Vs Middlesbrough (H) Match Thread

[MACKWORTHRAM]

Just now, Ghost of Clough said:

Go on then. Explain how the damage to the academy means the academy is still playing catch up.

Or did you not actually read what I've posted and and took it as a reference to everything the club has gone through?

Because we have had to start from pretty much scratch with the academy too.

All these clubs now selling players for big fees and making money that can then be spent elsewhere on the squad is what we are playing catch up to. We have not got any assets to sell because we have been stripped bare. You need one gem, that's all that can change everything.

If we had not been in administration and had remained a championship club. A player like Kelleyman, who has just gone for 19 million after having not played for Villa. What could we have got for him if he had played a season here? Kaide Gordon at Liverpool? What could he have gone for. We even sold his sell on fee.

All that money could have been invested into the club on the squad and back in to the academy. It was decimated like the squad was. 

[DavesaRam]

3 hours ago, Ram-Alf said:

Been there done that  😁

What? In Chris’s wardrobe?

[Anag Ram]

54 minutes ago, Big Bad Bob said:

Jeez, was that really Matt Clarke? I was there and I thought it was Tyson Fury 😆

I initially thought it was James Collins, the Welsh defender but he’s 40!

TBF Clarke had a pretty easy day. He will be gutted that Jones’ error cost them the game. 

[Foreveram]

9 minutes ago, KBB said:

Imagine a brick layer turns up to work and the foreman has been forced to sell all the bricks. His wall is gonna be pretty poor.

Forced, that sounds like a dodgy deal to me.😳

[DCFC Kicks]

13 hours ago, McArthur Park said:

Did I say that was the only time he might change things?

You were praising him by saying if Boro had scored then he would've changed tactics. Instead of perhaps anticipating that they were about to score and change tactics before they did - which they almost did over and over again.

Edited August 19 by DCFC Kicks

[DCFC Kicks]

13 hours ago, Jourdan said:

If we had lost 1-0 with 70% possession and 20 shots on goal, would you call it unlucky?

Yes. What's your point?

[DCFC Kicks]

6 hours ago, Kathcairns said:

I think in every football game there is a bit of luck involved, not just ours.

There's 'a bit of luck' e.g. winning 2-1 in a 50/50 game. Then there's winning 1-0 with 27% possession while creating next to nothing all game. We would've been very lucky to only lose this game by one goal let alone win. I can't think of a luckier win in recent memory. I'll obviously take it. Its just annoying everyone on here saying it was sum sort of Warne masterstroke.

[Wolfie20]

2 minutes ago, DCFC Kicks said:

There's 'a bit of luck' e.g. winning 2-1 in a 50/50 game. Then there's winning 1-0 with 27% possession while creating next to nothing all game. We would've been very lucky to only lose this game by one goal let alone win. I can't think of a luckier win in recent memory. I'll obviously take it. Its just annoying everyone on here saying it was sum sort of Warne masterstroke.

Has it ever dawned on you that some posters reaction in supporting Warne after Saturday is a response to your endless criticism of him, some of which is occasionally justified but most of the time gives the impression of being just a personal vendetta. 

[DavesaRam]

5 minutes ago, DCFC Kicks said:

There's 'a bit of luck' e.g. winning 2-1 in a 50/50 game. Then there's winning 1-0 with 27% possession while creating next to nothing all game. We would've been very lucky to only lose this game by one goal let alone win. I can't think of a luckier win in recent memory. I'll obviously take it. Its just annoying everyone on here saying it was sum sort of Warne masterstroke.

In part it was Paul Warne’s tactics - Middlesbrough's strength is in playing counter attacking football, which depends on drawing your opponent as far upfield as you can and breaking into the gaps which that creates. So Paul got us sitting back, sitting deep so the Smoggies couldn’t then hit us on the break because we were sat there waiting for them.

[DCFC Kicks]

6 hours ago, jono said:

Probably, but there will be games when we are unlucky. Lucky in so far as we pounced on a mistake during a game that we tactically won. It also shows as many said last season, that we can’t be as casual in the championship because if you make a mistake you’ll get caught and punished ….. Ask Middlesbrough 

I can't accept that we 'tactically won' that game. It can't be a tactic to just assume Boro won't take their chances. 

