We got the points I was expecting, along with us playing something like I expected us to when faced with a football team. Re the disallowed goal: a harsh decision, but if you look at the lead up to it, Wisdom was actually trying to push into the keeper, and the defender was standing between them, stopping Wizzy's efforts. The fact that he was stationary when the keeper collided with him was by circumstance, not intention. But given how our own defence is hamstrung by the same tactics virtually very game makes it an annoying decision. In addition, for every corner after that, the defender was bear-hugging Wisdom, so we should have had at least one penalty. But if the defender didn't do it, Wizzy would without doubt impede the keeper. So what is right? What is fair? You have often said, Ammy, that all it needs is for the ref to dish out a load of cards for fouls in the area at corners and free-kicks and things would change.
A major problem is the Derby reverted to "the Derby Way" of a few months ago by simply not doing any pressing at all. We gave Watford acres of space to ply their trade, which they are good at even before they are given the freedom of the pitch. By contrast every time we had the ball, especially at the b ack, Watford players homed in on us and made us work hard to do any sort of build up play. I thin Rooney has said that we gave them too much respect in the first half, and that we dominated the second half. I am not sure which second half that was - we played better, and made a few chances, but we didn't dominate them.
It is likely that if our first half goal had stood, Watford wouldn't have spent the match from then on sitting back and containing us, but pressed on for a third. Because in the end, no matter how well we did, Watford were just that bit better. When we attacked, even as we went forwards they knew exactly which way to turn their bodies to make us turn the way they wanted us to - away from any threatening position, and our real ascendency only really came once the blond boy went off.
Like many I am perplexed at how Waghorn keeps getting picked for the starting line up - his contribution has been erratic at best. His recently discovered prowess at corners had evaporated again last night, and his free-kick speciality seems to be associated with balloons and "over the bar" type phrases. He was very poor last night, and if Sibley has got to play better to get on the pitch, just how bad is he compared with Waggy? Sibley is only being brought on for the last 10 minutes in the match, and although some substitutions seem inspired, and have an immediate impact, it is much more normal for a player to have to get up to the speed of the match, for say 10 minutes before achieving much.
All I am saying
is give him a chance!
Yes I know he went in with a trademark rash challenge last night, but that is likely because he is trying so hard, and feels burdened to prove himself, and therefore over-tries. Like Joswaick, he needs a good run of starts, and not being subbed until well into the second half. And regarding wingers, I would like to see Roberts and Joswiack doing the wide man's work. Roberts needs someone to waft a cup of black coffee under his nose as a wake up call, because although he is very tricky with the ball and will take his man on, he is very easy to defend against because he is virtually always looking to cut inside, usually just before he gets to the corner of the box, sometimes before. And when he does go to the by-line, he then thinks he is capable of taking the entire defence on single handedly, instead of getting an early cross in. Joswaick has a similar weak end product, but he isn't a one-trick winger, and doesn't give any clues as to which way he is going to turn. And he does bust a gut to defend.
There was plenty to be pleased with last night. Watford have a load of Premier League standard players - not necessarily the best, but certainly well ahead of EFL standard, and to only lose 2-1 after the way those 2 goals went in is pleasing.