No, Claude Davis was a poor player. Davies presided over some of the heaviest defeats we had in the PL. Claude lacked professionalism, he shouldn't have to be relying on one manager to get the best of him.

Derby's defence is jittery because Keogh hasn't formed a regular centre-half partnership/understanding: just over half the season & it's been O'Connor, Buxton (injury) & O'Brien. Keogh himself is still in his mid 20s. Now is the time Shaun Barker's absence is being felt.

Bob, Derby's defence has been jittery since 2008! REGARDLESS of who is playing in defence!

Probably a result of that awful season, Mostyn. It's taken time to turn things around.

I don't think it's helped that it's either/or, like either Keogh or Shackell, not both - & Barker was unfortunate, no manager can legislate for that. It's not like we can go out and buy a like-for-like replacement.

I'd argue that we don't get as comprehensively beaten as we used to (OK Peterborough, Palace), & the side, in general, shows more resilience. Two years ago we would have lost on Saturday.

One of the major problems at Derby in past years has been a case of mix and match. We've not had a solid partnership at the back since Barker and Shackell last season. If you consider the partnerships prior it probably goes back to 1995 when we had a decent central defence pairing. Stimac / Daily

Traps obviously rates him.

Stop Press:


Trappatoni senile.

I dont pay too much attentiont to who makes international squads anyway, Fielding made a squad once. Even Nick Pickering got an England cap!

A few people undecided on Sammon. So that's a 'Yay-thrice nay-titter ye not' then.

I would say yay, but again I must echo the comments of those claiming he cannot play as a lone striker. Rasiak was so effective in the lone man role for three reasons:

1=He had Tommy Smith, Riech (spit) and idiakez supporting him.

2=He was naturally more imposing than Sammon and defenders in the Championship (especially in the lower half of the league) back then were less effective.

3=He had natural ball control. To be a good lone man you need to be able to control an incoming ball without thinking, Rasiak could do this; Sammon however, he sadly lacks this level of control and so needs too much time to get the ball under control to play as a lone-man. When he has a partner, the defenders around him are split so he has more time which is why he naturally appears more effective. However, when he is a lone-man, he has mere seconds before he is swamped and so constantly loses the ball.

Taiwan, good point re support. Lots of talk about formations yesterday. I'd like to see us play 4 2 3 1 with Jacobs, ward and a n other as the forward 3 in support of sammon. He's not a great player, but it's yes for me so long as he's not isolated.

Yay.

Sammon is an important player for us. Certain areas of his game require improvement, same as any player at this level. Having a strong player capable of holding the ball up is an absolute necessity in this league and for those of you who will try and convince me he doesn't hold the ball up well I defy you to tell me that we have less of the ball in the opposition's half since Sammon arrived.

Surprise surprise, asked for a simple yay or nay and Baz gives us a slightly shorter version of war and peace, probably got a hard on when he read the article title.

Its a yay for me, play someone up with him, its that simple.

surely if a player cannot play the team's (manager's) chosen formation, then it has to be a nay??

You'd think so, Mostyn, but perhaps the pertinent question would be to ask why that manager spent so long pursuing that player and committing his largest transfer fee in order to acquire him if he doesn't fit the role..?

having said that, Nigel does seem to make extra effort to justify Sammon's selection and praise his performance at any opportunity. So perhaps Nigel thinks Sammon does fit the role.

Many here think he doesn't.

Not at all Igor, football's all about opinions and I have mine about Sammon. I was merely try to point out that I STUDY him and can see beyond the occasional decent thing that he manages to achieve. I have nothing against the bloke whatsoever, neither is he a 'marked-man' in my book. I GENUINELY hope he get's a hatrick this weekend and flourishes as a result.

I see the bigger picture though and it frustrates me that many of Derby's attacks break down because he is unable to play the role being asked of him. Let alone all of his other sort-falls as a PROFESSIONAL FOOTBALLER.

Mostyn made a comment that he ducks under the ball when 'trying' to win a header. Very valid. I cannot comprehend why other's can't see this also?

Maybe so Baz, you still won't have him as one of youre scorers though, so pardon me if i believe you'd rather he fail here.

IMO Derby dont have a striker on the books that would be first choice at any other Chamionship Club.

Yes Ward and Sammon would get games at other Championship clubs but 1st choice I cant think of any right now off the top of my head

Igor, that would be like biting your nose off to spite your own face. Very stupid, and I'm not like that.

In Sammon, Clough has bought a bit of a cod

Stress sucks cox

Even the sheep are beginning to realise how carp Connor Sammon is.

I think Sammon does exactly what was expected....
He is clearly not a natural goalscorer... and I would expect 10 goals in a season from him.. no more.
He adds something different but 'no man is an island' and at times he needs support.
I'm happy with him!

Still scores more goals and makes more goals than the laughable Cox this season though, Tonto.

Someone (probably spotty - he's the only one gormless enough) said the other day when I pointed out that FACT that Cox '...brought other things to the Forest side'. I assume from that statement that he must make the dressing-room a happy place then, because he certainly sucked at Pride Park.

If played in a 4-4-2 Yay!

If played in a 4-5-1 Nay