Matchday Thread - Shrewsbury Town v Derby County (16/08 19:45)

[Jimbo Ram]

3 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

Except that points aren't awarded for possession, domination and chances created. 

I think possession and domination are two different things…

[brady1993]

2 minutes ago, Jimbo Ram said:

I think possession and domination are two different things…

They are and they aren't.

You can have high possession without dominating the game. But when I think of a truly dominant performance from a team they have more possession than the opposition and usually by a distance.

[brady1993]

15 hours ago, europia said:

Fair points. I really don't think that Derby County have the luxury of opting for 'philosophy first, results second'. We are in L1 and need to play for the results that will get the club back in the Championship as soon as possible. A very ordinary Shrewsbury nullified our approach without too much difficulty. We need to be able to change tactics mid game when this is happening.  

I actually this is the wrong way to think. 

If we embed the philosophy now at this point in the season then it will be the bedrock of success later in the season and going into the championship.

If we focus on results at all cost now we will end up a tactical mess of a team and probably looking back at a middling to average season and nothing to build on.

We have to look beyond short-termism right now, it's what lead to us being in league 1.

[brady1993]

15 hours ago, angieram said:

I think it's a lack of confidence to change it up instinctively during games! 

Coaching is all well and good, but the best players know when to try the unexpected.

I think that's partly coming down to our situation right now. 

Players aren't super match fit for the most part what with the short pre-season. They are also getting accustomed to what we are doing tactically and their team mates.

All of which leads to a player playing safer than they should because they aren't quite backing their ability, they don't instinctively know the role and the roles of the players around them and they don't instinctively know their teammates for the most part.

It's easy for us to sit back and say "oh you should have played a 40 yard switch to NML as he'd made a run and was open". But a player has a split second to make that decision more often than not and so unless they are either very good, very confident or at least very aware of everyone on the pitch they will often play safe.

The other thing I don't think people realise is that defaulting to playing directly is often the absolute safest thing for a player to do in a given moment.

[Jimbo Ram]

23 minutes ago, brady1993 said:

They are and they aren't.

You can have high possession without dominating the game. But when I think of a truly dominant performance from a team they have more possession than the opposition and usually by a distance.

Agree with that. We dominated possession against Salop but didn’t dominate the game in this instance ?

[Tamworthram]

49 minutes ago, Jimbo Ram said:

I think possession and domination are two different things…

I agree but you still don’t get points awarded for either of them.

[Jimbo Ram]

28 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

I agree but you still don’t get points awarded for either of them.

Totally agree. I think our current points total reflects our performances and position in the table is where we deserve to be ?

[Ram-Alf]

14 hours ago, NottsRam77 said:

Right so youve completely ignored the very first part of my post

City are a joy to watch, they press hard, they hunt it packs, they retain and smother possession of the ball and when they attack,  they do so with purpose and craft

 

 

I'm completely ignoring the rest of your post

and

 

 

[Jourdan]

4 hours ago, brady1993 said:

I actually this is the wrong way to think. 

If we embed the philosophy now at this point in the season then it will be the bedrock of success later in the season and going into the championship.

If we focus on results at all cost now we will end up a tactical mess of a team and probably looking back at a middling to average season and nothing to build on.

We have to look beyond short-termism right now, it's what lead to us being in league 1.

But isn’t results-driven thinking exactly what has allowed us to build a highly competitive squad?

It is easy to see we have been able to retain many of our young players and attract new signings who could have joined clubs in the Championship because they want to be part of a winning project.

Players want to win games, not style points. They see the possibility of promotion, the possibility of a Wembley occasion if we do well in the EFL Trophy, the possibility of playing in front of 25,000 crowds every other week.

You can’t sell that idea to players if results are secondary to philosophy. Results matter and keep fans coming through the turnstiles and entice players who wouldn’t normally join.

Rosenior is going to have to prioritise results at some point, especially because internally, players and staff are talking about promotion. 

Having a philosophy and building an ethos is great, but the way we’ve built our squad lends itself to a quick promotion and a need for results.

If we were going for a slow and steady rebuild, I think we would have reached out to an entirely different profile of player.

Edited August 18, 2022 by Jourdan

[Mihangel]

9 minutes ago, Jourdan said:

But isn’t results-driven thinking exactly what has allowed us to build a highly competitive squad?

It is easy to see we have been able to retain many of our young players and attract new signings who could have joined clubs in the Championship because they want to be part of a winning project.

Players want to win games, not style points. They see the possibility of promotion, the possibility of a Wembley occasion if we do well in the EFL Trophy, the possibility of playing in front of 25,000 crowds every other week.

