Flashheart
|
|
« on: Saturday, August 17, 2019, 21:55:30 » |
|
What do you think, as a partnership?
Doyle is clearly a poacher, whereas Yates is going to hassle the fuck out of the opposition's defense with his running and work rate. They will have some good service as well methinks.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
RobertT
Offline
Posts: 11715
|
|
« Reply #1 on: Saturday, August 17, 2019, 22:02:56 » |
|
I'd say Yates has the energy to play the number 10, along with a bit of craft and pace. Doyle seems to be more of an in the box player but can put his elbows and body about when needed.
i reckon Woolery and Anderson will lose out to these two, or they may all get rotated. That's good, creates competition and options.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
RobertT
Offline
Posts: 11715
|
|
« Reply #2 on: Saturday, August 17, 2019, 22:04:41 » |
|
Actually, they sound like a 1800's Detective duo TV programme, maybe on ITV?
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
tans
You spin me right round baby right round
Offline
Posts: 25062
|
|
« Reply #3 on: Saturday, August 17, 2019, 22:06:52 » |
|
Need a change of formation i think for it to work. Anderson or Woolery to drop out unfortunately
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Flashheart
|
|
« Reply #4 on: Saturday, August 17, 2019, 22:10:10 » |
|
I reckon Woolery and Anderson will lose out to these two, or they may all get rotated. That's good, creates competition and options.
I think Woolery will lose out, he's not quite clicked so far. Anderson has done better since being given a proverbial boot up the arse. Woolery would be a fantastic option as an impact sub, though. You wouldn't want to play against him with tired legs.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
suttonred
Offline
Posts: 12510
|
|
« Reply #5 on: Saturday, August 17, 2019, 22:23:11 » |
|
Why not try all 4? No one would attack in numbers, they'd be too scared.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
RobertT
Offline
Posts: 11715
|
|
« Reply #6 on: Saturday, August 17, 2019, 22:32:36 » |
|
Isgrove > Woolery & Anderson
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Flashheart
|
|
« Reply #7 on: Saturday, August 17, 2019, 22:39:13 » |
|
Isgrove is too good for L2.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
RedRag
Offline
Posts: 3310
|
|
« Reply #8 on: Saturday, August 17, 2019, 23:12:35 » |
|
The Bradford forum posters were in 5he main less than impressed with Doyle. His apologists or more open minded critics thought he might have performed so much better alongside a traditional centre forward.. Seems he'd been the lone front man (or no, 10) and that he'd disappointed. Thus at full strength, I'd like first to look at Yates AND Doyle with initially Anderson and, as sub, the speedy and sometimes clinical Woolery. Any front 3 combo of Doyle, Yates, Woolery and Anderson - with Isgrove and Doughty additionally available to create is rather demanding at L 2, imo. Keeping 'em fit and available will require a tad of good fortune but, if so....
|
|
« Last Edit: Saturday, August 17, 2019, 23:23:11 by RedRag »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
DiV
Has also heard this
Offline
Posts: 32299
Joseph McLaughlin
|
|
« Reply #9 on: Saturday, August 17, 2019, 23:22:20 » |
|
Getting results with one up front - so no need to change it to accommodate both strikers just yet.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
RedRag
Offline
Posts: 3310
|
|
« Reply #10 on: Saturday, August 17, 2019, 23:28:26 » |
|
Didn't see today.
Agree but horses for courses depending on oppo and whether home or away etc.
A goal to his name today will hopefully boost Doyle's confidence from its allegedly low base at present.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Flashheart
|
|
« Reply #11 on: Saturday, August 17, 2019, 23:30:53 » |
|
Getting results with one up front - so no need to change it to accommodate both strikers just yet.
Fair point, but hypothetically speaking... ?
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
DiV
Has also heard this
Offline
Posts: 32299
Joseph McLaughlin
|
|
« Reply #12 on: Saturday, August 17, 2019, 23:58:48 » |
|
Fair point, but hypothetically speaking... ?
Shouldn’t tamper with formations and such like till we are mathematically safe
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
DiV
Has also heard this
Offline
Posts: 32299
Joseph McLaughlin
|
|
« Reply #13 on: Sunday, August 18, 2019, 00:05:11 » |
|
Also, which is better? Playing them both upfront getting 10 goals each or playing one over the other and he gets 20 goals
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
The Artist Formerly Known as Audrey
Offline
Posts: 19375
?Absolute Calamity!?
|
|
« Reply #14 on: Sunday, August 18, 2019, 03:42:56 » |
|
Wellens, pre season, said he wanted to play with 2 up front - now, that has to be Yates and Doyle. You aren’t going to leave out the 2 players you have been after all along - especially one that has cost your chairman a fair old wedge.
Can’t drop Anderson on his performances so far, so it’d have to be Woolery unfortunately - and he’s done nothing wrong either.
Although we have a whole host of attacking players in the side, we haven’t, so far, looked like being overrun at the back. Whether some of that is down to our threat making opposition scared of committing, I don’t know.
The 3 managers we’ve played against so far have all commented on our pacy breakaways so the word spreads around.
Where we’ll struggle is when the likes of Lyden, Baudry and Isgrove can’t play for any extended period as we don’t have adequate replacements. Tbh, the FBs still look a bit vulnerable at times but even so they are an upgrade on what we’ve had previously.
Would anyone want Knoyle instead of either?
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|