Derby County 0 - 0 Cambridge

Reading the various forums, fans patience with Warneball is wearing very thin.

11 points from the last 11 home games is a pretty poor return.

I really want him to succeed (I like his personality), but it's getting tough.

Only watched the highlights but some of the finishing was abysmal. Barkhuisen receives the ball in the area and then moves left to make his shot more difficult! Moving right a trying the curler to the far post which was the more obvious choice would have probably scored.

Then Waghorn's missed hearder was easier to score than miss. Collins would probably have buried that one. Sibley free in the area makes a tame shot/low cross which was neither.

Must be very frustrating for the manager. We have exactly the same points at this stage as last season and Didzy was injured for the early games so I can't see why we should improve this season.

Thanks Vidal - the voice of reason from one who was there.

Spart, when you refer to Barks' miss do you mean the effort in the first minute? If so then try watching it again. B was calling for NML to release the ball sooner. If he had have done and done it accurately B would not have been forced out left and would probably have scored.

The big conundrum - when all our midfielders are fit which three should play (assuming it should be three)? Correct me if I have forgotten someone but we should have Fornah, Smith, Bird, Hourihane and Thommo. We need goals from one or more of these and so far only Hourihane looks to have a goal-scoring part to his game.

For me I think Fornah is a shoe-in. He has real quality and brings some much needed bite in there. Much as I like Smith I think he goes on the bench as a sub. While I want more from Hourihane I think he has to play for his goals. Thommo was great at Pboro but will he chip in with some goals? Is Bird likely to get some goals? I guess Bird gets the nod for his experience and guile. So - Fornah, Bird and Hourihane for me with Smith and Thommo on the bench.

Who would you play?

All of the above but not necessarily in that order. 🐏

comment by Chicagoram (U22653)
posted about 4 hours ago
Thanks Vidal - the voice of reason from one who was there.

Spart, when you refer to Barks' miss do you mean the effort in the first minute? If so then try watching it again. B was calling for NML to release the ball sooner. If he had have done and done it accurately B would not have been forced out left and would probably have scored.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
NML had to careful when he released the ball as at one time Berkhuisen had run ahead of him and the two defenders so would have been offside. That still doesn't excuse Barkhuisen's pathetic attempt to try and beat the goal keeper and two defenders at the near post. A decent player would have cut back after drawing the opposition to the near post. This would have had the advantage of 1) allowing a shot at the far post 2) the possibility of returning the ball to NML or 3) drawing a foul from the Cambridge defenders. Infact anything was better than his choice.

Wow! You sure do expect a lot! I think if he had cut back, NML would have been in the way of a shot to the far post. Returning the ball to NML would have been a negative option and anyway, at that point NML was surrounded by Cambridge defenders. (By the way, I am saying this bit from memory and not while watching a replay.) I think Barks took the only option available to him and I'm sure he would have been castigated if he had tried anything else.

All opinion of course.

comment by Chicagoram (U22653)
posted about an hour ago
Wow! You sure do expect a lot! I think if he had cut back, NML would have been in the way of a shot to the far post. Returning the ball to NML would have been a negative option and anyway, at that point NML was surrounded by Cambridge defenders. (By the way, I am saying this bit from memory and not while watching a replay.) I think Barks took the only option available to him and I'm sure he would have been castigated if he had tried anything else.

All opinion of course.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I could agree with you but it's always better not to have two people who are wrong.

At the time I felt that either NML should have backed himself and gone it alone or, if he was going to play in Barkhuizen he should have altered the direction of his run so that was more of an angle for the pass. At the top level this sort of thing looks easy but down the divisions the players are not of the same quality. If you are expecting top quality then you are always going to be disappointed. I also though Barkhuizen was a bit daft to shoot from where he was but sometimes you get lucky. I guess I'm more forgiving than some!

Me too! If Barks was as good as Spart expects him to be he would be playing at a higher level.

comment by Spart-Derby really are the best says red dog. (U4603)
posted 8 hours, 27 minutes ago
comment by Chicagoram (U22653)
posted about an hour ago
Wow! You sure do expect a lot! I think if he had cut back, NML would have been in the way of a shot to the far post. Returning the ball to NML would have been a negative option and anyway, at that point NML was surrounded by Cambridge defenders. (By the way, I am saying this bit from memory and not while watching a replay.) I think Barks took the only option available to him and I'm sure he would have been castigated if he had tried anything else.

All opinion of course.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I could agree with you but it's always better not to have two people who are wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I assume that that includes you!