Niall Quinns Discopants wrote:Beefymcfc wrote:NQDP (or amyone who cares to answer), I keep reading posts on how shit Nigel was in the 2nd half of the Derby match and how you keep reverting back to this point and although I respect your opinion, I do disagree.
This is not a swipe at you or any who had those thoughts, and won't be thrown back in your face. So, I'd like to know, 'Who would you now choose in that role, Nigel or Zab; or do you have another?'.
I agree with Socrates. The whole system of basically having five defenders is poor thinking. Especially as you know that if you start backtracking against Rags thery will punish you. Without exception. Always.
I wouldn't have replaced at halftime but 15 minutes into second half it was clear that he had completely lost midfield battle and raised his hands up. I mean, Andersson and Fletcher were running rings around him for whole 45 mins. At this stage changes needed to be made. Personally I would've thrown Petrov in to stretch their defence. Hughes did that twenty minutes too late and they had already put us under enormous pressure for which we eventually paid.
I stand by my opinion that anyone who claims otherwise, simply weren't watching the game. If you are unsure I'd suggest you watch the game again. I have done that, twice now and I stand by my original opinion (although I should have worded it better).
Thanks for replying Antti, but at the same time, why try to have a pop! You say you agree with Jon on the 5 defenders thing, yet this is the same system that got us 3 points against Chelsea and Arsenal, points away to Liverpool and Villa and a undeserved loss against the Scum. We didn't play him against an Arsenal youth and he wasn't on the bench; why, was he needed?
As for the game, yes, Taggart had instructed his players to move it away from Nigel due to the fact that he had killed everything they had done, but even so, how did the game actually go. Scum score, we score. Scum score, we score. And once again, scum score, we score (after Hughes made the change).
And to infer I watch the game again to actually tell me that you are right is just getting a little silly. Let's just say I watched it enough times at the time, and a few times more, and would still come out with the same opinion. We narrowly lost to the league champions and I accept that the referee and Taggart influenced the outcome. What I also accept is that people have opinions on games and see things differently, but what I don't accept is people who use the a loss in these circumstances to actually attack one of our players, and furthermore, to blame it on the manager for picking him!
This is your thread mate, which I tried to suggest was over, but obviously people have a point to prove. So, seeing as nobody answered the question I'll ask once again.
Who would you prefer in that position, Nigel or Zab?