The Paul Warne Poll

[Sparkle]

Just interested to know if anybody actually thinks we have improved after 50 odd matches under Warne ?

I don’t and it seems a very painful watch most of the time

[Andicis]

13 minutes ago, Kokosnuss said:

It is lazy and uninteresting, I agree.

Let's not pretend that he only gets brought into the conversation by people looking to being critical of Warne though, or that anyone who makes any sort of comparison is doing so out of a belief that Rosenior was on the verge of having us play scintillating attacking football.

A large number of people will, I believe, be of the opinion that that they could see a reasonably solid and organised base from which we could improve, despite being a bit too slow / cautious and overplaying at times. Those people would see that there we aspired to play positive, attacking possession based football, given time and suitable squad development.

IMO it's hard to see what we aspire to be under Warne, other than a team who are really, really good at playing frantic football with very little nuance and almost no scalability when going up the leagues. That's if it can even successfully achieve the first part, but with it being such a basic approach it wouldn't surprise me if it's a busted flush. But that's by-the-by.

Rather often, Rosenior is brought into the conversation by people defending Warne and completely exaggerating the negatives of our play under him, or because of the sometimes ridiculous double standards applied to both his and Warne's tenures, and people reacting to that.

There are a certain hardcore who outright refuse to hear a single word of criticism against Warne without getting really, really narky and who'll plead that it's too early for him to be judged while at the same time having made up their mind that they'd seen all a Rosenior team had to offer and didn't like it. I'm not saying you're in that group btw.

Honestly, people should probably just stop these pointless comparisons to Rosenior from both sides of the argument, but every post like yours and like mine right here adds to it. It's unavoidable really.

For what it's worth, I absolutely agree about people using Rosenior's tenure, that is equally boring and just as pointless. Rosenior was here for a very short amount of time and points are better made without comparison to his small sample size of derby games. It's an endless frustration that the debate still rages on.

[DCFC Kicks]

54 minutes ago, Yoxoram said:

I presume therefore that you would have sacked Brian Clough after the first few games of the 1968/69 season as after a reasonable start in the 1967/68 season, league form went downhill. His record at the start of 1968/69 was poor with only one win in the first six matches and three draws. Translated into today's points totals that is six points. A worse record than Warne at the start of this season.

I'm assuming there was evidence of Clough's innovative, attacking football. As oppose to Warne's which looks about 20 years out of date 

[uttoxram75]

23 minutes ago, Kokosnuss said:

It is lazy and uninteresting, I agree.

Let's not pretend that he only gets brought into the conversation by people looking to being critical of Warne though, or that anyone who makes any sort of comparison is doing so out of a belief that Rosenior was on the verge of having us play scintillating attacking football.

A large number of people will, I believe, be of the opinion that that they could see a reasonably solid and organised base from which we could improve, despite being a bit too slow / cautious and overplaying at times. Those people would see that there we aspired to play positive, attacking possession based football, given time and suitable squad development.

IMO it's hard to see what we aspire to be under Warne, other than a team who are really, really good at playing frantic football with very little nuance and almost no scalability when going up the leagues. That's if it can even successfully achieve the first part, but with it being such a basic approach it wouldn't surprise me if it's a busted flush. But that's by-the-by.

Rather often, Rosenior is brought into the conversation by people defending Warne and completely exaggerating the negatives of our play under him, or because of the sometimes ridiculous double standards applied to both his and Warne's tenures, and people reacting to that.

There are a certain hardcore who outright refuse to hear a single word of criticism against Warne without getting really, really narky and who'll plead that it's too early for him to be judged while at the same time having made up their mind that they'd seen all a Rosenior team had to offer and didn't like it. I'm not saying you're in that group btw.

Honestly, people should probably just stop these pointless comparisons to Rosenior from both sides of the argument, but every post like yours and like mine right here adds to it. It's unavoidable really.

