|
Don Rogers Shop
|
 |
« on: Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 13:50:56 » |
|
The last few weeks our defence has had no protection from the midfield,By all accounts he has performed well of late for the reserves and could maybe sit in front of the defence.
So is it time to recall pook?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Bogus Dave
Ate my own dick
 Offline
Posts: 16352
|
|
« Reply #1 on: Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 13:53:16 » |
|
I've heard worse ideas. Maybe not quite yet
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Things get better but they never get good
|
|
|
nevillew
Tripping the light puntastic
Offline
Posts: 4156
|
|
« Reply #2 on: Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 13:54:52 » |
|
We're always going to have this problem until McNamee learns some effective defensive duties (or is he beyond criticism ?)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Paolo Di Canio, it's Paolo Di Canio
|
|
|
DiV
Has also heard this
Offline
Posts: 32287
Joseph McLaughlin
|
|
« Reply #3 on: Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 14:08:11 » |
|
no, if anyone need a chance back in midfield its Lee Peacock!
...but...I dont think thats in the gaffers plans, but would be mine...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Batch
Not a Batch
Offline
Posts: 55375
|
|
« Reply #4 on: Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 14:23:56 » |
|
I think Pook and Sturrock are further down the pecking order than I am. What's the story, are they working on loan deals for them or are they being frozen out to force their hand. Not sure if DV was taking the piss, I thought he didn''t rate Peacock. But I genuinely think Peacock is as a better bet than Pook anyway. We're always going to have this problem until McNamee learns some effective defensive duties (or is he beyond criticism ?)
No he isn't. Both he and JPM don't offer the protection they could. JPM pushes inside too much and leaves his man McNamee sometimes doesn't track back. We have some problem with the central partnership too mind, but I hope that will be resolved when Easton sharpens up. All in my opinion of course. I guess we will have to stifle a bit of creativity in order to tighten up. We can't keep conceding like we have been (even if most of them have been individual errors). |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 14:26:08 by Batch »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Don Rogers Shop
|
|
« Reply #5 on: Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 14:26:58 » |
|
If you want protection then do not play mcnamee.I am afraid we cannot have it both ways if we want him to be creative we have to make do with how he is now as he will never become that player.
Jpm on the other hand has no exuse as he does not ever beat his man and should be able to offer more protection.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
DiV
Has also heard this
Offline
Posts: 32287
Joseph McLaughlin
|
|
« Reply #6 on: Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 14:34:04 » |
|
I was being serious Batch. I dont rate Peacock as a striker but I would have him in that midfield no problems. Infact he'd be one of the first names on my team sheet.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Batch
Not a Batch
Offline
Posts: 55375
|
|
« Reply #7 on: Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 14:37:48 » |
|
Fair enough. After paynters start to the season I'd agree Peacocks days as a striker are over (injury/suspensions aside). Like you say, I don't think Malpas sees it that way.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Samdy Gray
Dirty sneaky traitor weasel
Offline
Posts: 27137
|
|
« Reply #8 on: Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 14:53:39 » |
|
In order of preference:
Nalis > Easton > Timlin > Peacock > Allen > Pook
So in answer to the original question: No.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
flammableBen
|
|
« Reply #9 on: Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 14:55:41 » |
|
Do you not think Jack Smith could do a Gurney and move into the centre midfield?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Don Rogers Shop
|
|
« Reply #10 on: Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 14:57:19 » |
|
No but i think he would be a very good option at right wing
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Jamiesfuturewife
Cats is nature
Offline
Posts: 11649
|
|
« Reply #11 on: Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 14:59:38 » |
|
maybe we could put Pook and Blair in the Trade it "free to collector"?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Colin Todd
Offline
Posts: 3318
|
|
« Reply #12 on: Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 15:00:14 » |
|
maybe we could put Pook and Blair in the Trade it "free to collector"?
I think the football equivalent of that has already happened |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JOHNNY REEVES
|
|
« Reply #13 on: Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 15:05:26 » |
|
the goals we let in saturday would still happen whoever was in midfield,ifil let the ball under his foot ,smith wanted to star in football gaffes and aljofree just wanted to get an assist.i cant see how the midfielders would have made a difference.our formation is a bit lopsided on the attacking front though.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
fatbury
|
|
« Reply #14 on: Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 15:09:37 » |
|
I agree with the suggestion of Pook in midfield ... I have always believed him without question better than Timlin and on his day better than Easton .. I believe at the very least a three man midfield of Easton, Pook and Nalis would serve us much better in the long run than what we have been playing with.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
