v QPR (H) Match Thread

[Jimbo Ram]

3 hours ago, Nuwtfly said:

Yet again, ONE individual error costs us 2 points. If we don't give away the penalty we win the game. Simple.

Add QPR (H) to Swansea, Stoke, WBA as games where we deserved more than we got.

Thought we were fortunate to get a point at Stoke?

[Tamworthram]

3 hours ago, Nuwtfly said:

Yet again, ONE individual error costs us 2 points. If we don't give away the penalty we win the game. Simple.

Add QPR (H) to Swansea, Stoke, WBA as games where we deserved more than we got.

Football doesn't quite work like that though does it unless the one individual error happens in the final minutes. There is no telling if the game would have panned out any differently in the second half had they not been awarded the penalty.

Also, you could just as easily argue that an individual error by a QPR player (the careless tackle to give away the free kick) earned us a point. 

[jono]

1 hour ago, Coconut said:

Yep, lots of fine margins. We could easily be a very unimpressive team with a terrible away record somehow sitting 4th in the table.

As for yesterday, with Bielik in the team and sticking with the 3 at the back rather than dropping it three minutes into the game we win it easily.

Bogle & Malone actually playing as wing-backs, Marriott & Waghorn up top and the job's a good 'un. Bogle & Waghorn as the wingers, George Evans getting nowhere near to making a tackle forcing Duane Holmes to come deep, make the tackle instead and then try to start and end the move all by himself, central defenders having nobody to pass short to because Evans is hiding behind an opposition player and... eurgh.

I understand the logic that it was stupid for us to change the formation & team up after 5 home wins, coming up against a terribly out of sorts QPR but in a way it's also the ideal time to try something different. What better chance are you going to have to experiment?

This season is all about finding out what works and what doesn't, which players have a future at the club. We've got a £4m right back in Andre Wisdom, but to give him game time we have to drop Bogle, do that we'd have to suffer a load of people complaining about the manager being negative and not choosing an attacking RB, ignoring that Wisdom has previously been part of a very attacking team under McClaren.

Yesterday was supposed to be a way of killing both of those birds with one stone - Wisdom gets a full game and Bogle can concentrate on his attacking play, but then Bielik gets injured, we throw what we'd been working on for the game out of the window. Despite an awful performance we were still one stupid decision away from recording a victory.

Martin should always play, but maybe he wasn't up to a 90 minute performance? Let's not forget he's still got some fitness issues. Lowe vs Malone - Lowe is a better all-round player but I never really expect him to provide a killer final ball. Malone carries a greater attacking threat as shown when he was at Fulham, and occasionally has done here. If the original intention was to play with a back 4 then Lowe would probably have been slelected, but we were planning to play with wing-backs, so Malone was chosen.

That Bielik injury ducked us over big time. As soon as the change to the line-up was announced I regretted my pre-match prediction of an easy victory!

I had a real moan yesterday evening. It almost as bad as if we’d lost. But my more mature head has now risen and that is a decent summary.
It seems clear that Martin is going to struggle to play every game but if Waggy and Marriott can play as strikers together it shouldn’t be too big a problem. Waggy on the left, too far away to help Marriott  just doesn’t help. I have mixed feelings about Malone. He isn’t as gifted as Lowe but he does pass and then move to receive the ball back, I’ve Lso always liked how he plays the ball first time rather than taking a touch. Yesterday he didn’t.

Fine margins apart, as you say, it was the Bielik thing that stuffed the balance. They pressed and we still tried to play it out but with Evans nowhere and Curtis not really being a passer of the ball and we were stuffed. Evans actually isn’t a bad player but he is much better as a CB and he can pass. In a sense, while Clarke is out, i’d almost be tempted to try Evans and Fozzie together and give the skipper a rest. ? 

[Ramarena]

Whilst we have the current personnel losing one of shinnie and beilik is bad......losing both is a disaster as the only other midfielder capable of contributing something positive is Holmes who’s a mixed bag at present.

Im hoping Cocu can make better progress after the January window allows him some room to maneuver with the squad and then we will hopefully see further progress next season after the summer window.

