Derby County (H) - We couldn't make it four... could we?

[joey_big_nose]

Just now, Nelsonthedog said:

Folk like rothwell because he's a fancy pants type.. all tricks, but little end product in reality.

 

We got him from Oxford on a free.. perspective.

I like them both to be honest. And Dack, and Holtby. We have a really good set of attacking mids. 

[Admiral Nelsen]

Just now, joey_big_nose said:

I like them both to be honest. And Dack, and Holtby. We have a really good set of attacking mids. 

Agree with this. 

Pet theory of mine is that a lot of our problems this season have come from playing both Gally and Armstrong (both of who I like individually) at the same time. Both can be good finishers on their day, and both have got either the pace or power to trouble defenders, but both have had troubles looking after the ball.

Nothing stopping a midfield with Dack, Holtby and Rothwell really hurting teams. We just need to be a bit more respectful of possession to make the most of it, don't think it's a coincidence that our best performance of the season coincides with Graham coming in.

 

[Amo]

11 minutes ago, joey_big_nose said:

It's an interesting thing football fan psychology. You definitely get saints who can do little wrong and sinners who can do little right. 

Obviously there are cognitive biases, but it's not like the manager is any better. Some players he picks come rain or shine, others get thrown under the bus (usually the younger ones). 

[JacknOry]

33 minutes ago, Nelsonthedog said:

Folk like rothwell because he's a fancy pants type.. all tricks, but little end product in reality(at the moment). He's the new rochina.

 

We got him from Oxford on a free.. perspective.

He had plenty of end product at the end of last season when given a run. I think it would be fair to judge after another consistent run of games. Armstrong has created more chances and scored more goals simply because he has been ever-present in the lineup.

[frosty]

I wouldn’t say Rothwell is a ‘fancy pants type’ at all, unless that’s the new name we’re giving players that have noticeably more technical ability than most in the squad. He’s quick, direct, plays firm, crisp passes like he really means it and he wasn’t half getting stuck in against Brentford too.

He’s shown in his one run of being a regular starter, at the end of last season, that he chip in with goals too. If Mowbray keeps him in the team, I’m sure it won’t be long until he bags.

Edited December 3, 2019 by frosty

[Amo]

It's a myth that Rochina was a fancy dan with no end product. 5 goals and 4 assists in 19 apps isn't a bad return. That was his record in 2012/13 when we actually played him.

[Exiled in Toronto]

Rothwell made it easy for the notion of dropping him to take hold by an inept performance on Saturday, while Bennett did in twenty mins what Rothwell has yet to do in his 700+ minutes on the field this season: lay an unmissable chance on a plate for someone else. 

 

[Guest]

Whenever we play Derby I think back to the first game of that awfully boring season, Leon Best started up front, shit game, shit side. We've gone from midfield duo's containing Dickson Etuhu, Danny Murphy, Jason Lowe, Lee Williamson, Ryan Tunnicliffe, Hope Akpan and Danny Guthrie to the likes of Dack, Holtby, Travis and Rothwell.

Some say we're underachieving, some may not think so, but we can all agree we play football on completely different levels to how we used to. We had a good 4/5 years with ZERO creativity from midfield, and we're lucky to have the midfield we do in 2019.

If only in form Jordan Rhodes was here now....

[DE.]

1 hour ago, Admiral Nelsen said:

Pet theory of mine is that a lot of our problems this season have come from playing both Gally and Armstrong (both of who I like individually) at the same time.

From what I remember from some stats I posted a while back that is indeed the case. Statistically we were more likely to drop points if Armstrong and Gallagher both started. 

[LeftWinger]

1 hour ago, Amo said:

It's a myth that Rochina was a fancy dan with no end product. 5 goals and 4 assists in 19 apps isn't a bad return. That was his record in 2012/13 when we actually played him.

I think he was unlucky not to get a better run of games. I'd have loved to have seen Rhodes left out, and Rochina playing in behind Gestede and King around that time. Think we would have scored a lot of goals playing like that - with a three in midfield behind and the full backs providing width.

[roversfan99]

Just now, LeftWinger said:

I think he was unlucky not to get a better run of games. I'd have loved to have seen Rhodes left out, and Rochina playing in behind Gestede and King around that time. Think we would have scored a lot of goals playing like that - with a three in midfield behind and the full backs providing width.

I very much doubt Rochina could get close to the consistent goal output Rhodes provided, so ultimately I suspect it may have been easier on the eye at the cost of effectiveness.

[LeftWinger]

8 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

I very much doubt Rochina could get close to the consistent goal output Rhodes provided, so ultimately I suspect it may have been easier on the eye at the cost of effectiveness.

Between Gestede, King and Rochina they would have scored plenty of goals I'd have thought. I think it would have improved us defensively as well as Rhodes couldn't hold the ball up to save his life. Gestede could and King could stretch teams with his pace. 

[roversfan99]

Just now, LeftWinger said:

Between Gestede, King and Rochina they would have scored plenty of goals I'd have thought. I think it would have improved us defensively as well as Rhodes couldn't hold the ball up to save his life. Gestede could and King could stretch teams with his pace. 

Rhodes and Gestede scored over 40 between them. Rhodes scored more than a goal every other game. If there was one area of the pitch that didnt need rectifying, it was up front.

[LeftWinger]

Just now, roversfan99 said:

Rhodes and Gestede scored over 40 between them. Rhodes scored more than a goal every other game. If there was one area of the pitch that didnt need rectifying, it was up front.

If you compare Rhodes and Rochina in 12/13 - we won 32% of games with Rhodes starting, compared to 46% of games when Rochina started.

Then looking at 13/14 - we won 48% of games that King started in, 45% of games that Gestede started and 40% of games Rhodes started in.

