Who enjoys Warne's football poll?

[8Leeds]

1 hour ago, oodledoodle said:

[Tamworthram]

1 hour ago, leamram said:

He's basically David Brent 

I don't care if he's David Dickinson if we win the league under him.

[SSD]

I can sum up his coaching. 

 

 

[SSD]

Joe, don't distribute the ball out, whack it up the field.

Cash, Nelson. Makes sure you hit it long into the corner flag area for me. Build up play? Not for me. Get it up the field.

Fozzy, I know you're a good ball playing defender, do you mind clipping it down the wing even if nobody is available?

Midfield. Don't need you, I like to bypass you at every opportunity.

Wingers, just keep pumping the ball in the box. Don't care if we have any other options just get it in the penalty area.

Collo and Wash, watch out for the ball in the sky. Try and get your neck on it.

Waggy, do what you like pal. I fluked it by signing you, top top class player.

 

I've had a couple....

 

[Tyler Durden]

2 hours ago, Foreveram said:

 

About 26,000 that will be there on Saturday didn’t bother voting, 78 said they didn’t like it.

I know.....it was the poll I voted to say I didn't enjoy, not the football 

[jimtastic56]

3 hours ago, Foreveram said:

 

About 26,000 that will be there on Saturday didn’t bother voting, 78 said they didn’t like it.

19 of the 26,000 said they DID enjoy the football . I am sure that will go up if we win our next home game.

[Tamworthram]

2 hours ago, SSD said:

Joe, don't distribute the ball out, whack it up the field.

Cash, Nelson. Makes sure you hit it long into the corner flag area for me. Build up play? Not for me. Get it up the field.

Fozzy, I know you're a good ball playing defender, do you mind clipping it down the wing even if nobody is available?

Midfield. Don't need you, I like to bypass you at every opportunity.

Wingers, just keep pumping the ball in the box. Don't care if we have any other options just get it in the penalty area.

Collo and Wash, watch out for the ball in the sky. Try and get your neck on it.

Waggy, do what you like pal. I fluked it by signing you, top top class player.

 

I've had a couple....

 

I thought this poll was “allegedly” just to find out if anyone was actually enjoying the football and not just another excuse to criticise PW. There are plenty of other threads that are fit for that purpose.

[Rich3478]

When we play a back four I don’t mind it. Certainly wouldn’t say is hoofball. Could definitely do with playing through midfield more though.

when we play five at the back it just all seems slow and laborious. And overly defensive without looking any safer at the back.

think the lack of pace probably makes us a bit worse to watch, warne had two windows to try and address that now though.

Edited September 9, 2023 by Rich3478
Spelling

[duncanjwitham]

19 minutes ago, Rich3478 said:

Certainly wouldn’t say is hoofball.

I think part of the problem with discussions like this is that while I think WarneBall is absolutely both hoofball and also very defensive football, it isn’t what people normally mean by those terms.  We aren’t just lumping long balls up to a big target man, and we aren’t doing anything like sitting deep in 2 banks of 4 of trying to be hard to break down etc.  But we are very set on getting the ball forward and wide as quickly as we can, at the expense of having any kind of control of our own.  And we do seem very set on going out to stop the other team playing (by out running them, pressing them etc) at the expense of having a strategy to win the game of our own.  So both sides are kind of right, but it’s also basically an irrelevant argument over semantics.  The people saying we don’t like the hoofball are basically saying that we don’t like the minimal effort to actually establish some element of control in games, not that we don’t like the number of long balls we play (not wanting to put words into other peoples mouths etc).

[jimtastic56]

The only player I have seen hoofing the ball for Rams is Cashin . Warne’s style is not defensive as the central midfield players don’t come back and tackle very often. Certainly not a “Low Block” where a team has to get through 2 lines of defence. What I have seen is a style where there is one slip and the opposition is through on goal.

[Rich3478]

1 hour ago, duncanjwitham said:

I think part of the problem with discussions like this is that while I think WarneBall is absolutely both hoofball and also very defensive football, it isn’t what people normally mean by those terms.  We aren’t just lumping long balls up to a big target man, and we aren’t doing anything like sitting deep in 2 banks of 4 of trying to be hard to break down etc.  But we are very set on getting the ball forward and wide as quickly as we can, at the expense of having any kind of control of our own.  And we do seem very set on going out to stop the other team playing (by out running them, pressing them etc) at the expense of having a strategy to win the game of our own.  So both sides are kind of right, but it’s also basically an irrelevant argument over semantics.  The people saying we don’t like the hoofball are basically saying that we don’t like the minimal effort to actually establish some element of control in games, not that we don’t like the number of long balls we play (not wanting to put words into other peoples mouths etc).

Yeah, sort of what I meant by playing through midfield more. And like you say we’re not just banging balls up to a big man and playing for knockdowns.

i do sometimes wonder who we’re actually crossing the ball to? Have no real targets to aim at attacking wise.

[Ghost of Clough]

1 hour ago, duncanjwitham said:

I think part of the problem with discussions like this is that while I think WarneBall is absolutely both hoofball and also very defensive football, it isn’t what people normally mean by those terms.  We aren’t just lumping long balls up to a big target man, and we aren’t doing anything like sitting deep in 2 banks of 4 of trying to be hard to break down etc.  But we are very set on getting the ball forward and wide as quickly as we can, at the expense of having any kind of control of our own.  And we do seem very set on going out to stop the other team playing (by out running them, pressing them etc) at the expense of having a strategy to win the game of our own.  So both sides are kind of right, but it’s also basically an irrelevant argument over semantics.  The people saying we don’t like the hoofball are basically saying that we don’t like the minimal effort to actually establish some element of control in games, not that we don’t like the number of long balls we play (not wanting to put words into other peoples mouths etc).

