Jump to content
IGNORED

Derby County v Bristol City - Coming to America - Friendly Matchday Thread


Septic Peg

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Hampshire reds said:

i know yesterday the game was abandoned. but 2  halves 30 min each half. what was the point. enough players out there to play a proper game.or have i missed something. 

The point was trying different combinations and formations of some of the younger players. The game was a friendly in 30odd degree heat. Played pretty gently but they seemed happy at the end despite the result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, JonDolman said:

Yes it is only a friendly, but we pretty much never see what we look like without Pack in the side. What I did see was our midfielders releasing the ball quickly. Whether it was Brownhill or Rowe, it was a quick pass most of the time. Have to remember it is only a friendly and not get too excited, but Rowe does have some class and looks like he works his socks off too.

Whilst I agree that the midfield generally linked well, they also kept interchanging positions, sometimes Rowe, sometimes Brownhill and sometimes Szmodics were the one in the deeper holding position. 

What I did find with this, was that after the rain break, twice in 5 minutes Derby were allowed to waltz through the middle and create an opportunity - which they should have done better with - because one of the midfield 3 wasn’t holding. 

This is what Pack does that many people don’t see. He patrols the danger areas in the 25 yard zone outside our own box and we rarely see space and chances easily conceded straight through the middle. 

Twice in 5 minutes, without Pack, is something I worry about. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Harry said:

Whilst I agree that the midfield generally linked well, they also kept interchanging positions, sometimes Rowe, sometimes Brownhill and sometimes Szmodics were the one in the deeper holding position. 

What I did find with this, was that after the rain break, twice in 5 minutes Derby were allowed to waltz through the middle and create an opportunity - which they should have done better with - because one of the midfield 3 wasn’t holding. 

This is what Pack does that many people don’t see. He patrols the danger areas in the 25 yard zone outside our own box and we rarely see space and chances easily conceded straight through the middle. 

Twice in 5 minutes, without Pack, is something I worry about. 

I said that in another thread....I could t quite make out who had swapped positions but it looked like Rowe had gone to LB for a few minutes and Webster into the midfield and we’d gone 442 for a few minutes.  Couldn’t quite Erik out who was playing where but we lost the middle of the park, where we’d been dominant to that point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Harry said:

Whilst I agree that the midfield generally linked well, they also kept interchanging positions, sometimes Rowe, sometimes Brownhill and sometimes Szmodics were the one in the deeper holding position. 

What I did find with this, was that after the rain break, twice in 5 minutes Derby were allowed to waltz through the middle and create an opportunity - which they should have done better with - because one of the midfield 3 wasn’t holding. 

This is what Pack does that many people don’t see. He patrols the danger areas in the 25 yard zone outside our own box and we rarely see space and chances easily conceded straight through the middle. 

Twice in 5 minutes, without Pack, is something I worry about. 

Funny how we see things differently. Though i believe Pack positions himself well, he does not protect the defence very well. He needs a Smith type alongside him imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

Funny how we see things differently. Though i believe Pack positions himself well, he does not protect the defence very well. He needs a Smith type alongside him imo.

Tbf Pack could score from 20 yards and you'd claim it wasn't Pack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Baker poor mistake on goal there. And I know shot ended up in top corner but Bentley had narrowed the angle and wasn't far from it when it went past him. Maybe on another day he saves that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, wendyredredrobin said:

I haven't been at all impressed from what I've seen of him.  Needs to go out on loan to learn to play football.  How much did we spend on him?

 

17 minutes ago, Lew-T said:

I have a feeling he may go the same way as Eisa.

For what it's worth the players sat near me were encouraging him. Saying stuff like "come on Hak's get your goal" when he had the ball near the box.

But from my perspective he didn't stand out as much as, say, Edwards who was full of running and tricky feet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ExiledAjax said:

 

For what it's worth the players sat near me were encouraging him. Saying stuff like "come on Hak's get your goal" when he had the ball near the box.

But from my perspective he didn't stand out as much as, say, Edwards who was full of running and tricky feet.

