Derby County vs Notts Forest

[BramcoteRam84]

11 minutes ago, nottingram said:

The damning thing for Forsyth I think is that he didn’t check on their player (I don’t think). Surely if accidental then you would, even in a high intensity game like yesterday? 

But I agree, probably seen him play 150 games for Derby and I’m not sure he’s said boo to a goose in that time. Ultimately only he will really know.

I think he told him to get up!! ??

[BramcoteRam84]

13 hours ago, Ramarena said:

They’ve conceded 13 in 7 games.

Skewed by losing 4-0 to a very strong Wolves side playing with kids. In the league They’ve lost 3 times 2-1 and 1-0 before today. That’s now 8 goals in 5 games!! Hardly porous is it. 

[RoyMac5]

1 hour ago, Bianoic said:

You are right

One might have hoped, though, that we would have responded appropriately. Why  did we persist with the daft goal kick routine, and constantly giving the ball to Davies to try to do something with ? Just seemed to be a lack of communication by the management and a lack of footballing intelligence
 

Seems to me that we have three or four players who are very comfortable on the ball, even when it is fired in at them - Tom, Joz, Max and Ravel. Don’t understand why we don’t just aim to get those guys on the ball every time we have won it ? At least 3 of the 4 have shown they can control it and do something with it even when marked and under a lot of pressure .

Who would have made a real difference that we could have bought on? We continued to do what we had done well in the 1st half, and although not as well if we'd have put some of our chances away, been given that penalty, then it would be a different story.

Rome wasn't built in a day - oh and they had bricks to use!

[BramcoteRam84]

Can someone enlighten me on the chant doing the rounds yesterday. Think I picked up Forest are bankers in it but don’t know the rest and it sounded a good chant.

 

[Bianoic]

21 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Who would have made a real difference that we could have bought on? We continued to do what we had done well in the 1st half, and although not as well if we'd have put some of our chances away, been given that penalty, then it would be a different story.

Rome wasn't built in a day - oh and they had bricks to use!

Who said anything about bringing someone on ?

[Ramarena]

45 minutes ago, BramcoteRam84 said:

Skewed by losing 4-0 to a very strong Wolves side playing with kids. In the league They’ve lost 3 times 2-1 and 1-0 before today. That’s now 8 goals in 5 games!! Hardly porous is it. 

It’s still not great. Conceded in every game they’ve played this season.

Edited August 29, 2021 by Ramarena

[brady1993]

3 hours ago, Bianoic said:

Would love to have known what went on at half time to have led to such a change in attitude. It was almost as if we were determined to keep trying to shoot ourselves in the foot until we actually  did ! 

I don't think it was a change of attitude but more a tweak in formation and tactics from Forest that crippled our build up play combined with Lawrence tiring meaning he wasn't leading the line as well. The issues with it were there in the first half but they got exacerbated in the second.

 

3 hours ago, Bianoic said:

I find it baffling that we think it will be a successful tactic to give the ball to Davies and Shinniesta to start off our moves upfield. That is not either of theirs’ game and never will be.

We are actually from a set up point of view trying to do what we can to not give them ball in the framework of the system. Ultimately though with how we are set up and if we want to play out from the back then they are going to get the ball a decent amount. The plan isn't to play through them but in order to work the ball they are going to have to be ready to have it and help get us playing, playing out from the back just calls for it. You can't not play through them to an extent.

The reason why I think you are perceiving us giving them the ball a bunch is Forest clicked on to they could set easy pressing traps around the left half of our side (and those two in particular) i.e. leave them open in order to aggressively press them when the ball went into them. The problem isn't even really one or the other of them but the two of them with Fozzy to the side meant there was limited technical ability in half our team which was exacerbated by there not being an easy ball to knock into the channels and that Sibley (in front of them) was struggling to hold the ball up. It's something that I think we should have looked to counter by changing personnel around in the second half.