I first listened to the game on BBC Radio Tees before rewatching it. The commentators were shocked at how little football we were playing, comparing us to a Rugby Union side kicking into touch. 

[DCFC Kicks]

4 hours ago, Ram-Alf said:

I watched Brentford Vs Palace yesterday, Palace having a good goal disallowed...the referee admitted he blew to early, Brentford were lucky, Boro had a goal disallowed and hit the post...that was lucky for us, There's times in most games where a bit of luck will change a game, A corner given when a goal kick,  A throw in the same outcome, A player misses a one on one, The opposition miss a penalty...luck can play a major role in football.

Tactics have nothing to do with "luck" Man City won the Charity Shield because Evans missed his penalty, Pep said after the game We set our team up on the halfway line for all the pens and all the players were sending a message through thought that he would miss...now that's tactics  

Luck based on a refs decision is different because its got nothing to do with the players/managers performance. If a team completely dominates its almost impossible for them to get luck. They either get what they deserve or get unlucky. So in that regard tactics do have something to do with luck. The Boro game wasn't just a missed one-on-one or a missed penalty. It was being outplayed for an entire 90 mins. 

[Mucker1884]

19 hours ago, Chris_Martin said:

would you still say that if their shot had gone in off the post rather than back out?

or if their pass had made it to the gk ?

I reckon if we had scored thirteen against them, I'd have claimed "'Boro played well, but they were no Finn Harps".  🙄

[Ghost of Clough]

55 minutes ago, MACKWORTHRAM said:

Because we have had to start from pretty much scratch with the academy too.

All these clubs now selling players for big fees and making money that can then be spent elsewhere on the squad is what we are playing catch up to. We have not got any assets to sell because we have been stripped bare. You need one gem, that's all that can change everything.

If we had not been in administration and had remained a championship club. A player like Kelleyman, who has just gone for 19 million after having not played for Villa. What could we have got for him if he had played a season here? Kaide Gordon at Liverpool? What could he have gone for. We even sold his sell on fee.

All that money could have been invested into the club on the squad and back in to the academy. It was decimated like the squad was. 

Which academy players did we lose during administration? Which of those players would still be in the U21s (or below)?

Potential fees for the likes of Kellyman don't enter this discussion - the player isn't at the club regardless of admin or not, whisot the money gained would have gone towards the first team. It's not even guaranteed we would have sold him for more than we did during admin. Just look at the low fees received for Knight and Bird as examples. Or he could have struggled to establish himself and like a sibley and left for nothing.

Gordon chose to leave us in Feb 2021. 

[ipad1977]

2 hours ago, Alty_Ram said:

We will obviously see things very differently but though I disagree with your assessment, you have at least tried to engage on this very touchy subject, so I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt to try and help you understand our perspective.

When you are on the sharp end of near oblivion as a club, the fans will feel everything very keenly so you will appreciate that this one is still very raw. We are completely aware of the role Morris played and his reign at the club was ultimately an utter disaster, regardless of what good intentions he may have had at the outset.

I can't say either way what Gibson's specific intent was but it appeared utterly spiteful. From a Derby fans perspective he seemed so consumed with his feud with Morris that he was seemingly happy to see us cease to exist while he tried to 'teach a lesson' to someone who had already abandoned ship and left us to the circling sharks.

The club was saddled with massive unsustainable debt and lets be quiet clear, fans at this end know exactly where to point the finger of blame for that. Morris' tenure at the club was ultimately an utter disaster and he threw us under a bus with administration.

The source of much of the resentment re Gibson was that his feud with Morris seemed to only further endanger our club and its chances of survival at a time when Morris had said "See ya, I'm off, sort it it our yourselves". The term 'Survival' is not overstating the case - we were dead in the water and nobody wanted to buy a club worth nothing for the sort of money required to save it. Last orders had rung, the fat lady had already sung, the gangplank was almost up and the ship was ready to sail, the cupboard was bare, the administrators were switching the lights off and nobody credible was stepping forward to save the club. Even the chancers and charlatans had disappeared despite the EFL waving them all through.

The fact remains that we were as close to oblivion as any club who has ever survived such a spectacular financial meltdown, has ever found itself. Thanks to Morris, the club had massive crippling debt of course, but also a perfect storm of zero assets due to Morris' shenanigans with taking the stadium away from the club  and an academy that had been plundered of any assets of value and a first team that we could not offer any contract to to provide even a nominal residual value to give saleable assets to set against debt when vultures came to pick the carcass clean of the final few scraps.

