Jump to content

Is Marriott overrated.


Curtains

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 125
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 hours ago, Key clubber said:

I’ll be honest, you lost me at “Marriott is a pretty poor player at this level” . How do we know he never plays more than 3 consecutive games ?

He’s had a couple of runs in the team before, and while he’s shown some promise in terms of his poaching skill as I said, he didn’t show enough for me to think that he’s good enough as an all round striker for our level, even if he could stay fit. Simple as that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sparkle said:

The question was how to get the best out of Marriott  - actually I think we would be better suited to 352 with the players we have ( but we can’t fit Lawrence into that!) 

I would have him starting with Martin if both fit 

But we don’t play two up front, so we can’t fit both in the same team. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He’s needs to be playing off a focal point, on the shoulder of the last man 

he’s not going to get that opportunity at Derby over a period of games 

couple of isolated occasions that sadly seem to be a thing of the past or when we’re chasing the game but that’s it 

shame as I think he could be simply electric if used like this 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Millenniumram said:

I’ve said it before, he definitely is. Just like players who make a mistake in a big game (Keogh, Roos) end up being over-criticised for the rest of their time here as a result of the mistake, players who have a special moment in a big game (Bryson, Marriott) tend to be Overrated for the rest of their time here as a result. They seem to be able to get away with far more poor performances and still be bizarrely seen as the saviour. Marriott for me is a pretty poor player at this level. Don’t get me wrong, he’s not awful, and he does certainly have positives in terms of his ability as a poacher when he’s on the end of through balls. But it’s not enough for me. His general play isn’t good enough - he can’t hold a ball up, he doesn’t get involved enough in general play dropping deep, and his finishing is actually quite poor when you look up the stats. 

For me he isn’t good enough. He’s a low end championship quality player, and not good enough for a team gunning for promotion. We need better, and I actually think the plan was to get better this window. I’m certain we wanted Billy Sharp before the investment fell through, and gut feeling tells me we wanted to shift Marriott and replace him with Sharp. With the investment delay I don’t think we now have the funds to do so this window, as we have to focus on the bigger priorities.

You really would have struggled to enjoy Bobby Davison and Phil Gee if this is your opinion of Marriott.

You cannot compare him with Martin they are different players with different skill sets.

Marriott is a on the shoulder set me free on goal striker the same has Bobby and Phil both also missed their fair share of chances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Rambalin said:

You really would have struggled to enjoy Bobby Davison and Phil Gee if this is your opinion of Marriott.

You cannot compare him with Martin they are different players with different skill sets.

Marriott is a on the shoulder set me free on goal striker the same has Bobby and Phil both also missed their fair share of chances.

Difference is they trained properly I believe. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Curtains said:

I’ve seen some great strikers at Derby from Charlie George to Alan Biley and to Dean Saunders and Kevin Hector.etc etc

Marriott has the attributes but needs to back it up . 

 

Biley's 19 goals in 51 games is pretty good, but it's not much of a body of work and I certainly I don't think it deserves being called great or mentioning in the same breath as the other 3. Or Bobby Davison who I just saw you had mentioned and I forgot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Bob The Badger said:

Biley's 19 goals in 51 games is pretty good, but it's not much of a body of work and I certainly I don't think it deserves being called great or mentioning in the same breath as the other 3. Or Bobby Davison who I just saw you had mentioned and I forgot. 

Bobby Davison was fantastic for Derby.  Was he signed from Halifax ! 

Biley and Swindlehurst were a great pair together.  

Loved Biley but I think we were in a lower standard division  than now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rambalin said:

You really would have struggled to enjoy Bobby Davison and Phil Gee if this is your opinion of Marriott.

You cannot compare him with Martin they are different players with different skill sets.

Marriott is a on the shoulder set me free on goal striker the same has Bobby and Phil both also missed their fair share of chances.

We’re talking different generations of football here, when different qualities were required from forwards. Nowadays, we need more from a striker than just the ability to play on the shoulder, when we play the one man up front systems that we do in the modern game. I’m sure the two players you mention were far better players than Marriott regardless, but either way up, we need more than just a striker who can latch onto through balls these days. Forward roles aren’t the same as they used to be, so yes I can compare Marriott and Martin, because they both compete for the same lone striker position. And Martin is a much better all round footballer, simple as that for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Millenniumram said:

He’s had a couple of runs in the team before, and while he’s shown some promise in terms of his poaching skill as I said, he didn’t show enough for me to think that he’s good enough as an all round striker for our level, even if he could stay fit. Simple as that.

What is “simple as that” is when he’s played, most games he’s created chances when given the ball or scored.

A striker who doesn’t get the service doesn’t tend to score , simple . 
I’d be looking at the wingers and seeing what more they could do rather than blaming Marriott for “being poor at this level”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Key clubber said:

What is “simple as that” is when he’s played, most games he’s created chances when given the ball or scored.

A striker who doesn’t get the service doesn’t tend to score , simple . 
I’d be looking at the wingers and seeing what more they could do rather than blaming Marriott for “being poor at this level”

Has he? I can’t remember his creating a great deal of chances at all during his time here, he more often losses possession through his lack of strength than he creates something. And while he was a decent finisher last year, he’s been unbelievably wasteful this year, almost Sammon esque at times. 

I don’t think our supply line is good enough either don’t get me wrong, we need improvements on the likes of Lawrence if we’re gonna create enough chances to get anywhere. But let’s not pretend that that’s the  only problem we have up front. Our strikers, including Marriott, haven’t been good enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...