You can’t sell that idea to players if results are secondary to philosophy. Results matter and keep fans coming through the turnstiles and entice players who wouldn’t normally join.

Rosenior is going to have to prioritise results at some point, especially because internally, players and staff are talking about promotion. 

Having a philosophy and building an ethos is great, but the way we’ve built our squad lends itself to a quick promotion and a need for results.

If we were going for a slow and steady rebuild, I think we would have reached out to an entirely different profile of player.

You appear to have inferred a lot from whatever interviews etc players have given, I reached a different conclusion from what they've been saying. I heard many of them talking about a project, it's been mentioned many times. A 'project' certainly doesn't suggest a mentality that demands immediate results, quite the opposite, I'm not quite sure how you convince ever entitled fans of the project mentality so I guess we're just going to have to put up with some disappointment. 

[europia]

7 hours ago, brady1993 said:

I actually this is the wrong way to think. 

If we embed the philosophy now at this point in the season then it will be the bedrock of success later in the season and going into the championship.

If we focus on results at all cost now we will end up a tactical mess of a team and probably looking back at a middling to average season and nothing to build on.

We have to look beyond short-termism right now, it's what lead to us being in league 1.

I don't think I mentioned results at all costs. It's really about a style of play suitable for success in L1. 

[ariotofmyown]

3 hours ago, Jourdan said:

Rosenior is going to have to prioritise results at some point

???

[Van der MoodHoover]

4 hours ago, Jourdan said:

But isn’t results-driven thinking exactly what has allowed us to build a highly competitive squad?

It is easy to see we have been able to retain many of our young players and attract new signings who could have joined clubs in the Championship because they want to be part of a winning project.

Players want to win games, not style points. They see the possibility of promotion, the possibility of a Wembley occasion if we do well in the EFL Trophy, the possibility of playing in front of 25,000 crowds every other week.

You can’t sell that idea to players if results are secondary to philosophy. Results matter and keep fans coming through the turnstiles and entice players who wouldn’t normally join.

Rosenior is going to have to prioritise results at some point, especially because internally, players and staff are talking about promotion. 

Having a philosophy and building an ethos is great, but the way we’ve built our squad lends itself to a quick promotion and a need for results.

If we were going for a slow and steady rebuild, I think we would have reached out to an entirely different profile of player.

He will of course (or at least should) think that his style is effective, so play it well and the good results follow. 

The cheerleafing role of the manager is important for morale. But there surely wouldn't be too much harm in acknowledging when appropriate that whilst elements of what he wants are happening, the impact is not having the effect he's looking for because the anticipated goals and wins aren't yet happening. 

[jono]

9 hours ago, Jimbo Ram said:

? We dominated possession against Shrewsbury, creating 3 or 4 chances…did you miss the Shrewsbury chances in the second half ? Oxford could quite easily have beaten us, the toss of a coin really and second half we managed to hang on in the end v Barnsley……but yep should have 12 points ?

Hey mate, I know we are just having a debate, so defo not being awkward.

Thing is, games split into a number of categories for me

1) won, deserved it

2) won, tight game could have gone either way but we earned something

3) won, were jammy.

4) drew, sounded about right on the balance of play

5) drew, Phew .. we were under the cosh

6) drew, we did enough to get all 3 but didn’t get the run of the play

7) drew, “we was robbed”

8  lost, no excuses, better team won

9) lost, tight game a bit unlucky not to get something

10) lost, we were well and truly robbed

As I see it, We haven’t robbed anyone or been robbed, we might have deserved better on a couple of occasions and haven’t had a number 5. ……. but that’s sport. 
 

Mind the trams on Saturday ?

[brady1993]

19 hours ago, Jourdan said:

But isn’t results-driven thinking exactly what has allowed us to build a highly competitive squad?

It is easy to see we have been able to retain many of our young players and attract new signings who could have joined clubs in the Championship because they want to be part of a winning project.

Players want to win games, not style points. They see the possibility of promotion, the possibility of a Wembley occasion if we do well in the EFL Trophy, the possibility of playing in front of 25,000 crowds every other week.

You can’t sell that idea to players if results are secondary to philosophy. Results matter and keep fans coming through the turnstiles and entice players who wouldn’t normally join.

Rosenior is going to have to prioritise results at some point, especially because internally, players and staff are talking about promotion. 

Having a philosophy and building an ethos is great, but the way we’ve built our squad lends itself to a quick promotion and a need for results.

If we were going for a slow and steady rebuild, I think we would have reached out to an entirely different profile of player.

