Jump to content
Rample

v Scunthorpe (A) Carabao Cup - Match Thread

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

A broken Mercedes saloon car would probably be nearer, not the right thing, and broken, but would've been nice in another context.

You did make me laugh though

spacer.png

tragic and costly

Share this post


Link to post

4-3-3 

GK - Ravas 

RB - Lowe 

CB - Keogh 

CB - Clarke 

LB - Malone

DM - Bielik 

CM1 - Shinnie 

CM2 - Sibley/Knight 

RW - Paterson

LW - Bennett

ST - Marriott

Bench of Hamer, Knight/Sibley, Martin, Lawrence, Mitchell-Lawson, Evans, Buchanan

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, ThePrisoner said:

I think Cocu is going to go mostly full strength on this but probably start Paterson, Marriott and Bielik.

I'd argue that would be our full strength, minus injured Bogle. And obviously just making plain assumptions about the quality of Bielik 😄 

The way he talked at the press conference about a number of players being "very close" to their primary competition for positions makes me think we could see quite a few changes. But yeah, could just play full strength. That just sounded, to me, like justification for making changes.

The dream is that as well as Marriott and Bielik, he plays the likes of Sibley etc. and he has a great game - putting him firmly in the picture for Stoke.

Edited by SaintRam

Share this post


Link to post

I’d be very surprised to see Marriott start as a lone striker. The huge problem coming out of Saturday was our gap between our midfield and Waghorn, if we went with similar tactics then with Marriott upfront then I think it would only expose it further. Therefore I think, especially considering there will be changes, I’d push for Martin or Bennett in the CAM role and not focus on coming too deep but be used as an outlet. Both of them played that role in preseason so it atleast makes sense.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, TuffLuff said:

I’d be very surprised to see Marriott start as a lone striker. The huge problem coming out of Saturday was our gap between our midfield and Waghorn, if we went with similar tactics then with Marriott upfront then I think it would only expose it further. Therefore I think, especially considering there will be changes, I’d push for Martin or Bennett in the CAM role and not focus on coming too deep but be used as an outlet. Both of them played that role in preseason so it atleast makes sense.

 

Agree. Could maybe see him play behind Martin? 

Cocu seemed to like that partnership, albeit in very early pre-season. 

Although I'd be surprised (pleasantly, probably) to see Martin start. Just a thought.

Share this post


Link to post
29 minutes ago, Hathersage Ram said:

I just hope Marriott plays and scores.

I wish I knew the reason both Lampard and Cocu don't seem keen on playing Marriott.

I don't believe injuries are more than a bit part in their decisions.

Who knows????

 

I don't know for sure but I can make a few suggestions:

1) Suitability as a lone striker in a 433. There are question marks for over whether he does enough as its important that a striker in this system comes to link play and be an option in the build up play. Yes he played here a bit last season but crucially his best games here came with Waghorn wide doing a lot of this work for him.

2) Reliability. He had a period under Lampard last season in January, February before he got dropped for an extended stretch where the goals completely dried up and he wasn't doing enough to warrant a place. 

3) Attitude. Take this with a pinch of salt as most of it is reading between the lines. When Lampard dropped Mariott last year for an extended he alluded to players not doing enough in training and then after the Leeds 2nd leg he said something to the affect of "If he plays like that more often then he will get more game time". So it's possible Lampard didn't think Mariott was giving his all.

4) Waghorn might be a better all round choice. Whilst Mariott is an excellent finisher, Waghorn had a comparable goal record when played as a striker (slightly better goals/min). Waghorn also has better hold up play, is more physical, better on the ball and more comfortable rotating with wide players. 

Mariott is a good player but there are definately reasons as to why he might not be starting other than fitness.

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, SaintRam said:

Agree. Could maybe see him play behind Martin? 

Cocu seemed to like that partnership, albeit in very early pre-season. 

Although I'd be surprised (pleasantly, probably) to see Martin start. Just a thought.

