Matchday Thread - Derby County v Barnsley (13/08 15:00)

[Ram1988]

14 hours ago, ossieram said:

He was having a rant and offering to meet the South stand outside before slipping on the stairs and then ranting again. 

He looked like a total pillock to say the least....

[IslandExile]

"Winner stays on".

Come on @Ghost of Clough , the shrews are up next.

Edited August 14, 2022 by IslandExile

[FlyBritishMidland]

15 hours ago, Chris_Martin said:

48 i think

I think it’s 49.  He played against Sheff Wed in the last game of  20/21

[brady1993]

Only just got round to watching the game. Thought it was a decent-ish for the win for the most part and didn't really think Barnsley threatened that much. 

Few random thoughts:

 - The midfield looked better balanced in midfield first half with Sibley. And I don't think he should have come off when he did.

- Stearman makes me appreciate that Davies has actually got a lot better on the ball as Stearman looked a good deal shakier in possession and wasn't make build up play easy.

- Whilst I'm there I think Stearman could have done better for the goal.

- To reiterate everyone Cashin was fantastic.

- I'm still not sure what Rosenior sees in Smith, especially in a more advanced position.

On a more general point I don't think we got the subs right. Hourihane's legs had gone after an hour and NML looked knackered as well. Whilst Sibley was tiring I don't think he should have been first off as he still had some running in him and he kept them honest in midfield by providing a threat. If the thinking was to get control of the midfield I can understand that but in that case I think you have to look at Hourihane first and then maybe Sibley at the same time. In particular I thought we were crying out for McGoldrick to come on so the ball would stick a deal more (probably for Sibley) and we needed his ability to get on the ball and link play.

Also am I imagining things or don't we have 5 subs ?  

Personally would have gone something like:

Hourihane -> Smith/Thompson 60mins  

NML -> Dobbin 60mins 

Sibley -> McGoldrick 65mins

Collins -> Thompson/Smith 80 mins 

Fozzy on late if you need him in the air.

 

[Quagga]

21 hours ago, brady1993 said:

 

Also am I imagining things or don't we have 5 subs ?  

Personally would have gone something like:

Hourihane -> Smith/Thompson 60mins  

NML -> Dobbin 60mins 

Sibley -> McGoldrick 65mins

Collins -> Thompson/Smith 80 mins 

Fozzy on late if you need him in the air.

 

Totally agree with your post, only quibble i'd make is we have 5 subs but only 3 chances to change in open play.
So you'd need to make that Fozzy call on 80mins when Collins came off or not at all

Alternatively you can abuse the concussion subsitute rules

[sage]

22 hours ago, brady1993 said:

Only just got round to watching the game. Thought it was a decent-ish for the win for the most part and didn't really think Barnsley threatened that much. 

Few random thoughts:

 - The midfield looked better balanced in midfield first half with Sibley. And I don't think he should have come off when he did.

- Stearman makes me appreciate that Davies has actually got a lot better on the ball as Stearman looked a good deal shakier in possession and wasn't make build up play easy.

- Whilst I'm there I think Stearman could have done better for the goal.

- To reiterate everyone Cashin was fantastic.

- I'm still not sure what Rosenior sees in Smith, especially in a more advanced position.

On a more general point I don't think we got the subs right. Hourihane's legs had gone after an hour and NML looked knackered as well. Whilst Sibley was tiring I don't think he should have been first off as he still had some running in him and he kept them honest in midfield by providing a threat. If the thinking was to get control of the midfield I can understand that but in that case I think you have to look at Hourihane first and then maybe Sibley at the same time. In particular I thought we were crying out for McGoldrick to come on so the ball would stick a deal more (probably for Sibley) and we needed his ability to get on the ball and link play.

Also am I imagining things or don't we have 5 subs ?  

Personally would have gone something like:

Hourihane -> Smith/Thompson 60mins  

NML -> Dobbin 60mins 

Sibley -> McGoldrick 65mins

Collins -> Thompson/Smith 80 mins 

Fozzy on late if you need him in the air.

 

I think he wants Hourihanes experience on the pitch,  though I agree he looks knackered in the last third of games. I think he was only going to use McGoldrick if we were chasing the game. I imagine the extra three days means he will come on tonight. 

[brady1993]

12 minutes ago, sage said:

I think he wants Hourihanes experience on the pitch,  though I agree he looks knackered in the last third of games. I think he was only going to use McGoldrick if we were chasing the game. I imagine the extra three days means he will come on tonight. 

The thing is though is when is experience just overridden by fatigue and not keeping up with the game? Because at a certain point it doesn't count for anything when decisions become poor, when technique becomes sloppy and when the legs go right? 

Like I can see how you leave him on when you are chasing because he has got the ability to win a game but when you are holding a lead and getting ragged in the heat, I just think its flawed thinking to leave him on. Especially with a packed schedule to come.

Get it about McGoldrick but I feel like if the remit was he would only come on if he was needed then I think Saturday kinda called for it. Because more than anything we just needed it to stick more in midfield areas and he's excellent at that.

[sage]

5 hours ago, brady1993 said:

The thing is though is when is experience just overridden by fatigue and not keeping up with the game? Because at a certain point it doesn't count for anything when decisions become poor, when technique becomes sloppy and when the legs go right? 

Like I can see how you leave him on when you are chasing because he has got the ability to win a game but when you are holding a lead and getting ragged in the heat, I just think its flawed thinking to leave him on. Especially with a packed schedule to come.

Get it about McGoldrick but I feel like if the remit was he would only come on if he was needed then I think Saturday kinda called for it. Because more than anything we just needed it to stick more in midfield areas and he's excellent at that.

I agree about Hourihane,  just suggest why LR makes that decision. 

Disagree about McGoldrick. If he was borderline in terms of being ready,  why risk him. 

I do think we will be transformed when we get a new RB and Knight can make up a midfield three with Bird and Hourihane 

[brady1993]

12 hours ago, sage said:

I agree about Hourihane,  just suggest why LR makes that decision. 

Disagree about McGoldrick. If he was borderline in terms of being ready,  why risk him. 

I do think we will be transformed when we get a new RB and Knight can make up a midfield three with Bird and Hourihane 

But what I'd say is if he's borderline why is he on the bench ?

I do mostly agree about pushing Knight into midfield but I also feel like this is a situation we could be mostly solving already.

[sage]

2 minutes ago, brady1993 said:

But what I'd say is if he's borderline why is he on the bench ?

I do mostly agree about pushing Knight into midfield but I also feel like this is a situation we could be mostly solving already.

when someone is coming back from injury there is always a slight risk, the percentage reduces over time. Everthing is a managed risk