I understand your points but the truth is that while we are in the third tier, any manager would have people slagging them off after 6 games where we've won 3  and lost 3. Its the expectation of being a Derby fan. Us older ones are probably a bit more patient because we've seen it all before and are prepared to see what unfolds before panicking. Also, we are old enough and mentally strong enough to not give a flying fck what other fans say about us.

Its far too early to criticise in my opinion. Give the players time to gel and the manager to find his best options with his squad.

 

 

[Rammy03]

38 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

Just interested to know if anybody actually thinks we have improved after 50 odd matches under Warne ?

I don’t and it seems a very painful watch most of the time

We improved until about February of last season then went backwards as we ran out of steam which is why we never made the playoffs. The start of this season we've been all over the place quite frankly.

[DCFC Kicks]

1 hour ago, Jourdan said:

How do you demonstrate progress six games into the season and especially when the squad has had 11 new arrivals, 4-5 significant first team outgoings, and a significant number of injuries? What are we comparing? By what objective metric exactly?

We’re actually 4 points better off now v comparable fixtures in 2022-23. Is that progression? I don’t think anyone in favour of Warne would argue that because we are only six games in, not 36. Things are still taking shape. We won’t know how much we’ve progressed until March or April next year and whether we mount and sustain a promotion challenge.

Do they hand out trophies and prize money now? How do you define progress less than 20% into the season? Final positions are decided after 46 games. 40 games from now, if we finish 6th or above, isn’t that progression?

I'm including the end of last season as well. We only won 6 of the last 18 games. In my opinion the style of play has gradually regressed over that period up to now as well. 

If Liam didn't sign McGoldrick, Warne would've been sacked(if we can afford to sack him). 

He's had one transfer window and his recruitment hasn't been as good as Liam managed to do through his personal contacts alone. 

Your happy to give him over half the season? Even if it means we may have to write off another season because of it? 

Edited September 4, 2023 by DCFC Kicks

[Rammy03]

27 minutes ago, DCFC Kicks said:

I'm including the end of last season as well. We only won 6 of the last 18 games. In my opinion the style of play has gradually regressed over that period up to now as well. 

If Liam didn't sign McGoldrick, Warne would've been sacked(if we can afford to sack him). 

He's had one transfer window and his recruitment hasn't been as good as Liam managed to do through his personal contacts alone. 

Your happy to give him over half the season? Even if it means we may have to write off another season because of it? 

To be fair whoever Rosenior brought in would look a good signing because we didn't have anyone on the books in the first place. Some of the signings would have been lined up when Rooney was here, I don't think it was all on Roseniors 'personal contacts'

[Archied]

10 hours ago, Chris_Martin said:

if it can only be done with extremely good players and an extremely good manager, then why are worse teams, with worse players than us, able to do it ?

I'm not asking for pep guardiola, just someone who will not be so negative and one dimensional. 

You mean like Bolton 😂 , I’m talking about it being done well not just done ,remember all the calls for a plan b when we were decent ? 

Edited September 5, 2023 by Archied

[Archied]

8 hours ago, Andicis said:

The Rosenior angle is just so lazy and uninteresting yet it repeatedly crops up. Posters that are anti Warne will just make statements about the amazing football they reckon Rosenior was going to get us playing (completely unrelated to the football we actually played under him and not grounded in any reality). Let it go. Rosenior is gone, your made is scenario isn't real. 

Yep , we were really good against Charlton , teams figured us out quicksmart and it turned out we were not very good at it and we were going backwards at a rate of knots , teams either sat in and hit us on the break or put pressure on us in our own half and we fell apart and couldn’t pass a ball under pressure ,

I don’t believe for one minute the team are playing the way warne wants and it his job to get them doing it just the same as it was liams , liams gone and warne will be too unless things improve 

[Archied]

8 hours ago, Jimbo Ram said:

Not too keen on turgid hoof ball either 😉

Niether am I jimbo , niether am I , ideally I want to see a team capable of mixing it up with players who have an inkling of when to mix it up ,

all this this argument just takes me back to mel and the derby way guff spouted 

[Archied]

8 hours ago, DCFC Kicks said:

Explain why the team has got gradually worse since Warne has been here then. Shouldn't it be the opposite? He's been here 51 games now, which is long enough to demonstrate some sort of progression. 

