Suggestions for the next Derby manager

[May Contain Nuts]

Overall Wassall did a very good job as interim manager, but it doesn't mean I think he should be given the reigns full time.

The best football we played between January 2015 and March 2019 was probably when Wassall was in charge. He took on a team who had the creativity knocked out of them somewhat by Clement and found a way to get them playing exciting attacking football. The squad was a little bit of a mish-mash at the time but nowhere near what it was to become later under Pearson.

Of the Clement signings he managed to get some good stuff from Johnson, he got Butterfield in and around the box feeding off Martin, of the players inherited he used Martin properly, he put Russell back on the right hand side, Thorne was having a steady season and the best thing of all, the thing I give him the highest honour for - he was the only manager we've had who actually used Ince for the benefit of the team (by playing him on the left) rather than using the team for the benefit of Ince! Will wonders never cease!? (Yes they will, and they did)

However when it came to in-game management he WAS tactically naive, you can't deny that nor should you. In a vital play-off game (home vs Hull) he set the team up in the wrong way, I seem to recall, on the advice of Redknapp. He didn't show strength in his own conviction. I don't think that was because of the loss of Thorne either - as above he was getting some good decent stuff out of Johnson especially in an earlier 4-0 demolition of them, there was no need to change the way we approached that home leg just because Thorne was injured.

Lampard was also tactically naive at times, he also set the team up wrong in a major play-off fixture, but you should expect that of any rookie manager. The difference then really comes down to the 'it' factor. Wassall can get all the qualifications in the world, in fact it seems he has, but he'll never have that.

Wassall's media personality, post match interviews etc also left a lot to be desired. They were quite frankly amateurish, a bit comical, a bit 'David Brent-y' as someone else said.

It sounds bloody stupid to cite that as a reason why one should be the manager and one shouldn't, but so, so much of football management, football culture and in some cases success comes down to perception. The pull in the transfer market, the ability to surround yourself with the best backroom team etc. There are benefits to personality and being a big name that qualifications can't match.

There's a massive difference between the relatively low pressure world of Academy football management and the intense pressure of Championship management and as much as I admire much the job Wassall did in his spell in charge, and his brilliant work in the Academy, he isn't a long term answer to our first team managerial position. He just isn't.

[Papahet]

15 minutes ago, Mostyn6 said:

absolutely disingenuous claptrap to put the blame for Rotherham and Hull, and Jason Shackell at Wassall's door, and I'll tell you why; those things repeated themselves, under every manager since. Every manager since, and before, had teams that threw away leads, had a player who was a bit of a dick, and didn't get promoted. If you actually did some factual research, you'll find that Wassall's contribution was way more positive than it was negative. He arrested the slide (from top on boxing day, to 5th on Valentine's Day) and re-introduced attacking football, goals, wins and a feelgood factor, whilst sustaining a play-off place. The Rotherham game had no bearing on the season whatsoever. It didn't impact on our play-off place at all. The Hull first leg was solely about player error(s). Go and look at the goals ffs! He didn't pick a negative team or formation.

It's sickening and shamefully ignorant that you (people) cannot associate mental weakness in the team with what happened in those 2 games, but can to perhaps defend anyone other than Wassall.

balls

We was 3-0 up at Rotherham, out of sigh. What's Wassall do? He takes Thorne off and brings on another forward in Blackman, tell me the thinking behind that one.  We have Hanson on the bench, we had Buxton on there, so why did he feel the need to bring Nick Blackman on and change formation to go (even) more attacking?

Hull 1st leg: an absolute shambles. Player errors? What a crock of poo. They had 16 shots, absolutely battered us in that first half. Why not change the system there and then? His first substitution when was it? After a hour, a hour FFS. I could've told you after 20 minutes it wasn't working. Then he brings Hughes off and sticks Bent on with what? three minutes remaining, school boy poo right there.

How is it ignorant? It's fookin common sense 

[Carnero]

15 minutes ago, Nuwtfly said:

I'm not going to do the same situation there where we approach another club. Because we can't. We have a manager at the moment."

Depends which bit you bold... my interpretation is that only out of work managers will be spoken to whilst Frank is still ours, not that no managers in jobs will be considered should a vacancy actually arise!

[May Contain Nuts]

37 minutes ago, Mostyn6 said:

The Hull first leg was solely about player error(s). Go and look at the goals ffs! He didn't pick a negative team or formation. 

He didn't pick a negative team or formation, but that doesn't mean he didn't alter the tactical approach.

