Why Knight should start at RB

[sage]

Just now, David said:

Fully aware of the number of signings, but right now he's the only right back we have in the first team and we're playing a CM ahead of him.

Had he been playing for the U21s, I would be more accepting that he wasn't signed for the first team.

Fact is, he hasn't even made a match day squad for the U21s.

As for best option, that's like having breakfast and declaring it to be the best meal you've had today and it's not even past 10am.

In our situation,  many young players will be on the bench but not in the u21s. 

Not sure why you're so het up about this. No one has been written off,  it's just picking the right side at this moment. 

If you haven't got a best option,  how can you pick a team. 

I would add that no manager will want to pick a defende that they may have to take off at ht.

[brady1993]

10 minutes ago, chadlad said:

Fozzy is a Chamionship standard LB, I would argue that he is as good if not better than Roberts at LB.

I can think of a few RB who have successfully played the LB position and Roberts seems to have 2 good feet.

We gain more than we lose and Roberts is a good defender whereas both Oduroh and Smith would be targeted aerially.

My point about Fozzy is you really do not want him as involved in the build up play as we are currently asking our fullbacks to be.

I mean yeah I'm not saying a left footed right back can't exist. I'm saying it'd likely hurt our build up play because he can't open his body up as easily.

I think we lose significantly more than we gain by shuffling around like that.

[RoyMac5]

1 hour ago, sage said:

You do know @brady1993 isn't LR don't you?

He has excellently explained why Knight is playing there under LR and is currently the best option. 

No I didn't realise who he was.

My point was to question the whole premise. If you don't get why that should be done then fair enough. Carry on as you are. ?

[sage]

4 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

No I didn't realise who he was.

My point was to question the whole premise. If you don't get why that should be done then fair enough. Carry on as you are. ?

He explained how is works and what LR is trying to achieve. 

Beyond that what else can a poster say?

[Day]

20 minutes ago, sage said:

In our situation,  many young players will be on the bench but not in the u21s. 

Not sure why you're so het up about this. No one has been written off,  it's just picking the right side at this moment. 

If you haven't got a best option,  how can you pick a team. 

I would add that no manager will want to pick a defende that they may have to take off at ht.

Not het up in the slightest, just putting my thoughts out there.

Fully expecting Knight to start RB tomorrow and I'm absolutely miles off jumping on any early departure of the Rosenior out train.

It's just a standard fan manager disagreement over the starting line up 

[RoyMac5]

What a waste of Jason Knights undoubted talents it is playing him at RB. So no Knight should not start at RB. Round pegs round holes.

[chadlad]

23 minutes ago, brady1993 said:

My point about Fozzy is you really do not want him as involved in the build up play as we are currently asking our fullbacks to be.

I mean yeah I'm not saying a left footed right back can't exist. I'm saying it'd likely hurt our build up play because he can't open his body up as easily.

I think we lose significantly more than we gain by shuffling around like that.

Football is a simple game, you get the ball, you pass it, you score, repeat.

Playing the best players in their best positions will help to do this. I would argue our best midfield consists of Knight, Bird and Hourihane. I would also argue that currently our best available defenders are Roberts, Stearman, Cashin and Forsyth.

I just dont see how playing Knight at full back helps us to be a better team.

 

[sage]

8 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

What a waste of Jason Knights undoubted talents it is playing him at RB. So no Knight should not start at RB. Round pegs round holes.

Who should start there then? 

[RoyMac5]

3 minutes ago, sage said:

Who should start there then? 

A right back obviously.

[sage]

2 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

A right back obviously.

Who? 

[RoyMac5]

6 minutes ago, sage said:

Who? 

Twit too who?

[sage]

3 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Twit too who?

you ?

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

Knights average in his first season worked out around 9-10 goals as he got 7 in 31.  Probably more as a fair few of those were 20-30 minute cameos, plus the constant energy.  His goal average has suffered since with overplaying in 19/20, constantly being jammed out wide in 20/21, a 3 month layoff with a bust ankle last season and now he's full back .  Only Derby would stick a bloke with motm performances in his last 3 international matches playing midfield, at fullback in League one.   Probably very used to playing with Hourihane in that midfield as well so they know each others game .  Ridiculous.

[Ghost of Clough]

1 hour ago, Warwick Ram said:

Playing a central midfielder at right back instead of recruiting an actual right back is very short sighted.

Knight should be running the midfield as well as providing a goal threat.

If this was Cocu it would be slated.

Some would say it is very naive of Rosenior to potentially waste Knight at full back.

Treating where a player plays on the pitch as rigidly as 'RB' is archaic. You need to look into the actual role being asked of them.

Similar to Lawrence and where he spent most of his time playing for us. Same with Ince and most of our other 'wingers'. Traditionally, the left sided midfielder/attacker would stay very wide and get crosses in. His actual role was to drift inside and be a goal threat.

The same applies to 'full backs'. Traditionally, they wouldn't push much further forward than the CBs and weren't involved in build up play much. This role being very much suited to a defensive minded player with limited technical ability, not too disimilar to CBs. Wisdom and a younger Stearman being examples.