What I’ve seen is periods where we have got better then worse , then better then worse , it’s a long season and these teams that are being touted as the holy grail of football , eg Bolton ect will hit they’re poor runs and they’re fans will be saying they are predictable, have no plan b , have a soft underbelly ect ect ect ,

warne is nowhere near producing on the pitch the type of football he says he wants at the moment and if he doesn’t he will be gone and rightly so , where is the front foot pressing is my biggest bug bear , we saw it at times under warne last season and I loved it , we just gave teams no space to breath in some games and we’re all over them , that’s not happening just now and warne needs to figure out why it’s not happening 

[Archied]

7 hours ago, S8TY said:

So you think City are boring to watch ? 
Some do think that …I don’t as to me it’s total control football 

I have mixed feeling with them , at times they are great to watch and at others they are frustrating as hell ,wanting to score the perfect goal or walk the ball in ,

for me the problem with obsessive possession footbal is players can and do too easily fall into the mindset trap of just keeping the ball , strolling round and it can become a real snooze fest 

[Anag Ram]

3 minutes ago, Archied said:

What I’ve seen is periods where we have got better then worse , then better then worse , it’s a long season and these teams that are being touted as the holy grail of football , eg Bolton ect will hit they’re poor runs and they’re fans will be saying they are predictable, have no plan b , have a soft underbelly ect ect ect ,

warne is nowhere near producing on the pitch the type of football he says he wants at the moment and if he doesn’t he will be gone and rightly so , where is the front foot pressing is my biggest bug bear , we saw it at times under warne last season and I loved it , we just gave teams no space to breath in some games and we’re all over them , that’s not happening just now and warne needs to figure out why it’s not happening 

Easy. Too many lazy older players.

The reason Thompson has shone this year is not that he has turned into Declan Rice but that he is simply putting the effort in we expect of all of our players. 

Skill is great but every successful team works hard and we simply aren’t at the moment.

Hard work can be exciting. It means running for your team whether to give them an easy pass or to double up when they need cover. 
 

 

[Archied]

7 hours ago, Kokosnuss said:

It is lazy and uninteresting, I agree.

Let's not pretend that he only gets brought into the conversation by people looking to being critical of Warne though, or that anyone who makes any sort of comparison is doing so out of a belief that Rosenior was on the verge of having us play scintillating attacking football.

A large number of people will, I believe, be of the opinion that that they could see a reasonably solid and organised base from which we could improve, despite being a bit too slow / cautious and overplaying at times. Those people would see that there we aspired to play positive, attacking possession based football, given time and suitable squad development.

IMO it's hard to see what we aspire to be under Warne, other than a team who are really, really good at playing frantic football with very little nuance and almost no scalability when going up the leagues. That's if it can even successfully achieve the first part, but with it being such a basic approach it wouldn't surprise me if it's a busted flush. But that's by-the-by.

Rather often, Rosenior is brought into the conversation by people defending Warne and completely exaggerating the negatives of our play under him, or because of the sometimes ridiculous double standards applied to both his and Warne's tenures, and people reacting to that.

There are a certain hardcore who outright refuse to hear a single word of criticism against Warne without getting really, really narky and who'll plead that it's too early for him to be judged while at the same time having made up their mind that they'd seen all a Rosenior team had to offer and didn't like it. I'm not saying you're in that group btw.

Honestly, people should probably just stop these pointless comparisons to Rosenior from both sides of the argument, but every post like yours and like mine right here adds to it. It's unavoidable really.