Rhodes lack of pace, strength and ability to hold up the ball caused us issues when we didn't have the ball or when he couldn't hold it up in my opinion. 

[Wegerleswiggle]

1 minute ago, LeftWinger said:

If you compare Rhodes and Rochina in 12/13 - we won 32% of games with Rhodes starting, compared to 46% of games when Rochina started.

Then looking at 13/14 - we won 48% of games that King started in, 45% of games that Gestede started and 40% of games Rhodes started in.

Rhodes lack of pace, strength and ability to hold up the ball caused us issues when we didn't have the ball or when he couldn't hold it up in my opinion. 

I didn't realise until now that we received £1.5m when Rochina joined Ruben Kazan.

[Nelsonthedog]

31 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Rhodes and Gestede scored over 40 between them. Rhodes scored more than a goal every other game. If there was one area of the pitch that didnt need rectifying, it was up front.

The rest of the team suffered for Rhodes presence.. especially defensively.

Edited December 3, 2019 by Nelsonthedog

[Gone to seed]

 

Just now, Wegerleswiggle said:

I didn't realise until now that we received £1.5m when Rochina joined Ruben Kazan.

Kerching! the penny finally drops!

[roversfan99]

I do find it astounding how underappreciated a regular, consistent 20+ goal a season striker now is since his departure.

He did his side of the bargain consistently throughout his time here, retrospectively painting a picture that we would have been better had he not been there is ridiculous.

If you had to prioritise one thing in a striker, goals, pace, hold up, give me goals anytime.

[old darwen blue]

Just now, roversfan99 said:

I do find it astounding how underappreciated a regular, consistent 20+ goal a season striker now is since his departure.

He did his side of the bargain consistently throughout his time here, retrospectively painting a picture that we would have been better had he not been there is ridiculous.

If you had to prioritise one thing in a striker, goals, pace, hold up, give me goals anytime.

Absolutely correct. Jordan Rhodes was lethal in front of goals and from what I remember of King he wasn’t the player then for us that he is now. Some on here have selective memories. 

[Amo]

36 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Rhodes and Gestede scored over 40 between them. Rhodes scored more than a goal every other game. If there was one area of the pitch that didnt need rectifying, it was up front.

It would be madness to scapegoat Rhodes for our failure to get promoted but we looked a better TEAM with King/Rudy leading the line. It’s notable that Rhodes was on the bench when we turned over Swansea and Stoke in the FA Cup. Goal poachers are a dying breed and strikers are expected to contribute more to the team’s overall performance than just hitting the back of the onion bag. Experienced bosses like  Strachan and Lambert had his number. Rhodes would’ve been a fantastic supersub but at £8m there was no justifying that. 

[sabino]

On 03/12/2019 at 12:34, windymiller7 said:

Is that for us or does that include his assists for the opposition as well? ?

I just don't get the rediculous treatment of Elliott Bennett. He has performed well enough in most games. But he still gets childish comments about sending him off if he commits a foul. When he makes a mistake, as all our defence do, he is the one that gets panelled. But when he puts a perfect ball on Tosin's head, it is ignored.

Edited December 4, 2019 by sabino
Sp

[roversmum]

3 hours ago, Exiled in Toronto said:

Rothwell made it easy for the notion of dropping him to take hold by an inept performance on Saturday, while Bennett did in twenty mins what Rothwell has yet to do in his 700+ minutes on the field this season: lay an unmissable chance on a plate for someone else. 

 

ROTHWELL wasn’t his usual self on Saturday - he had suffered a calf strain earlier in the week which may have returned. I noticed when subbed he went off back to the changing room with one of the staff. 

[only2garners]

So did Armstrong and Graham as well roversmum - that I think is just what happens but usually you don't notice it.

My view is that the Stoke game was the wrong one for Rothwell and he would have been better to have missed that one and be back for the Derby game, which will be much more suited to his talents. He does still need to work out when to pass the ball and when to attack opposing players - he still has a tendency to do the latter too many times in the wrong part of the pitch.

[DE.]

Just now, only2garners said:

So did Armstrong and Graham as well roversmum - that I think is just what happens but usually you don't notice it.

My view is that the Stoke game was the wrong one for Rothwell and he would have been better to have missed that one and be back for the Derby game, which will be much more suited to his talents. He does still need to work out when to pass the ball and when to attack opposing players - he still has a tendency to do the latter too many times in the wrong part of the pitch.

Just a guess but perhaps Mowbray has been feeling the pressure, and was worried how the crowd would react if Rothwell wasn't in the starting lineup - especially if we went on to lose. At the end of the day we won the match so regardless of how Rothwell played the lineup was ultimately the right one.

1 hour ago, LeftWinger said:

If you compare Rhodes and Rochina in 12/13 - we won 32% of games with Rhodes starting, compared to 46% of games when Rochina started.

Then looking at 13/14 - we won 48% of games that King started in, 45% of games that Gestede started and 40% of games Rhodes started in.

Rhodes lack of pace, strength and ability to hold up the ball caused us issues when we didn't have the ball or when he couldn't hold it up in my opinion. 

Worth noting that Rhodes played 4018 minutes during the 13/14 season, whereas King and Gestede played 1868 and 1714 minutes respectively. That's obviously going to skewer the percentages somewhat. I would be interested to know how many games Rhodes started compared to King/Gestede - I imagine the difference would be fairly significant.

Edited December 3, 2019 by DE.

[tomphil]

1 hour ago, Nelsonthedog said:

The rest of the team suffered for Rhodes presence.. especially defensively.

No the midfield was piss weak game after game teams played through us the gap between Rhodes and the 2 deep lying mids was two thirds the length of the pitch.  

There was no Dack floating in there aimless balls coming back into midfield the majority of the time were picked straight back up again by the opposition.

Edited December 3, 2019 by tomphil