We started the season with barely any players, a short pre-season and transfer restrictions. Any players coming in would have been aware that a promotion this season is far from a guarantee. Pushing for it for sure but not nailed on at all. 

The primary reason we targeted the players we did was to stabilise, which was vital in the postion we found ourselves. In the window we have been largely limited to experienced players who've perhaps fallen out of favor or not quite at the level they were or players who are wholly untested. What we've tried to do is bring in experience according to how we want to play, with the idea they could do a job in the championship and can hit the ground running. They will allow us to rebuild structure and more quickly build a firm tactical plan from which we can have continuity. Whilst targeting young players to support the team and develop.

There is a gap between results at all cost and slowly developing. And whilst I don't think we are planning on sticking around in league 1 it's important to note that large sections of the club need/needed rebuilding.

My overall point about focusing on philosophy and tactical identity right now is that ultimately it will lead to better results over the full course of the season and beyond. The quibbles people have had so far are not really a problem with the tactical ideas at play and more than as a club/squad we are still pretty undercooked. I.e. it looks iffy at times because we aren't fluent at it yet. This would be the case with any tactical identity we tried to pursue most likely. 

If we switched to solely focusing on results right now, it might (its a big might as well) result in better results in the short term. But that kind of thinking only ever works short term because your squad never really develops as a squad. It's why every poohouse team you see tends to have a very hard limit on how far they can go.

Ultimately the results really aren't bad right now either. 7 out 12 puts us on target for top 6. If we can hold our nerve, maintain that pace and focus on what we need to do better then my bet is that it clicks around the winter and we see a surge in form. Which leaves us in a better place for subsequent because we'd have something rock solid to build from. 

 

[brady1993]

17 hours ago, europia said:

I don't think I mentioned results at all costs. It's really about a style of play suitable for success in L1. 

Thing is what does that even mean ? 

Styles of play don't get worse going down the leagues. They get more uncommon because attitudes about tactics tend to filter from top to bottom, as managers find themselves out of their depth they drop down and it can get harder (not impossible) to find the right kinds of player.

The only thing we need to have in mind is teams are more likely to sit back and lump it. Which they would do regardless of how we play. So we need an idea of how to open them up, which is stuff we are trying to implement tactically.

[europia]

6 hours ago, brady1993 said:

Thing is what does that even mean ? 

Styles of play don't get worse going down the leagues. They get more uncommon because attitudes about tactics tend to filter from top to bottom, as managers find themselves out of their depth they drop down and it can get harder (not impossible) to find the right kinds of player.

The only thing we need to have in mind is teams are more likely to sit back and lump it. Which they would do regardless of how we play. So we need an idea of how to open them up, which is stuff we are trying to implement tactically.

 To clarify, the meaning of style is:    'a particular procedure by which something is done; a manner or way' 

[jono]

On 18/08/2022 at 12:48, brady1993 said:

I think that's partly coming down to our situation right now. 

Players aren't super match fit for the most part what with the short pre-season. They are also getting accustomed to what we are doing tactically and their team mates.

All of which leads to a player playing safer than they should because they aren't quite backing their ability, they don't instinctively know the role and the roles of the players around them and they don't instinctively know their teammates for the most part.

It's easy for us to sit back and say "oh you should have played a 40 yard switch to NML as he'd made a run and was open". But a player has a split second to make that decision more often than not and so unless they are either very good, very confident or at least very aware of everyone on the pitch they will often play safe.

The other thing I don't think people realise is that defaulting to playing directly is often the absolute safest thing for a player to do in a given moment.

I mostly agree but McGoldrick apart we should be match fit by now. Enough time has passed. I think you have a point in that “our” team isn’t a unit yet. They haven’t been through enough triumph and disaster together. There’s a spine in Cashin/Curtis/Knight/Bird/Fozzy but the sharp end are all new boys, they need time to know each other and develop a team instinct. 
It will happen, I am sure of it it and we do have some talented, useful players who on the evidence so far are proper grafters beyond a skill set. 
 

It’s going to be tough against WBA on Tuesday but in the end it is all about team experience, every bit helps. It’s a long time since I’ve felt “sooner or later someone is going to be on the wrong end of a DCFC thrashing”  This squad, and what I’ve seen in endeavour and willingness looks right. 
 

All will be well come September/October 

[ram59]

It was interesting to see the 'Shropshire Star' take on Shrewsbury's match against Ipswich, basically, they said that the team were knackered after giving everything against Derby in midweek. 

Maybe, if the fixtures had been reversed, we'd have had the comfortable victory against them on Saturday?