[Hanny]

17 hours ago, NottsRam77 said:

Oh I hear what ur saying and I’m totally in the same camp that winning / losing isn’t this lucky metric 

mode me urs always been about performances ( unless we’re in poo streak) 

for me results are short term performance are long term 

is it fair to say that both ... more so performances have been I short supply 

And  that’s the thing that concerns me and why I can’t share your optimism

we play well ie boro and then forest with two up top, probably the most fluent we’ve been going forward then he changes players and formation... why ? 

we the get tonked by fulham and produce an abject home performance today 

I’m just not feeling it 

I want to ... I want this to work Cos it could be beautiful 

who knows maybe with Rooney and few back we’ll pick up but u think he needs to decide on few things and make some tough calls 

 

Thanks. And I think I'm hearing what you are saying as well. 

It is frustrating to watch a system work one match and either not work the next, or get changed. Especially if the result or performance is poor. 

I agree with you that results are a measure of short term success. Performance a measure of long term success. Which is why I am so enthralled with this season. 

I was taught years ago; Players, not Plays. Meaning, you can scheme, plot, change, etc. But if you don't have the consistency of performance from the Players...none of it really matters, as then it becomes a guessing game, and hope/prayer/luck. 

I think Cocu's approach is emulating Players, not Plays...and that's why I seem to be navigating the emotions of this season so well. But that's just me. I understand everybody may have a different approach. I just hope Cocu is as good as I think he his. Because if he is, then to paraphrase you...This could be a beautiful thing for the club. 

coyr

[Ambitious]

I really liked the idea of a 3-5-2, but it was 4–3-3 with Bogle playing on the wing. Wisdom RCB and Forsyth LCB next time and a bit of work on the system, it’s the best option for our current playing squad IMO. 

I think Martin not playing hurt our ability to create chances in the final third. Not to worry though - we’ve got to allow time. 

[JfR]

22 hours ago, IslandExile said:

I think it was intended to be 3-5-2 but, after Bielik pulled out in the warm up, it was clear that Evans wasn't an adequate replacement. With him not strong enough to play the role, Cocu had to change the formation to 4-2-3-1.

I'm sure if Cocu had known Bielik wouldn't be able to play, he'd've set things up differently. But in the circumstances, he was allowed to change the injured player but not any others.

That said, I would have thought Bielik was already a doubt, after the knocks at Fulham, so presumably they had prepared for him failing a fitness test but that might still have resulted in a different line up.

I think he intended to use a 3-5-2 because QPR have used that as their primary formation this season and had used it as their formation in the four or so games in the run-up to the game yesterday. I think he changed to a 4-2-3-1 because QPR ended up setting up in something of a 4-4-1-1 and so the original plan didn't work out, though I think the choice of some players was so that they could play in either system if QPR changed system during the game, i.e. Wisdom as a CB or RB, Waggy as a CF or winger, Bogle as a RB or winger (which wasn't great, but we've not really got anyone else that can play RW well so it was probably worth a try to see if he could adapt).

I know people have criticised Cocu for changing the system to match QPR's, but considering that the three games we've played against a back three with a 4-2-3-1 were the ones against Brentford, Bristol City and Charlton, I think it's harsh to criticise him for not wanting to set up the same way for a fourth time. We've also struggled against teams playing two up top while playing a 4-2-3-1, like the first halves against Stoke and Bristol City, and the second half against Birmingham. We definitely looked better when we changed to a back three in each of those games.

[RoyMac5]

12 minutes ago, JfR said:

I know people have criticised Cocu for changing the system to match QPR's...

Too right. They've been absolutely pants and had been thrashed in their last game.

Why on earth shouldn't they try and adapt to how we were playing!!!!!?

[May Contain Nuts]

13 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:

Why on earth shouldn't they try and adapt to how we were playing!!!!!?

2013/14  & 2014/15. Derby have an excellent squad and are playing the best football seen at Pride Park in years. Most teams are swept aside but some just don't seem to want to budge. There are results like 0-0 bore draws against Milwall. Derby fans: "We need a plan B, once teams figure out they can mark Martin out of the game we just keep trying the same thing, we can't break them down, they just wait for a defensive mistake and beat us 1-0"

2017/18. Derby are playing Rowettball, the squad isn't great but we play a pretty successful counter attacking style, but every time we come up against a team who play with wing backs we get torn a new one. Derby fans "We need to come up with a plan to cope with these teams, we can't just defend for 90 minutes and rely on Vydra getting us out of the poo"

2018/19. Derby have an average squad but within it are 3 Premier League quality loans who cover some if not all of the cracks. There are great performances, there are awful performances. They still struggle to play against teams who set up with wing backs, and quite a few other teams too, especially big physical sides with little talent, like, well, Milwall. Derby fans: "We're so naive at times, the better teams have figured us out, we can't just rely on Harry Wilson banging in a free kick or every so often.