The only change to the starting line-up between the 2 Hull games was Hughes coming in for Thorne, yet instead of playing in the same style that saw us smash them 4-0 in the league game we spent much of the match hitting it long for Johnson to try to win headers up on the left hand side. To say it didn't work would be an understatement.

[lushrams]

sexy attacking football no problem........ here's your man.

[Bluedogmaz]

39 minutes ago, Nuwtfly said:

To me, this tells us that Mel Morris is not going to interview any managers who are currently in work.

The reason I think this is because of the bit in bold. I think he's referencing the way Chelsea have approached us, here. That they've come in for our manager at a time that will likely disrupt our preparations for the season. To me, he's saying that he doesn't want to, and won't, put another club in that same situation.

Some people have been suggesting to me that this is only the case while Frank is still here - but he doesn't explicitly say this. I don't see why he would suddenly be OK with causing "the same situation" on another club once our manager has gone.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but that's how this has come across for me. 

Didn't come across like that to me at all - the way he said it suggested to me he wouldn't do it while we still had a manager in charge

[RadioactiveWaste]

3 minutes ago, Bluedogmaz said:

Didn't come across like that to me at all - the way he said it suggested to me he wouldn't do it while we still had a manager in charge

Or more realistically "we can't say we want to talk to your manager, our current one is leaving soon" because you'll be told in no uncertain terms that you can't interview for job that doesn't exist.

I'm pretty sure we'll happily talk to clubs once the position is vacant.

[Bob Gnarly]

1 hour ago, Andicis said:

It doesn't exactly inspire confidence in Wassall's managerial skill that even he himself, or the higher ups above him, had so little faith that they had to bring in someone over him does it? 

Are you one of the people who also would like a DOF in place? Not a dig. Genuine question.

[Ghost of Clough]

53 minutes ago, Coconut said:

He didn't pick a negative team or formation, but that doesn't mean he didn't alter the tactical approach.

The only change to the starting line-up between the 2 Hull games was Hughes coming in for Thorne, yet instead of playing in the same style that saw us smash them 4-0 in the league game we spent much of the match hitting it long for Johnson to try to win headers up on the left hand side. To say it didn't work would be an understatement.

Goal 1 - a decent long range effort by Hernandez finds the bottom corner

Goal 2 - an effort on goal deflects off Olsson's heel smashes off Shackell's chest and hits the back of the net with Carson wrong footed.

Goal 3 - 98th minute goal when only 5 were given!

They only had 3 shots on target in the entire game and came away with three goals

 

The injury to Thorne undoubtedly unsettled us and massively disrupted preparations. Having no natural replacement didn't help. Bryson, Johnson, Butterfield, Hughes and Hendrick to choose from... Who would you have gone with?

[BaaLocks]

2 hours ago, David said:

2 hours on TalkSport has just wiped out 82 pages of Hughton, Karanka, Pulis and Cowley brothers. Shall we start again?

I think every manager since Jimmy Methven is mentioned in there at some point so it's just a process of elimination. It'll be like the biggest game of "Guess Who?" in history.

Has he managed or played for Derby before? No <flip over McClaren, Wassall, Clough, Moore>

Does he play the Derby way? Yes <flip over McCarthy, Karanka, Pulis>

Will he get on with the Chairman? Yes <flip over Monk, Davies>

Is he in work at the moment? No <flip over Gerrard>

Has he managed a club before? Yes <flip over Terry, Carrick, Arteta>

[Andicis]

51 minutes ago, Bob Gnarly said:

Are you one of the people who also would like a DOF in place? Not a dig. Genuine question.

No, I'd just like a capable manager.

[May Contain Nuts]

37 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Goal 1 - a decent long range effort by Hernandez finds the bottom corner

Goal 2 - an effort on goal deflects off Olsson's heel smashes off Shackell's chest and hits the back of the net with Carson wrong footed.

Goal 3 - 98th minute goal when only 5 were given!

They only had 3 shots on target in the entire game and came away with three goals

 

The injury to Thorne undoubtedly unsettled us and massively disrupted preparations. Having no natural replacement didn't help. Bryson, Johnson, Butterfield, Hughes and Hendrick to choose from... Who would you have gone with?

I'd have picked the same team Wassall did, I wasn't criticising his selection.

I'm not what relevance describing the goals proves? No doubt they got lucky with the goals, though the goals don't always tell the story of the game. The shooting stats may help display my point.