In some systems, the full back would push high and stay wide. Effectively they're wingers, which is why a lot of wingers had been converted to play this role - Byrne being one of them, Bogle another.

A style creeping into the modern game, is for the full back to tuck in alongside the DM. Guardiola arguably being the pioneer in using full backs this way. They're heavily involved in the build up play, create overloads in central areas and win the ball back quickly. This type of full back is very similar to a CM, which is why it suits Knight.

[nottingram]

Out of interest how many games has Knight played explicitly as a central midfielder for Derby?

Just wondering what performances people have seen from him there that have convinced them that’s his best position and will solve all our problems? Always tended to be a (to be fair, narrow) wide midfielder to my untrained eye. 

[Caerphilly Ram]

3 hours ago, chadlad said:

Football is a simple game, you get the ball, you pass it, you score, repeat.

Playing the best players in their best positions will help to do this. I would argue our best midfield consists of Knight, Bird and Hourihane. I would also argue that currently our best available defenders are Roberts, Stearman, Cashin and Forsyth.

I just dont see how playing Knight at full back helps us to be a better team.

 

It has helped us keep clean sheets in 2 of our 4 league matches so far as well as achieving 7 points from a possible 12. It’s not a bad return for a squad hastily thrown together in the shortening shadow of our recent misery. 
Knight works as a rb option currently in the view of the coaching staff, all the noise they’re making in interviews seems to suggest that won’t change.

I agree with everyone saying Knight is one of the best midfielders at the club and I would rather see him in a midfield 3 as the box to box option alongside Bird sitting deeper and probably Hourihane; but that in itself then raises questions. Playing Knight in midfield potentially means leaving out one of Sibley/Hourihane/McGoldrick/Bird or face playing one of them out of position also in place of NML/Barkhuizen/Collins.
These are the headaches Rosenior has to resolve and as much as we can discuss and debate the rationale behind it there’s not a great deal we can actually do to affect it. I do wonder if everyone would be as troubled by this particular tactical choice if it was 12 points from 12 and the goals were flying in? 
Isn’t it nice to be having these discussions again ? 

[Crewton]

5 hours ago, David said:

If he's not good enough right now, why are we sitting him on the bench and not giving him minutes with the U21s?

Odurah played for the u21s against Middlesbrough last Friday. 

[Orphanram]

Taking a more straightforward view of how Knight has done in the games so far without all of the tactical machinations, I think Knights been OK but not out of this world. Defensively he hasn’t really been beaten much on the outside as his tenacity enables him to get tackles in. However, there have been quite a few occasions where he drops right off an shows the opposition wide player inside with a lot of distance between him and the man. What I’ve noticed in L1 is the wide man just send in crosses for the striker and they don’t cut inside and shoot as often as they do in the championship. Knight did this at Charlton in the 1st half which needed an excellent save from Wildsmith to prevent a goal and there have been examples of this in all the other games . Going forward he has done Ok again but nothing more than I’d expect from a RB in our team and the way we play. I agree with previous comments about him being an international midfielder and getting him back in the middle of the park. 
 

On another note it’s seems that it’s a given that Hourihane has an automatic starting berth. Whilst he scored the winner against Oxford and has produced a few lovely deliveries in to the box, I’ve been a bit disappointed in his overall performances. It’s early days but I would like to see a midfield trio of Bird, Knight and Sibley given a try. If we are struggling to break teams down (which is a reoccurring theme for us) we could bring on Hourihane as quarter back sub and go a bit more direct late on to try and mix it up a bit, which would definitely feel like a genuine plan B. 

[chadlad]

5 hours ago, Caerphilly Ram said:

It has helped us keep clean sheets in 2 of our 4 league matches so far as well as achieving 7 points from a possible 12. It’s not a bad return for a squad hastily thrown together in the shortening shadow of our recent misery. 
Knight works as a rb option currently in the view of the coaching staff, all the noise they’re making in interviews seems to suggest that won’t change.

I agree with everyone saying Knight is one of the best midfielders at the club and I would rather see him in a midfield 3 as the box to box option alongside Bird sitting deeper and probably Hourihane; but that in itself then raises questions. Playing Knight in midfield potentially means leaving out one of Sibley/Hourihane/McGoldrick/Bird or face playing one of them out of position also in place of NML/Barkhuizen/Collins.
These are the headaches Rosenior has to resolve and as much as we can discuss and debate the rationale behind it there’s not a great deal we can actually do to affect it. I do wonder if everyone would be as troubled by this particular tactical choice if it was 12 points from 12 and the goals were flying in? 
Isn’t it nice to be having these discussions again ? 

But we didn’t get 12 points out of 12 and the goals aren’t flying in.

Question is would Knight in midfield have made that difference? Probably.

[Day]

6 hours ago, Crewton said:

Odurah played for the u21s against Middlesbrough last Friday. 

You've just ruined my fact!