Just to add to the long ball discussion...

We actually attempt the 5th fewest long balls per game (64), behind only:
1. Peterborough (51)
2. Bolton (59)
3. Wigan (61),
4. Bristol (62).

However, there's a difference between Bolton attempting 59 long passes out of a total of 549, and Derby attempting 64 long out of 353. In terms of favouring a long ball game over short passing, we rank 10th, with 18% of attempted passes going long.
1. Stevenage (29%)
2. Cheltenham (26%)
3. Shrewsbury (24%)
4. Cambridge (24%)
5. Burton (24%)
6. Lincoln (23%)
7. Wycombe (23%)
8. Carlisle (22%)
9. Port Vale (20%)

We also rank 10th lowest for passes completed, with just 253, with the same 9 teams making up the rest of the bottom 10.

[duncanjwitham]

16 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

We actually attempt the 5th fewest long balls per game (64)

And then we just need to agree what *exactly* constitutes a long ball.  I suspect a fair few of the types of passes the long-ball-moaners are unhappy about don’t even get classed as long balls. Specifically (for me anyway) the aimless chips over the top to nobody that we seem to play far too many of.  It’s far more about forcing the ball forwards when it isn’t on than any specific length of pass.

[Ghost of Clough]

4 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

And then we just need to agree what *exactly* constitutes a long ball.  I suspect a fair few of the types of passes the long-ball-moaners are unhappy about don’t even get classed as long balls. Specifically (for me anyway) the aimless chips over the top to nobody that we seem to play far too many of.  It’s far more about forcing the ball forwards when it isn’t on than any specific length of pass.

It's defined as an attempted pass of at least 25m. Those "aimless chips" should therefore be included.

I do agree with you on it being the forced passes though. It's almost like every pass needs to be that killer pass which unlocks a defence.

[sage]

It would seem by the third option, 15.6% of us don't understand the concept of enjoyment, didn't realise my ex wife was on here

 

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

19 hours ago, Bris Vegas said:

The football under Lampard was dire when Mason Mount was injured. We won only once in about ten weeks (11 games or so).

We have had purple patches under all managers since.

We broke a 40-year club record under Phillip Cocu of scoring at least once in over 20 consecutive league games. Not even Jim Smith or Steve McClaren manager that.

We had a great spell under Wayne Rooney when Bielik was injury free and completely dominating the opposition. 

I don’t recall creating as many chances as we did during Rosenior’s spell in charge, regularly having over 60% possession and 20+ attempts on goal.

And to be fair to Warne, I think he boasts the longest unbeaten run of any Derby manager since Jim Smith. But then again, it largely coincided with playing all the bottom teams and hammering the likes of Forest Green Rovers, Accrington Stanley and Morecambe.

Long story short, we’ve had purple patches under all managers and Lampard has gone on to show he is a bog standard manager who wouldn’t have had us anywhere near the top six without £100m worth of talent on loan.

Marriotts form really dropped off in this period due to him not getting any service without Mount.  This had a much bigger part to play in him not getting goals for 2 months than the much vaunted beer monster on a golf course drivel. 

[sunnyhill60]

No more boring than what we saw under non-league Nigel, who at least had the benefit of being able to spend "Barker-type" fees

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

14 minutes ago, sunnyhill60 said:

No more boring than what we saw under non-league Nigel, who at least had the benefit of being able to spend "Barker-type" fees

The much maligned Clough who halved the wage bill, reduced the age of the squad by 5 years, put together a core of the side that got to the playoff final and had a gross spend after sales of less than 2 million.  Can't recall many 900k fees myself bar Sammon.  The Barker type fee for Keogh was raised by getting a bigger than Barker fee for Shackell.

Warnes footy is abject b*******.  I'm that bored with it I hadn't noticed we weren't playing today.

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

Our football at the moment is what you employ to get an edge if you  haven't got enough footballing quality. It's the football we used to struggle against when we were good. It's Rotherham Utd. (no insult to Rotherham intended) 

[IlsonDerby]

On 09/09/2023 at 01:25, uttoxram75 said:

We're in Division 3.

Enjoyment comes when we look like we have a chance of promotion. Until then, its a matter of getting behind the lads every match.

Having said that, some of us will remember the days of being in similar circumstances fondly. I cannot emphasise enough how good it will feel when we make our journey back. Be part of it. Be proud. Keep the faith.

COYR

I don’t agree with this at all. Plymouth played scintillating football last year. Why can’t we aim to go up playing good stuff? 

4 hours ago, sunnyhill60 said:

No more boring than what we saw under non-league Nigel, who at least had the benefit of being able to spend "Barker-type" fees

That’s ridiculous. There were games under Clough that we absolutely played opponents off the park. There were lots of other games where it was boring unfortunately but his brief was ‘keep us in the division, get rid of everyone who earns anything more than peanuts’. 
 

The football when he got Kuqi together with bueno and commons. Unreal. 14 points from 6 games and then an unfortunate drop off of form meant that he was too cautious to continue with that combination of attackers.

 

Then there was the hammering of Millwall away and the 24 pass team goal for Bryson in the season he was sacked. 

In his 5 seasons with us he finished 18th, 14th 19th 12th and 10th whilst always trimming the budget and cutting the clothe. You take that weird 19th finish away and that’s a brilliant example of long term improvement and squad building. 

I’d go as far as to say I think that Clough would have had us exactly where other managers had us eventually. The club just panicked with attendances and pushed the button. I’ll always respect the superb job he did. Arrived to a team in free fall with a forest sized squad of overpaid players. Left after guiding us to tenth with a really good hungry squad that only took the ‘shackles being removed’ to absolutely fly.