There is a decent risk that this will be come a recurring problem as other teams click onto it because it's not hard to recognise and set up for. Buchanan coming back on the left will help. Having Baldock back up top could help as well (as much as I'd like to see us build with this front 4 as is). It's fairly well documented that we were looking to bring in another centre back (Mengi) and I don't think it's a stretch to suggest we were also looking at bringing in another midfielder both of which would have helped but it's unlikely that materialises anymore. So we either wait out until Bielik returns and try and ride out these issues or we gamble on one of the academy players coming in for Shinnie in midfield.

4 hours ago, Bianoic said:

And as for this bizarre six yard kick off routine that we persist with, the less said the better !

See this contradicts what you previously talked about. The whole point behind that routine is so that Davies isn't being the one pressed initially when we start play out from the back and to try and create space for playing our way out. If Davies was good on the ball I'd bet you'd see Roos starting the kick primarily short to one of the CBs.

[RoyMac5]

7 minutes ago, Bianoic said:

Same goes to Ravel to some extent too. And it would be great to know why he didn’t get subbed off in the second half too, when he was clearly suffering and effectively we were reduced to playing with ten men at times. 

 

9 minutes ago, Bianoic said:

Who said anything about bringing someone on ?

I assumed if you subbed someone off you'd bring someone on?

[Ramarena]

2 hours ago, Bianoic said:

You are right

One might have hoped, though, that we would have responded appropriately. Why  did we persist with the daft goal kick routine, and constantly giving the ball to Davies to try to do something with ? Just seemed to be a lack of communication by the management and a lack of footballing intelligence
 

Seems to me that we have three or four players who are very comfortable on the ball, even when it is fired in at them - Tom, Joz, Max and Ravel. Don’t understand why we don’t just aim to get those guys on the ball every time we have won it ? At least 3 of the 4 have shown they can control it and do something with it even when marked and under a lot of pressure .

Good points. When this system works, it works fairly well like in the first half yesterday.

Sadly teams are rapidly working it out and shutting us down. Boro did it last week and Forest did so yesterday. Actually Forest started fairly well yesterday and clearly had a plan to counter us which was working till Lawrence’s goal knocked the stuffing out of them and their heads went down and we took control. 

Hughton was mocked on here last week, but his changes turned the game.

[Bianoic]

6 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

 

I assumed if you subbed someone off you'd bring someone on?

Totally confused - but I think I understand now

You quoted the wrong comment initially, didnt you ?

 So, just to clarify. Is your subbing off comment in relation to my observation that Ravel seemed to be in some distress and was barely mobile towards the end of the game ( in which case , literally anyone would have been better). 
 

Or was it in relation to my comments about some of our tactics in the second half, none of which were anything to do with substitutions ? 

[RoyMac5]

1 minute ago, Ramarena said:

Good points. When this system works, it works fairly well like in the first half yesterday.

Sadly teams are rapidly working it out and shutting us down. Boro did it last week and Forest did so yesterday. Actually Forest started fairly well yesterday and clearly had a plan to counter us which was working till Lawrence’s goal knocked the stuffing out of them and their heads went down and we took control. 

Hughton was mocked on here last week, but his changes turned the game.

He was able to bring on players to change the game, a winger and a Grabban to go two up top. We had a young striker to go one up top. But still we should have scored more. I'm glad we don't have Hughton.

[RoyMac5]

4 minutes ago, Bianoic said:

Totally confused - but I think I understand now

You quoted the wrong comment initially, didnt you ?

 So, just to clarify. Is your subbing off comment in relation to my observation that Ravel seemed to be in some distress and was barely mobile towards the end of the game ( in which case , literally anyone would have been better). 
 

Or was it in relation to my comments about some of our tactics in the second half, none of which were anything to do with substitutions ? 

Are the two things not related?

[Bianoic]

19 minutes ago, brady1993 said:

I don't think it was a change of attitude but more a tweak in formation and tactics from Forest that crippled our build up play combined with Lawrence tiring meaning he wasn't leading the line as well. The issues with it were there in the first half but they got exacerbated in the second.

 

We are actually from a set up point of view trying to do what we can to not give them ball in the framework of the system. Ultimately though with how we are set up and if we want to play out from the back then they are going to get the ball a decent amount. The plan isn't to play through them but in order to work the ball they are going to have to be ready to have it and help get us playing, playing out from the back just calls for it. You can't not play through them to an extent.