As a fully paid up member of the ‘Martini’s’ on here, I’d still be surprised if he started but I do hope he gets a fair chance to make an impact in this squaad Not gonna delude myself and say he’s a long term answer but when you can see a problem like the ball not sticking up front then he’s a logical piece of the jigsaw. It’s not just ‘Waghorn was poor so let’s stick Marriott in and give him a run out’ because the issue of not creating enough isn’t resolved.

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, TuffLuff said:

As a fully paid up member of the ‘Martini’s’ on here, I’d still be surprised if he started but I do hope he gets a fair chance to make an impact in this squaad Not gonna delude myself and say he’s a long term answer but when you can see a problem like the ball not sticking up front then he’s a logical piece of the jigsaw. It’s not just ‘Waghorn was poor so let’s stick Marriott in and give him a run out’ because the issue of not creating enough isn’t resolved.

I too would not be adverse to giving him a go in a cup match. If he can link with bryson hendrick and Hughes perhaps he can with Lawrence, Dowell and Zoon.

for three season he was brilliant before nigel Pearson decided he could case punts forward really quickly and was thus done for. He even started well at Fulham before Thames Water gave him IBS.

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, Jourdan said:

Surely we go with the strongest team available?

It’s an ideal opportunity to give the players more minutes to get up to speed with what Cocu wants and for the team to gel.

I would have thought so, with a couple of changes to give the likes of Marriott a proper run out. The thing desperately needed at this stage of the season is match fitness and sharpness.

On top of that the cup runs last season seemed to do morale a world of good and, contrary to fashionable belief, didn't seem to hinder our league performances.

Share this post


Link to post
31 minutes ago, KCG said:

I would have thought so, with a couple of changes to give the likes of Marriott a proper run out. The thing desperately needed at this stage of the season is match fitness and sharpness.

On top of that the cup runs last season seemed to do morale a world of good and, contrary to fashionable belief, didn't seem to hinder our league performances.

Might have buggered up Mason Mount for a while tho, playing at Chelsea when he really shouldn't have....

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, brady1993 said:

I don't know for sure but I can make a few suggestions:

1) Suitability as a lone striker in a 433. There are question marks for over whether he does enough as its important that a striker in this system comes to link play and be an option in the build up play. Yes he played here a bit last season but crucially his best games here came with Waghorn wide doing a lot of this work for him.

2) Reliability. He had a period under Lampard last season in January, February before he got dropped for an extended stretch where the goals completely dried up and he wasn't doing enough to warrant a place. 

3) Attitude. Take this with a pinch of salt as most of it is reading between the lines. When Lampard dropped Mariott last year for an extended he alluded to players not doing enough in training and then after the Leeds 2nd leg he said something to the affect of "If he plays like that more often then he will get more game time". So it's possible Lampard didn't think Mariott was giving his all.

4) Waghorn might be a better all round choice. Whilst Mariott is an excellent finisher, Waghorn had a comparable goal record when played as a striker (slightly better goals/min). Waghorn also has better hold up play, is more physical, better on the ball and more comfortable rotating with wide players. 

Mariott is a good player but there are definately reasons as to why he might not be starting other than fitness.

Marriott is given a lot of undue criticism over his all round play and him being a bad boy without  people even knowing what they are talking about and making up BS rumours. His all round player is criticised over harshly just becuase he is small and weaker doesn't mean he can't play lone striker. Waghorn is not what he is made out to be by some, he is not a Prime Chris Martin with a great touch and perfect hold up play against Swansea his ability to link he play was rather poor and he is average in this area, the only thing he can do is win the odd freekick with his back to goal becuase of his strength. Marriott has better footwork  and pace so he can get the ball and accelerate away from defenders with his pace and agility and create chances that way,  his passing is pretty decent and is not a weakness, most of the time when he was poor last season was becuase of the rank bad service even Aguero would struggle with a dodgy midfield behind him. Our best performances were with Marriott playing, not a prayer Waghorn would have scored Marriott's winner vs Leeds and also I am very confident we would have won vs Swansea with Marriott starting, as  there was a chance Marriott would have definitely scored but Waghorn was too slow to reach the ball before the keeper, and he missed a decent  chance from a Bogle cross + a pen.

