Jump to content

Derby v Lincoln Match Thread


Bwash_Ram

Recommended Posts

I’ll happily admit to being more on the optimistic side most of the time, I don’t think last night was a “good” performance, but it was better than we’ve had in some games and showed what the team can do regardless of the opposition. Lots of stock has been placed in stats to show how poor our performances have been at times, last nights stats seem to make good reading to me. 
Is it a positive to see two of our attacking players back from injury and finishing two really good attacking moves to get on the scoresheet? For me it is. Is it a positive to see us keep a clean sheet? For me it is. Is it a positive to see some rotation in the squad and minutes in the legs for more players? For me it is. Is it a positive to see us pass the ball more, have more possession, play more accurate passes than the opponent? For me it is. Is it a positive seeing the club I support win regardless of the opponent or competition? For me it is.

So taking this game in isolation it was a decent win. As for what it means in the grand scheme of the season we have to wait and see, it’s on to Carlisle on the weekend to hopefully build some momentum. 

 

IMG_0321.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Caerphilly Ram said:

I’ll happily admit to being more on the optimistic side most of the time, I don’t think last night was a “good” performance, but it was better than we’ve had in some games and showed what the team can do regardless of the opposition. Lots of stock has been placed in stats to show how poor our performances have been at times, last nights stats seem to make good reading to me. 
Is it a positive to see two of our attacking players back from injury and finishing two really good attacking moves to get on the scoresheet? For me it is. Is it a positive to see us keep a clean sheet? For me it is. Is it a positive to see some rotation in the squad and minutes in the legs for more players? For me it is. Is it a positive to see us pass the ball more, have more possession, play more accurate passes than the opponent? For me it is. Is it a positive seeing the club I support win regardless of the opponent or competition? For me it is.

So taking this game in isolation it was a decent win. As for what it means in the grand scheme of the season we have to wait and see, it’s on to Carlisle on the weekend to hopefully build some momentum. 

 

IMG_0321.jpeg

How very dare you say what I said! 

I will celebrate with the rest when we beat some decent opposition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A much better performance that will hopefully push us on. More energy and better use of the ball. Wilson played really well and without fear which was refreshing to see.

However, they were a Lincoln City B team so let’s not get carried away - how an earth did they not latch on to our out ball - Cashin to Wilson every time !

Still I’m taking it as a positive but if Warne doesn’t play the likes of Wilson this weekend or we go back to the turgid crap we have been playing it will further increase the doubt I have about him….

Edited by Justa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, DazzaRam said:

Really pleased to see us score 2 goals like that without a cross in sight!! We played alot more like a football side 2nd half. Instead of a "just cross it and hope" side. Having Barkhuizen and Sibley back helps put Warneball to one side. We need to carry it on Saturday and not revert to boring non football stuff. Last night showed we can play. Carry it on!!!

Interesting that Warne himself noted that in his interview. He was actually annoyed by the number of aimless crosses with no one in the box. It just seems like a disconnect between his instructions and the players carrying it out. Hopefully they can iron it out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Srg said:

Interesting that Warne himself noted that in his interview. He was actually annoyed by the number of aimless crosses with no one in the box. It just seems like a disconnect between his instructions and the players carrying it out. Hopefully they can iron it out.

I noticed that. Maybe the players coming back have given us the creative spark weve badly needed and an alternative to just cross. Was interesting to hear tho i agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RoyMac5 said:

I said we can only beat what's in front of us. It was basically Lincoln reserves - 8 changes was it? We hardly sparkled and I stick with that. If fans want to see a 'good game' that is fine by me. 

Conveniently not mentioning that we made six changes, whatever fits the narrative eh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:

I agree. Lincoln still passed the ball more freely and better than we did until the final third. It was so obvious our only tactic, until Sibs disobeyed and went through the middle, was play the ball out wide to the fullbacks. Cashin to Wilson was on repeat and Lincoln let them. Wilson looks nothing like a fullback but slightly like a winger, and managed some half decent possession. The midfield was lightweight as a feather and up front was invisible. How far Warne has dropped us if some think this was a good display.

But you can only beat the opposition in front of you. So it looked like we ripped Lincoln reserves another hole. 😄

You almost posted something positive Bet that hurt 😆

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Enjoyed last night. I’m also looking forward to Warne having some headaches with that midfield selection. Embleton, Sibs, Fornah, Bird, Tommo, Smith and Hourihane. There’s some really good players there which should bode well over the course of the season.
 

I do like the look of Fornah, he makes it look easy which is always a sign of a good player. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Foreveram said:

Conveniently not mentioning that we made six changes, whatever fits the narrative eh.

Indeed - a bit like the narrative choice to pretend that all changes are equal / made for the same reason.

There's rather a difference between making changes to to give game time to players returning from injury (Sibley, Barkhuizen) or to new signings brought in with the intention of being first choice (Elder, Bradley) and making changes to give first team players a rest / play the kids etc.

Our changes were nearly all designed to improve us (you could say Collins & Wilson are backups, but they'll still be expected to contribute a lot throughout the season), how many of theirs were?

Edited by Kokosnuss
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Kokosnuss said:

Indeed - a bit like the narrative choice to pretend that all changes are equal / made for the same reason.

There's rather a difference between making changes to to give game time to players returning from injury (Sibley, Barkhuizen) or to new signings brought in with the intention of being first choice (Elder, Bradley) and making changes to give first team players a rest / play the kids.

Our changes were all designed to improve us, how many of theirs were?

Don’t know, don’t care 🤷🏻‍♂️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...