taken into consideration before grabbing the pitchforks.

Likewise with Bryson.

Where was Evans last night? Does anybody know yet, was he fully fit and completely left out or is he carrying a knock. 

I’m not saying Lampard can not ever be questioned on his team selections, I’m sure he has left fully fit players out that some of us may believe would have been game changers. But let’s also remember when being critical we are completely ignorant to players fitness levels, injury status and how much they have trained through the week.

Information that isn’t public so not to give the opposition a heads up. [insert Bielsa joke here].

Think he can still be criticised for picking players that have no future at the club, are certainly leaving, don't fit the team identity, have been banned for biting and haven't kicked a ball in anger for months.

[NorfolkRam]

As has been said, second guessing player fitness is difficult. I think the major issue most had last night was King and Johnson in midfield having not had many minutes over the last few months/season, it was a recipe for disaster from the start.

 

My questions would be where was Evans? could Holmes and Wilson not played with one of King or Johnson to accommodate for a bit of rust and play Bennett out wide? Would Huddlestone not have been a better sub to bring on for half an hour than any of the subs made to add some control to a midfield battle we were clearly losing against a poor side?

 

It's hard to second guess fitness as I said but I would definitely question Johnson starting ahead of any of the above suggestions (King not available on Saturday so it made sense to start him IMO) 

[David]

9 minutes ago, Srg said:

Think he can still be criticised for picking players that have no future at the club, are certainly leaving, don't fit the team identity, have been banned for biting and haven't kicked a ball in anger for months.

Right, he could have stuck with 4-3-3 with King holding, things like that I wouldn’t argue against. Even if you was to say we would have won had Huddlestone played, no problems.

But when the manager is being criticised for not playing a player(s) in their 30’s, hold on, let’s consider the possibility he may not be up for 3 games in a week that’s all. 

[Bald Eagle's Barmy Army]

We took a point, not great but not bad either. 

We have players coming back in the squad with games coming up at home. 

We’d all have taken play offs and a good cup run at the start of the season. 

[AdamRam]

9 minutes ago, David said:

Right, he could have stuck with 4-3-3 with King holding, things like that I wouldn’t argue against. Even if you was to say we would have won had Huddlestone played, no problems.

But when the manager is being criticised for not playing a player(s) in their 30’s, hold on, let’s consider the possibility he may not be up for 3 games in a week that’s all. 

Isn’t Keogh the same age ? 

Not sure why you feel that Huddlestone can’t complete 3 games in a week, is this based on anything factual or something FL has said, or just guessing ?

Once again not saying he can or can’t do it, however it seems to be a reason that is being given and I’m wondering on what basis.