All in all I'd like to see him start tonight and also see the likes of Knight or Sibley play along side Beilik and Shinnie as our midfield and striker position has not looked too great in the first games, with our defence being the strong point.

Edited by Marriot Ram99

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/08/2019 at 12:29, Pottig said:

Worcester City are my local team. Took these lot to the longest penalty shootout in FA cup history in the second round at Aggborough (2014) where we ultimately lost. So I have unfinished business with Scunthorpe. Come on you Rams, avenge us.

What’s the city like for supping @Pottig been meaning to have an afternoon there for quite a while. Big real ale fan and there’s a few listed for Worcester. I’m out on the rip tomorrow, looking at options. 🍺👍

Share this post


Link to post

@Marriott Ram99

I want to start off by saying I think Mariott is a good player with the potential to be very good at this level and that I'm not saying whether or not he should start. My answer was more to give potential reasons as to why he might not be fancied in response to somebody asking that question. I'm not even saying they are definitive answers just more where the question marks lie about him.

Seeing as you've taken the time to put forward a decent counter argument, I want to go through your general points one at a time but I'll lump them together a little. 

1) "The rumours around attitude" - This one is difficult because there is nothing definitive and things have been potentially conflated. However what we know is there was an extended period last season where Lampard dropped him from the squad yet he was said to be fit and that when Lampard first dropped him, Lampard alluded to some players not putting there all in during training. Now i agree that there might have been nothing here but it is strange what happened and does lead some credence to the rumours. 

2) "His all round play/whether he can play as a lone striker" - I agree that whether he can play as a lone striker isn't dependent on his size and I think he's plenty strong enough for the role. I will also say that at times he's showed decent bits of link up play or a good pass here or there but it's not yet been consistent. His first instinct is to look to be played in behind, which there is nothing wrong with but often you need the lone striker to come short for the ball and help with the build up play because if they don't the striker can isolate themselves and the trying to build into the final third becomes disjointed.

For me I don't think his all round play as a lone striker is quite there yet on a consistent basis. And his best performances last year came with somebody else operating as a quasi target man for him; either Waghorn tucking in from the wing or Bennett against Leeds.

3) "His bad performances were down to bad service" - Yeah there is some of that but I don't think he was doing enough despite the inadequate service.

4) "Mariott was a part of all our best performances" - This debatable and depends on what you considered the best performances. To my mind our best stretch of performances was from the Rotherham game to the end of the season where Mariott didn't feature (not saying that's the reason we player but just pointing out he didn't play a part here). 

5) "Waghorn's link up play is average" - Its not as good as Martin's but it's better than average and pretty good for the league. I'll admit he's not been at his best this season so far but his all round play was really good at the back end of last season.

6) "Mariott would have scored x/ Waghorn wouldn't have scored y" - I always think these types of arguments are a bit silly because you can't know for certain and it's likely that opportunities wouldn't have come about how they did if you swapped the players around. But I think it's fair to say Mariott is a better finisher. 

To be honest I think if Mariott is over his fitness problems and the attitude stuff is BS then our best 11 likely includes them both. I'm more arguing that if you had to pick only one on current evidence I'd go Waghorn because I think he's a more rounded player. But I do think Mariott has the potential to be a lot better than he's showed so far. 

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, brady1993 said:

1) "The rumours around attitude" - This one is difficult because there is nothing definitive and things have been potentially conflated. However what we know is there was an extended period last season where Lampard dropped him from the squad yet he was said to be fit and that when Lampard first dropped him, Lampard alluded to some players not putting there all in during training. Now i agree that there might have been nothing here but it is strange what happened and does lead some credence to the rumours. 

I think Lampard used pretty harsh words after THAT Leeds game... Something like "if he just wanted enough, he could do anything" or something along those lines. Sounded very much like attitude problem to me.

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Dimmu said:

I think Lampard used pretty harsh words after THAT Leeds game... Something like "if he just wanted enough, he could do anything" or something along those lines. Sounded very much like attitude problem to me.

Yeah he also reiterated it a few times. The emphasis was seemed less about the individual performance and more that it was the level of performance should have been giving but hasn't.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.