The reason why I think you are perceiving us giving them the ball a bunch is Forest clicked on to they could set easy pressing traps around the left half of our side (and those two in particular) i.e. leave them open in order to aggressively press them when the ball went into them. The problem isn't even really one or the other of them but the two of them with Fozzy to the side meant there was limited technical ability in half our team which was exacerbated by there not being an easy ball to knock into the channels and that Sibley (in front of them) was struggling to hold the ball up. It's something that I think we should have looked to counter by changing personnel around in the second half.

There is a decent risk that this will be come a recurring problem as other teams click onto it because it's not hard to recognise and set up for. Buchanan coming back on the left will help. Having Baldock back up top could help as well (as much as I'd like to see us build with this front 4 as is). It's fairly well documented that we were looking to bring in another centre back (Mengi) and I don't think it's a stretch to suggest we were also looking at bringing in another midfielder both of which would have helped but it's unlikely that materialises anymore. So we either wait out until Bielik returns and try and ride out these issues or we gamble on one of the academy players coming in for Shinnie in midfield.

See this contradicts what you previously talked about. The whole point behind that routine is so that Davies isn't being the one pressed initially when we start play out from the back and to try and create space for playing our way out. If Davies was good on the ball I'd bet you'd see Roos starting the kick primarily short to one of the CBs.

Fair comments Brady

I think overall my point is that I’m a bit mystified why a lower half team in England’s second tier, with the quality of player we currently have, and ones with a quality that  you would expect to be playing no higher than that level, should adopt some tactics that some of the top teams in the world and certainly the Prem would struggle to be successful with. I just don't think we have the players to do that and its a case of the management to some extent trying to force square pins into round holes

[RoyMac5]

1 minute ago, Bianoic said:

Fair comments Brady

I think overall my point is that I’m a bit mystified why a lower half team in England’s second tier, with the quality of player we currently have, and ones with a quality that  you would expect to be playing no higher than that level, should adopt some tactics that some of the top teams in the world and certainly the Prem would struggle to be successful with. I just don't think we have the players to do that and its a case of the management to some extent trying to force square pins into round holes

Who would you have started with up top then young Stretton? Then we could have not played out from the back?

Edited August 29, 2021 by RoyMac5

[Bianoic]

5 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Are the two things not related?

Totally unrelated 

[RoyMac5]

Just now, Bianoic said:

Totally unrelated 

We have no real quality on the bench but you're surprised we don't make a substitution, okay.

[Bianoic]

1 minute ago, RoyMac5 said:

Who would you have started with up top then young Stretton?

No idea what this has got to do with anything and I’m very bored now with this

Very much enjoy your contributions on here but for now toddlepip 

 

[RoyMac5]

Just now, Bianoic said:

No idea what this has got to do with anything and I’m very bored now with this

Very much enjoy your contributions on here but for now toddlepip 

I'm bored with your inability to join concepts together, toodlepip.

[Bianoic]

Just now, RoyMac5 said:

We have no real quality on the bench but you're surprised we don't make a substitution, okay.

Oh god…

[Ramarena]

6 minutes ago, Bianoic said:

Fair comments Brady

I think overall my point is that I’m a bit mystified why a lower half team in England’s second tier, with the quality of player we currently have, and ones with a quality that  you would expect to be playing no higher than that level, should adopt some tactics that some of the top teams in the world and certainly the Prem would struggle to be successful with. I just don't think we have the players to do that and its a case of the management to some extent trying to force square pins into round holes

Can anyone point to more than a couple of championship teams that have the players with technical quality in each area to pull off this system?

As you say it’s much more suited to the big clubs and the Prem who have much larger resources and can attract the technical players.

We have developed, against Peterborough we were really struggling to make it work and the splitting centre mids, the CAM dropping between the CB’s and the suicidal 6 yard line goal kick routine have all been dropped or dramatically changed…….so progress of sorts

Edited August 29, 2021 by Ramarena