2019/20 season. Derby have an average squad, a lack of quality loan signings has exposed it further and there are multiple injuries to boot. Derby fans "We just need to stick to playing our football, let other teams worry about us! QPR will be a walkover. We just need to stick to one system, why are we trying to change it after it worked in previous games?"

 

 

[RoyMac5]

42 minutes ago, Coconut said:

 Derby fans "We just need to stick to playing our football, let other teams worry about us! QPR will be a walkover. We just need to stick to one system, why are we trying to change it after it worked in previous games?"

This is particularly valid when you have an average squad - you cannot expect average players to play 'total' football. Stick with what worked.

[May Contain Nuts]

17 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

This is particularly valid when you have an average squad - you cannot expect average players to play 'total' football. Stick with what worked.

So you can guarantee it would have worked again, can you?

We could have kept the same system, tried to play it the same way (despite the most important player in the team, the one who makes the system work, being missing) and lost 3-0!

Nobody would have moaned though.

ps changing to a 3-5-2 now and then isn't 'attempting to play total football'

[BathRam72]

27 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

This is particularly valid when you have an average squad - you cannot expect average players to play 'total' football. Stick with what worked.

I think the plan changed as soon as Bielik got injured. You can't just stick with it if the play maker that makes the team tick is suddenly out.

I guess that Cocu was trying to limit the damage and try something different with what he has left of a rag tag bunch.

With our current injuries Derby look like a bunch of squaddies heading back from the front for a bit of R and R.

[RoyMac5]

7 minutes ago, BathRam72 said:

I think the plan changed as soon as Bielik got injured. You can't just stick with it if the play maker that makes the team tick is suddenly out.

I guess that Cocu was trying to limit the damage and try something different with what he has left of a rag tag bunch.

With our current injuries Derby look like a bunch of squaddies heading back from the front for a bit of R and R.

Hamer

Wisdom/Bogle Davies Fozzie Lowe/Malone

Knight Holmes/Sibley Evans

Waghorn Martin Lawrence

Midfield a bit thin, but there might be one or two 23s who are suited to DM? 

[BathRam72]

10 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Hamer

Wisdom/Bogle Davies Fozzie Lowe/Malone

Knight Holmes/Sibley Evans

Waghorn Martin Lawrence

Midfield a bit thin, but there might be one or two 23s who are suited to DM? 

I personally think it is the midfield;d where our problems lie.

No cohesion between defence and attack.. 

[RoyMac5]

10 minutes ago, BathRam72 said:

I personally think it is the midfield;d where our problems lie.

No cohesion between defence and attack.. 

I agree but Bogle and Lowe get forward well especially at home. Knight was in flavour then out but looks a better prospect than Evans. Dowell who I forgot might provide better creativity than Evans. It's the creativity that is missing imo, but when we have 'two DMs' it's no surprise. 

Edit: forgot Whittaker too.

[Bubbles]

No one making a Blackburn thread then?

[ViewsFromTheMiddle]

33 minutes ago, Squid said:

No one making a Blackburn thread then?

Still @peachmyster as they were unbeaten v QPR.

Can they guide us to an away win? Wouldn’t bet on it!

[Rammy03]

On 01/12/2019 at 11:40, Andicis said:

Doesn't start Martin: "But he's the only attacker with a brain!"
Doesn't start Marriottt: "But he's the best goalscorer we've got!"
Doesn't start Wagorn: "But he's out top goalscorer!"
Doesn't start Whittaker: "Why aren't we giving youth a chance?!"

To be fair, the fans would be happy if he started Marriott and Martin because it works. They both offer something completely different and therefore make a good partnership

[Bubbles]

2 minutes ago, Rammy03 said:

To be fair, the fans would be happy if he started Marriott and Martin because it works. They both offer something completely different and therefore make a good partnership

Would currently prefer Martin and Whittaker starting based on recent form.