Seen quite a bit of Edwards. He always looked extremely quick and always thought he'd be more a wing back than winger.

But I really did not expect him to from National league South to maybe being part of our squad this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

Seen quite a bit of Edwards. He always looked extremely quick and always thought he'd be more a wing back than winger.

But I really did not expect him to from National league South to maybe being part of our squad this season.

He's got a bit to learn. Today, towards the end of the game, he was playing out right, I think as the RB. Eliasson was in front of him and Edwards, who I think is quite similar to Eliasson; smaller, quick, direct, tricky feet, kept pushing up on him. So basically we has two of the same player occupying the same space. This left acres of space to the right of our CBs that Derby could, and did, attack. 

He's definitely got the skills but is still raw. As an aside, he's definitely developed physically since I last saw him play at Watford in the FA cup 3rd round in Jan '18.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I think we won 1 lost 1....the fact the score Re-started at 0-0.  All imho ?

TBF neither were "nailed on " results(as if it matters ) neither were played to the regulation 90 mins. Who's to say we wouldn't have come back in the remaining half hour..........or indeed Derby done the same in the second half ,last night ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, elhombrecito said:

Well, Derby have it has two completely separate games... 

Screenshot_20190714-212059~2.png

The fact they reset the score to 0-0 tells me this was two games. That's how I've recorded it.

Also there was a new teamsheet handed out at the ground. New dates and everything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, JonDolman said:

Funny how we see things differently. Though i believe Pack positions himself well, he does not protect the defence very well. He needs a Smith type alongside him imo.

“Pack doesn’t protect the defence very well”. 

Blimey Jon, we do watch very different games. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, RedDave said:

The point was so that a lot of players could get one hours football. They didn’t want players playing 90 mins. 

 

I thought i saw an official tweet during the abandoned match saying the original plan was to play 4 30min quarters which turned into one 45 min half and a second game of 2 30min halves.

Very american but again at this stage a totally pointless friendly that both teams agreed to change the rules of the game for, its nothing more than an open training session between the two teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Harry said:

“Pack doesn’t protect the defence very well”. 

Blimey Jon, we do watch very different games. 

I think once a player gets beyond him then he's out of the game and they're running straight at our defence. And he's slow at making blocks and winning balls that are loose.

It's mainly his lack of mobility in that role, but also on the ball I think he is more effective with more licence to get forward, which he has when he has someone like Korey alongside him.

There aren't many players at this level without their weaknesses, as otherwise they'd be better than championship players.

Pack seems to be a player like Weimann that people don't like hearing about his weaknesses. 

I'd say only 2 or 3 players we have don't have any obvious weaknesses to their game. The rest do imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sydneybcfc said:

I thought i saw an official tweet during the abandoned match saying the original plan was to play 4 30min quarters which turned into one 45 min half and a second game of 2 30min halves.

Very american but again at this stage a totally pointless friendly that both teams agreed to change the rules of the game for, its nothing more than an open training session between the two teams.

Pointless friendly? Assume you think all friendless are pointless then as this was no more or less pointless than any other friendly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Harry said:

“Pack doesn’t protect the defence very well”. 

Blimey Jon, we do watch very different games. 

Any DM will protect the defence by some degree just by being where they are on the pitch. Positioned in front of the defence.  Guess it comes down to how much you then expect from them in that position.

For me a Pack upgrade is needed as much as another striker is needed. I see many DMs at this level with a more complete all round game than Pack 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, RedDave said:

Pointless friendly? Assume you think all friendless are pointless then as this was no more or less pointless than any other friendly

Not at all, wrong choice of words i suppose.

I should have said that neither of the clubs were treating this as a real friendly in the sense that they weren't even following the regulation rules of 2 45min halves. 

It was exactly what they intended it to be, a competitive open training session between 2 clubs and i don't think either would have cared if they lost as both were intending to play several different teams over the course of 1hr20mins had the game gone to schedule.

I wasn't intending to counter your viewpoint but back it up in that both sides were using it for experimentation rather than trying to win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...