Rams vs Luton Matchday Thread

[May Contain Nuts]

1 hour ago, VulcanRam said:

I'm not sure it's fair to analyse by hindsight in this manner. The analysis - and criticism or praise - is surely on the tactical decision, which was to add in another defender at this stage. The actual 'who' is a bit immaterial because once the players are out there it's out of the manager's hands and anything can happen. You could argue Stearman was the better call to head balls away but, or you could argue their greatest threat was coming from wide and crosses in so Williams was the right call to help prevent the crosses coming in.

Are you criticising for putting a defender on or just which defender was put on, because if its the latter surely its an impossible argument (in the context of last night's game) but it's all conjecture based around one player's performance and one player's non-performance because he didn't get on so you're trying to build a case on what may or may not have happened . Ultimately whoever is on the pitch, if the keeper comes like that and misses, it's down to the keeper and no-one else, certainly not the manager. 

 

I think I was being perfectly fair, praising the good things but mentioning one area of weakness.

We're talking about as issue wider than one substitution made last night, we're talking about something which has presented itself on multiple occasions. Tactical changes backfiring once or twice can be written off, but when it becomes a noticeable feature of someone's spell in charge it warrants discussion no matter the circumstances surrounding it.

You've seen discussion and critique as criticism when it wasn't.

I already covered that there are no certainties by subbing one player on rather than another, or having one manager over another. I didn't say one option was definitely right and the other definitely wrong - although as it happened Williams didn't stop the crosses and we didn't defend the crosses - I queried whether he'd made a mistake, and mitigated it by saying that even if he had it's understandable because he's a rookie manager. It's hardly being unfair.

You could say that every single analysis of what's happened on a football pitch is in hindsight, and therefore all discussion post-match is unfair. We could just gloss over any potential faults in Rooney's management and call it all conjecture, or we could acknowledge based on what we've seen that he has some areas to work on?

The only way to avoid being accused of speaking up in hindsight is to discuss things as they present themselves. Once again though, discussion doesn't mean criticism.

It's something to revisit in 6, 12, 18 months.

Oddly this post feels way more critical than the one I posted initially!

Edited October 20, 2021 by Coconut's Beard

[ramsbottom]

Just watched their 2nd goal again. It’s such a crap attempt to come for the ball from Allsop. So half hearted and no conviction, like he fully expected to get to it without really trying. If he backed off to his goal line it would’ve been such an easy save cus there was zero pace on the header.  That’s the most annoying thing about last night, they didn’t have to work for either of their goals, and both were 100% avoidable ???

[VulcanRam]

1 hour ago, kevinhectoring said:

He’s motivating them well and I think we’re set up fine. But the strange idea that the management team’s job is done when the first whistle blows is unfortunately one that our dug out seems to share. 

I'm not saying they don't have a job to do, there is bits they can be doing regards organising and motivating, but what they can't do is head or kick footballs and what I'm asking is how do people expect them to be responsible for individual errors at the moment they happen?

[VulcanRam]

46 minutes ago, Coconut's Beard said:

I think I was being perfectly fair, praising the good things but mentioning one area of weakness.

We're talking about as issue wider than one substitution made last night, we're talking about something which has presented itself on multiple occasions. Tactical changes backfiring once or twice can be written off, but when it becomes a noticeable feature of someone's spell in charge it warrants discussion no matter the circumstances surrounding it.

You've seen discussion and critique as criticism when it wasn't.

I already covered that there are no certainties by subbing one player on rather than another, or having one manager over another. I didn't say one option was definitely right and the other definitely wrong - although as it happened Williams didn't stop the crosses and we didn't defend the crosses - I queried whether he'd made a mistake, and mitigated it by saying that even if he had it's understandable because he's a rookie manager. It's hardly being unfair.