When we beat them 4-0 we had 17 shots, 7 on target. When we lost to the 3-0 we had 8 shots, 1 on target, in the 80th minute.

Replacing Thorne with Hughes in the starting lineup should never have made that big a difference. They're not like-for like replacements but they don't facilitate a big change in style of play.  We beat them in the league by passing around them (Huddlestone & Davies were made to look very poor, as they did when we got passed around under Rowett!) but barely laid a glove on them during the play-off game.

There's no reason we couldn't have tried passing it around them with Hughes as DM but instead of trying to do that we went more direct. It failed. As I said earlier though I do have a vague memory of it coming to light that Redknapp had suggested we try matching them for physicality, and Wassall listened when in hindsight he should have told him to duck off ?

 

[Ghost of Clough]

3 minutes ago, Coconut said:

I'd have picked the same team Wassall did, I wasn't criticising his selection.

I'm not what relevance describing the goals proves? No doubt they got lucky with the goals, though the goals don't always tell the story of the game. The shooting stats may help display my point.

When we beat them 4-0 we had 17 shots, 7 on target. When we lost to the 3-0 we had 8 shots, 1 on target, in the 80th minute.

Replacing Thorne with Hughes in the starting lineup should never have made that big a difference. They're not like-for like replacements but they don't facilitate a big change in style of play.  We beat them in the league by passing around them (Huddlestone & Davies were made to look very poor, as they did when we got passed around under Rowett!) but barely laid a glove on them during the play-off game.

There's no reason we couldn't have tried passing it around them with Hughes as DM but instead of trying to do that we went more direct. It failed. As I said earlier though I do have a vague memory of it coming to light that Redknapp had suggested we try matching them for physicality, and Wassall listened when in hindsight he should have told him to duck off ?

 

Nearly every one of their 16 shots was a pot shot from outside the area.

Outside: 11 (3 goals)

Centre of box: 2 (both headers)

Left side of box: 2

Right side of box: 1

Tight angle on right: 1

[Nuwtfly]

I think I've decided I want Daniel Stendel. 

But it's going to be Monk, isn't it? Or Wassell. ?

[Sith Happens]

2 hours ago, Papahet said:

balls

We was 3-0 up at Rotherham, out of sigh. What's Wassall do? He takes Thorne off and brings on another forward in Blackman, tell me the thinking behind that one.  We have Hanson on the bench, we had Buxton on there, so why did he feel the need to bring Nick Blackman on and change formation to go (even) more attacking?

Hull 1st leg: an absolute shambles. Player errors? What a crock of poo. They had 16 shots, absolutely battered us in that first half. Why not change the system there and then? His first substitution when was it? After a hour, a hour FFS. I could've told you after 20 minutes it wasn't working. Then he brings Hughes off and sticks Bent on with what? three minutes remaining, school boy poo right there.

How is it ignorant? It's fookin common sense 

I felt at the time because we were playing them off the park he brought blackman on because he thought it was a good chance for him to score and build some confidence.

Could have paid off but sadly fell apart badly.

That first game against hull was horrific. Came away feeling so low. Quite how we nearly turned it around i dont know.

 

[Wignall12]

2 hours ago, Nuwtfly said:

To me, this tells us that Mel Morris is not going to interview any managers who are currently in work.

The reason I think this is because of the bit in bold. I think he's referencing the way Chelsea have approached us, here. That they've come in for our manager at a time that will likely disrupt our preparations for the season. To me, he's saying that he doesn't want to, and won't, put another club in that same situation.

Some people have been suggesting to me that this is only the case while Frank is still here - but he doesn't explicitly say this. I don't see why he would suddenly be OK with causing "the same situation" on another club once our manager has gone.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but that's how this has come across for me. 

Go back and listen again............we won't talk to any currently employed managers whilst Frank is still our manager....i.e. until or if he has left for Londonville 

[MuespachRam]

has King Billy returned yet?

[Mark of Ayrshire]

Sounds like the next manager will be a poster from on here

[Anag Ram]

6 minutes ago, Mark of Ayrshire said:

Sounds like the next manager will be a poster from on here

Let's have a vote!!

[Mark of Ayrshire]

2 minutes ago, Anag Ram said:

Let's have a vote!!

A vote for a thread like this would have been good, it’s just descended into hundreds of comments waffling about tactics from matches of four years ago (even down to descriptions of the goals) a load of ifs buts and maybes.  Until the new manager gets there nobody knows what will happen no matter how you all try to justify your choice.