As the drowning form of DCFC, flailed away trying to get to the harbour wall, Gibson and Couhig made an already unviable deal even less attractive but keeping this threat of some highly debatable but considerable imagined debt owed to their clubs and in effect wanted to charge any concerned good citizen who wanted to save the drowning man millions of pounds just to use the life ring. Everyone just walked on by and DCFC slipped beneath the waves.

We were only saved by a local hero who at the 11th hour just refused to let the club die and payed frankly absurd money for something that was worth nothing. None of us will ever know what deals were done behind closed doors with Gibson, Couhig, Morris and others but other clubs chairmen were conscious, deliberate players in holding a dying club to ransom when the villain of the peace had already walked away and left others to clean up the carnage.

Football is an emotional business and I'd expect that you'd also resent a 3rd party who appeared to be an active and enthusiastic participant in massively complicating a rescue of your club if god forbid you ever find yourselves in similar circumstance. I know that you lot have been on the brink before and I think the short memories and gloating from some of your fans was what was so disappointing.

Your account of what yourself and your fellow fans have been through obviously had a fair amount of emotion behind it and it's an emotion that I can certainly both identify with and recollect easily enough.

You're also indeed correct, Middlesbrough football club had the liquidators called in, the gates to Ayersome Park were locked by outside forces and we ceased to exist, in 1986. Obviously a large swathe of our fans won't have that experience in living memory, certainly not all of those aged 40 and under so as such can't identify with it personally, but I do. I was a 9 year old boy who bawled his eyes out at the time at the thought of his local team gone for good.

For your Mel Morris, our villain of the piece was called Charlie Amer, a man who ran the club like his plaything and piggy bank and was guilty of a stupid amount of financial mismanagement. We shut down completely, until much like yourselves in the 11th hour a local consortium stepped in to rescue the club, with a certain twenty-something Steve Gibson involved. Not many of our fans knew him previously but he was a baby-faced kid from a Middlesbrough Council estate who had quietly built up his fledgling haulage business to become a multi-millionaire even at that young age. He would of course in the years that followed go on to assume the role of major shareholder and chairman, spearheading the club towards its greatest times in living memory and these factors mean he is held in high regard by a lot of our fans, much the same I imagine as your new owners are by your support.

We even had to play at Hartlepool's ground for a while to fulfill fixtures with their permission and wishes of goodwill, which we always remember whilst our ground ownership was sorted out.  It's no coincidence that when Hartlepool themselves nosedived out of the football pyramid and further recently with their own extreme financial troubles, they were stunned as were their opponents in fixtures no doubt that they suddenly began to get 20K odd crowds showing up to watch their games in the second division down of non-league as many thousands of Boro fans began turning up to support them and help their financial woes any way we could, chanting "We remember 86" as we did so.

Regarding the recent rift between OUR clubs or more importantly it's cause, it's clear that there's no love lost between Gibson and Morris and it's sad that your fans have borne the brunt of it it seems, rather than the real charlatan, whom those from both clubs can identify. I have to confess to having no legal knowledge of how each party may be pursued through courts for any perceived injustice or whether it is possible, but disregarding this the honourable and logical course of action would have been for Gibson to hold Morris personally accountable for whatever financial disadvantage he perceived MFC to have had. Honourable as he was the man ultimately responsible for all the financial decisions involved, whereas your fans of course had no input into any of this and logical as he was about to emerge from your club with his saddlebags full to ride off into the sunset, whereas Derby County no longer had a pot to piss in thanks to his mayhem?

Again I don't know whether this is legally possible as the finer points of such laws are not my area of expertise, but it's the course I'd have thought he would have taken if it was.

In truth I don't think the vast majority of our fans actually wanted Derby County to fold, certainly not almost all of the ones old enough to remember our own darkest hour. You will of course get the mindless element who support any club who will gleefully jump all over any perceived grief plus some stupid kids, the kind that were out living it large during the recent riots, but it's always a sad truth that empty vessels make the most noise and get focussed upon, merely as they're the extreme. This in turn will produce the same reaction from the opposing mindless element and as such toxic feelings will escalate. Its unfortunately what always tends to happen.