You could say that every single analysis of what's happened on a football pitch is in hindsight, and therefore all discussion post-match is unfair. We could just gloss over any potential faults in Rooney's management and call it all conjecture, or we could acknowledge based on what we've seen that he has some areas to work on?

The only way to avoid being accused of speaking up in hindsight is to discuss things as they present themselves. Once again though, discussion doesn't mean criticism.

It's something to revisit in 6, 12, 18 months.

Oddly this post feels way more critical than the one I posted initially!

Thanks mate, I think we've both had our say on this, I think you've misunderstood my point but it doesn't matter; one thing I'd like to ask, which I think gets to the crux of your argument, is tactical changes had failed / worked out negatively / harmed us (whatever phrase you wish to use) on "multiple occasions". I'm not sure what you're referring to. 

[May Contain Nuts]

25 minutes ago, VulcanRam said:

I'm not saying they don't have a job to do, there is bits they can be doing regards organising and motivating, but what they can't do is head or kick footballs and what I'm asking is how do people expect them to be responsible for individual errors at the moment they happen?

Because some tactical changes increase the likelihood of situations arising where these individual errors happen?

A change in shape at the wrong time, partnerships on the pitch being broken up, players coming onto the pitch taking time to get up to the speed of the game etc, all affect the flow of the game.

How many times have you seen a team under siege, but after their manager makes a couple of small tactical tweaks they start to take the initiative?

13 minutes ago, VulcanRam said:

Thanks mate, I think we've both had our say on this, I think you've misunderstood my point but it doesn't matter; one thing I'd like to ask, which I think gets to the crux of your argument, is tactical changes had failed / worked out negatively / harmed us (whatever phrase you wish to use) on "multiple occasions". I'm not sure what you're referring to. 

I don't have a list of games, tactical changes and subs, sorry.

More a distinct memory of a feeling after a few games where we've ended up chucking away points, that the subs didn't help matters. Specifics though, I couldn't tell you.

I don't think I'm alone in this though?

Edited October 20, 2021 by Coconut's Beard

[Jourdan]

2 hours ago, VulcanRam said:

What are they? What tweaks/ingenuity are you referring to? Most managers would surely have done exactly what Rooney did - throw on another defender.

Luton - scored 22. Their two top scorers have more goals than all of Derby's team put together. Huddersfield, scored 18. Coventry, scored 18. Derby, scored 10. Does that not infer they have better goalscorers? And even with that, take away our points deduction and we'd be only 2 points behind Millwall, who you refer to and who aren't exactly prolific themselves and who have a very similar record to us. 

I'm not saying there's not room for improvement, of course there is, but don't tell me that the fact we are reliant on Baldock, Stretton and Kazim for goals isn't a principal reason we're not winning games. Their lad up front last is better than all three and would definitely improve our chances. There's only so much any coach can do with players of a certain ability. 

Never forget the great Alex Ferguson quote when asked what made him a great manager: "Great players", he replied. 

Personally, I would have kept the same settled team and perhaps added Stearman into the back line in the last 15 minutes. As little disruption as possible. We weren’t chasing the game.

Do Luton, Huddersfield and Coventry have better goalscorers than us really? Or is it that their teams function better as a unit and their coaching and tactics are better at getting more out of what they have?

Now I am not saying that we have top shelf options, but it’s not as if we have plucked Lawrence, Jozwiak, Baldock and Kazim from Dog and Deer FC either.

These free scoring teams you mention are almost exclusively reliant on unproven players coming up from League 1 and 2 and in some cases lower. Many players we would overlook and turn our nose up at if given the chance.

The only notable exception I can see is Coventry’s multi million signing of Gyokeres from Brighton.

Better players needed v better coach needed? It’s the eternal debate. I think at this moment all the evidence points to better coaching being needed which would lead to better decision making on the pitch. But let’s agree to disagree.

[VulcanRam]

43 minutes ago, Coconut's Beard said:

Because some tactical changes increase the likelihood of situations arising where these individual errors happen?