Good post , I don’t believe we saw what rosenior was trying to put out on the park and I don’t believe we are seeing what warne wants either 

[Archied]

10 minutes ago, Anag Ram said:

Easy. Too many lazy older players.

The reason Thompson has shone this year is not that he has turned into Declan Rice but that he is simply putting the effort in we expect of all of our players. 

Skill is great but every successful team works hard and we simply aren’t at the moment.

Hard work can be exciting. It means running for your team whether to give them an easy pass or to double up when they need cover. 
 

 

You could be right , I’ve always been a bit of an old bore regards banging on about movement off the ball, it’s the be all and end all no matter what style or formation you play and when we lose the ball players have to bust a gut to get back and cover , perhaps that’s what was missing for Liam back then and warne just now🤷🏻‍♂️

[Van der MoodHoover]

20 hours ago, Archied said:

What I want is quite simple , I want to be off my seat as often a possible celebrating a goal , off my seat as often as possible hoping a goalmouth incident/ chance is going to hit the net and I want to be off my seat at the final whistle celebrating a derby win 🤷🏻‍♂️

Terrible diarrhoea?

[RoyMac5]

1 hour ago, Anag Ram said:

Easy. Too many lazy older players.

The reason Thompson has shone this year is not that he has turned into Declan Rice but that he is simply putting the effort in we expect of all of our players. 

Skill is great but every successful team works hard and we simply aren’t at the moment.

Hard work can be exciting. It means running for your team whether to give them an easy pass or to double up when they need cover. 

You okay Paul? We get the message, but you know that football isn't always about running hard, let the ball do the work. Yours, G. Kinkladze.

[alram]

10 hours ago, Andicis said:

The Rosenior angle is just so lazy and uninteresting yet it repeatedly crops up. Posters that are anti Warne will just make statements about the amazing football they reckon Rosenior was going to get us playing (completely unrelated to the football we actually played under him and not grounded in any reality). Let it go. Rosenior is gone, your made is scenario isn't real. 

But it’s the vision.

 

the style we were trying to implement and a clear plan of how to do so & buying players that would fit that plan.

 

something to look forward too and view gradually improve. I don’t think it’s relevant what it looked like at the time LR was canned because it was never going to be the finished product after signing a hatful of players and not given enough time to see it develop anyway

 

what we have at the minute offers none of those things

 

the point in general is we would be in a better position now both physically and mentally if we had followed the vision and not thrown it in the bin for god knows what we are doing now

[VulcanRam]

8 hours ago, Sparkle said:

Just interested to know if anybody actually thinks we have improved after 50 odd matches under Warne ?

I don’t and it seems a very painful watch most of the time

No I don't think we have particularly. Listening to his interviews, particularly post match, he doesn't seem to have anything like the analytical mindset that you'd get from Rosenior, Rooney, Cocu, Lampard or Rowett. "We wanted to win the game, we started with two strikers" was about as in-depth as it got from Saturday. The rest of it is just a brain dump of consciousness, although in fairness it wasn't really helped by some pretty anodyne questioning from Ed Dawes.

I'd really like an interviewer to talk to him about tactics, about positioning of players, about patterns of play, about possession of the football in one of these post matches. 

Anyway, let's hope that with a fully fit squad and more options, the style of football will improve. I'm sure there were periods last year where it looked like we were getting towards what he said he would do - keep the possession stuff but get everything going forward quicker. Maybe though it's just the mists of time playing tricks on my mind.

 

 

[duncanjwitham]

8 hours ago, Rammy03 said:

We improved until about February of last season then went backwards 

Did we even improve (as in continuously get better over time) until February? There was a definite uptick in performances when we reverted to a back 4 in October, but I wouldn't say we actually got better between October and February.  Arguably the best performance in that time was the one that kicked it off, Bristol Rovers at home.  And I'd say performances were pretty inconsistent (some good, some less good) throughout that time, even when we were finding ways to win.