[LazloW]

We won the game. There was obviously a large element of luck in that Boro had a lot of the ball, quite a few chances and were obviously the better team, who will probably end up in a better position than us come the end of the season. But given all that we defended quite well, keeper played very well and we scored a good goal thanks to a defensive c***-up (such things happen and it was a ‘good goal’ in my opinion because of the quality finish).  This happens all over the country every weekend - it’s football and sometimes the teams with least possession, attempts on goal and pass completion stats wins.  We will play better and lose, we will play the same and lose, we will play better - and differently - and win.  I enjoyed the match even though it was backs to the wall. I am pleased that we won.

I thought there would be general consensus that the way we played isn’t going to win the league, that we all hope we won’t play like that at all times, that we may need to play like that now and again as we cannot currently compete financially or squad quality wise with a lot of other teams in this very hard league and - with the best will in the world - this season is about doing the very best we can with no particular expectation of greatness. On that basis, the odd backs to the wall performance is sort of expected.

With all that in mind, what are people actually arguing about 3 days later? Can’t we just be happy with the win and see what transpires as the season progresses? 

Edited August 19 by LazloW

[MadAmster]

1 hour ago, DCFC Kicks said:

There's 'a bit of luck' e.g. winning 2-1 in a 50/50 game. Then there's winning 1-0 with 27% possession while creating next to nothing all game. We would've been very lucky to only lose this game by one goal let alone win. I can't think of a luckier win in recent memory. I'll obviously take it. Its just annoying everyone on here saying it was sum sort of Warne masterstroke.

So, once forced into replacing Cash and Kane with more defensively minded defenders in Nyambe and Bradley, he got the message to the team to change the original game plan which is why we dropped back 5 or so yards and the players all understood the job they were being asked to do and how to do it effectively. That's luck?

[MadAmster]

51 minutes ago, DCFC Kicks said:

Luck based on a refs decision is different because its got nothing to do with the players/managers performance. If a team completely dominates its almost impossible for them to get luck. They either get what they deserve or get unlucky. So in that regard tactics do have something to do with luck. The Boro game wasn't just a missed one-on-one or a missed penalty. It was being outplayed for an entire 90 mins. 

Outplayed from the 25th minute. Once we rejigged the game plan, yes, they had 70% possession, yes they had territorial advantage. However, the Rams were well organised, well drilled and, apart from that offside header, restricted Boro to taking pot shots from 25 yards out, a massive 4 of which were on target. Luck or excellent defensive play? Most would say the latter.

[Comrade 86]

55 minutes ago, ipad1977 said:

Your account of what yourself and your fellow fans have been through obviously had a fair amount of emotion behind it and it's an emotion that I can certainly both identify with and recollect easily enough.

You're also indeed correct, Middlesbrough football club had the liquidators called in, the gates to Ayersome Park were locked by outside forces and we ceased to exist, in 1986. Obviously a large swathe of our fans won't have that experience in living memory, certainly not all of those aged 40 and under so as such can't identify with it personally, but I do. I was a 9 year old boy who bawled his eyes out at the time at the thought of his local team gone for good.

For your Mel Morris, our villain of the piece was called Charlie Amer, a man who ran the club like his plaything and piggy bank and was guilty of a stupid amount of financial mismanagement. We shut down completely, until much like yourselves in the 11th hour a local consortium stepped in to rescue the club, with a certain twenty-something Steve Gibson involved. Not many of our fans knew him previously but he was a baby-faced kid from a Middlesbrough Council estate who had quietly built up his fledgling haulage business to become a multi-millionaire even at that young age. He would of course in the years that followed go on to assume the role of major shareholder and chairman, spearheading the club towards its greatest times in living memory and these factors mean he is held in high regard by a lot of our fans, much the same I imagine as your new owners are by your support.

We even had to play at Hartlepool's ground for a while to fulfill fixtures with their permission and wishes of goodwill, which we always remember whilst our ground ownership was sorted out.  It's no coincidence that when Hartlepool themselves nosedived out of the football pyramid and further recently with their own extreme financial troubles, they were stunned as were their opponents in fixtures no doubt that they suddenly began to get 20K odd crowds showing up to watch their games in the second division down of non-league as many thousands of Boro fans began turning up to support them and help their financial woes any way we could, chanting "We remember 86" as we did so.