A change in shape at the wrong time, partnerships on the pitch being broken up, players coming onto the pitch taking time to get up to the speed of the game etc, all affect the flow of the game.

How many times have you seen a team under siege, but after their manager makes a couple of small tactical tweaks they start to take the initiative?

I don't have a list of games, tactical changes and subs, sorry.

More a distinct memory of a feeling after a few games where we've ended up chucking away points, that the subs didn't help matters. Specifics though, I couldn't tell you.

I don't think I'm alone in this though?

I think the only time we have chucked away points this season is against Peterborough. But I see what you're getting at. 

[DCFC1388]

18 hours ago, Crewton said:

LOL, of course you did. 

 

 

Edited October 20, 2021 by DCFC1388

[Comrade 86]

9 minutes ago, DCFC1388 said:

 

 

[Rampage]

Best thing about this game is that we managed to score two goals.

[Rampage]

The three teams directly above are not as good as us so we will pass them. If we had win last night and did not have a points deduction, we would be three points off the top six.

[Yani P]

Cardiff Hull and Barnsley all losing...would probably prefer Hull to get a point with Peterboro but great results for us so far with 4th bottom getting nothing..

[Rampage]

20 minutes ago, Yani P said:

Cardiff Hull and Barnsley all losing...would probably prefer Hull to get a point with Peterboro but great results for us so far with 4th bottom getting nothing..

Cardiff in it now. About to get another manager probably.

[Ravabeerbelly]

18 hours ago, ramsbottom said:

Just watched their 2nd goal again. It’s such a crap attempt to come for the ball from Allsop. So half hearted and no conviction, like he fully expected to get to it without really trying. If he backed off to his goal line it would’ve been such an easy save cus there was zero pace on the header.  That’s the most annoying thing about last night, they didn’t have to work for either of their goals, and both were 100% avoidable ???

Do you think Jags was blameless in this?

[Ram-Alf]

9 minutes ago, Ravabeerbelly said:

Do you think Jags was blameless in this?

Can I chuck my 5 peneth in.

With Jagielka behind their attacker you'd have thought it's in the bag, BUT!, He can see Allsop coming to to collect so makes little effort to challenge, Now this is hindsight... If Jagielka had done his job and if Allsop had done his job...I see a collective pileup from the 3 players involved...just My opinion

[leroyoftherovers]

14 minutes ago, Ravabeerbelly said:

Do you think Jags was blameless in this?

Yes ,for me he back's off a little when he sees the keeper coming or he's heard a shout, Jags gets non of the blame from  me, think he's been really good so far. 

Edited October 21, 2021 by leroyoftherovers

[Ravabeerbelly]

I suspect Jags knows he didn’t cover himself in glory. It was his man and he got himself the wrong side at the wrong time and was on his heels. 

Just like Stearman when McDonald made the mistake v Sheff Utd he could’ve made life a lot harder for the attacker and a lot easier for his keeper.

However these are just footballing errors and I’m not vilifying Jags (or Stearman) any more than I would Allsop

Edited October 21, 2021 by Ravabeerbelly

[ramsbottom]

4 hours ago, Ravabeerbelly said:

Do you think Jags was blameless in this?

See below ?

4 hours ago, leroyoftherovers said:

Yes ,for me he back's off a little when he sees the keeper coming or he's heard a shout, Jags gets non of the blame from  me, think he's been really good so far. 

 

[Oldben]

Nixon confirms, Former Manchester City chief Garry Cook was spotted at Pride Park earlier this week, attending the game between Derby County and Luton Town.

Interesting to see if cook buys the club.

 

[Reggie Greenwood]

2 hours ago, Oldben said:

Nixon confirms, Former Manchester City chief Garry Cook was spotted at Pride Park earlier this week, attending the game between Derby County and Luton Town.

Interesting to see if cook buys the club.

 

Cook won’t be “buying” the club just facilitating a group who may