Regarding the recent rift between OUR clubs or more importantly it's cause, it's clear that there's no love lost between Gibson and Morris and it's sad that your fans have borne the brunt of it it seems, rather than the real charlatan, whom those from both clubs can identify. I have to confess to having no legal knowledge of how each party may be pursued through courts for any perceived injustice or whether it is possible, but disregarding this the honourable and logical course of action would have been for Gibson to hold Morris personally accountable for whatever financial disadvantage he perceived MFC to have had. Honourable as he was the man ultimately responsible for all the financial decisions involved, whereas your fans of course had no input into any of this and logical as he was about to emerge from your club with his saddlebags full to ride off into the sunset, whereas Derby County no longer had a pot to piss in thanks to his mayhem?

Again I don't know whether this is legally possible as the finer points of such laws are not my area of expertise, but it's the course I'd have thought he would have taken if it was.

In truth I don't think the vast majority of our fans actually wanted Derby County to fold, certainly not almost all of the ones old enough to remember our own darkest hour. You will of course get the mindless element who support any club who will gleefully jump all over any perceived grief plus some stupid kids, the kind that were out living it large during the recent riots, but it's always a sad truth that empty vessels make the most noise and get focussed upon, merely as they're the extreme. This in turn will produce the same reaction from the opposing mindless element and as such toxic feelings will escalate. Its unfortunately what always tends to happen.

I think you'll find, despite being pretty objective, that ill feeling towards Gibson and a portion of your fan base still runs deep. Only time will fix that, but sadly a lot of yours were back on the wind up again on Saturday and none of your lot have recognised the role your owner played in 2 years of abject misery for everyone associated with Derby. Neither do they acknowledge the hypocrisy displayed by Gibson in selling the club's debt to avoid FFP constraints. His attempts to ruin Derby weren't a footballing call, or even about the money, more his vanity and a bitterness streak a mile wide over our ex-owners demeanour towards him. He's a little man, with a big bank balance and a massive chip on his shoulder. 

I don't personally blame you, or any other individual, bar your bilious hypocrite of an owner, but no amount of rationale will undo what's done and certainly not while your fans continue to sing about our club dying. We have our own idiots too, but you'll have noted (perhaps) the comments on here about chants aimed at Gibson on Saturday. Despite all, the majority on here at least, retain some measure of class. Sadly, it's very hard to say the same about the Boro fans who rocked up on the weekend. Not an ounce of humour in their collective body, just hissing and overt malice.

By all means respond if you wish, but I think for many of us Rams, this is how it is and this is how it will remain, for the foreseeable at very least. FWIW, I've been really impressed with your lot on the pitch and feel certain you will be right up there end of season. I also commend your patience and polite manner, even if there's litttle upon which we can agree.

Edited August 19 by Comrade 86

[Ram-Alf]

59 minutes ago, DCFC Kicks said:

Luck based on a refs decision is different because its got nothing to do with the players/managers performance. If a team completely dominates its almost impossible for them to get luck. They either get what they deserve or get unlucky. So in that regard tactics do have something to do with luck. The Boro game wasn't just a missed one-on-one or a missed penalty. It was being outplayed for an entire 90 mins. 

Really, The manager picks the players, The manager sets the players up to attack, The player gets fouled, The player scores from the free kick...yep nowt to do with the manager or the players.

But I do have to say...Brentford got all the luck and they never even touched the ball🙋‍♂️

 

[DE56Ram]

4 hours ago, ollycutts1982 said:

Exactly this, it wasn't pretty Saturday but it was effective, albeit through a gift of a goal. If we go toe to toe with sides like Boro we will get torn apart. Like it or not they are light years ahead of us at the minute. We need points on the board and not to leak goals. The game plan was perfect Saturday as it allowed their full backs to push higher up the pitch into the wingers space and pretty much nullified their threat from the wide players. If we want to stay up this season this is what we will need to do against the better teams.

It wasn’t entirely a gift of a goal.

A bloke that sits behind me is a lower league manager and said as I was peeling myself off the PP roof, I like to see a quick lad left a bit up the pitch at opposition corners.
Another shrewd positional ploy from our excellent manager!