Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: Yates and Doyle  (Read 1296 times)
Flashheart


+61/-10090
Offline Offline

Posts: 27022


FUCK YEAH! ©™



« on: Saturday, August 17, 2019, 22:55:30 »

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

I like it firm and fruity.
RobertT


+59/-29
Offline Offline

Posts: 7142




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: Saturday, August 17, 2019, 23:02:56 »

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


+59/-29
Offline Offline

Posts: 7142




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: Saturday, August 17, 2019, 23:04:41 »

Actually, they sound like a 1800's Detective duo TV programme, maybe on ITV?
Logged
tans
You spin me right round baby right round


+28/-35
Online Online

Posts: 19491





Ignore
« Reply #3 on: Saturday, August 17, 2019, 23:06:52 »

Need a change of formation i think for it to work. Anderson or Woolery to drop out unfortunately
Logged
Flashheart


+61/-10090
Offline Offline

Posts: 27022


FUCK YEAH! ©™



« Reply #4 on: Saturday, August 17, 2019, 23:10:10 »

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

I like it firm and fruity.
suttonred


+30/-9
Offline Offline

Posts: 11964





Ignore
« Reply #5 on: Saturday, August 17, 2019, 23:23:11 »

Why not try all 4? No one would attack in numbers, they'd be too scared.
Logged
RobertT


+59/-29
Offline Offline

Posts: 7142




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: Saturday, August 17, 2019, 23:32:36 »

Isgrove > Woolery & Anderson
Logged
Flashheart


+61/-10090
Offline Offline

Posts: 27022


FUCK YEAH! ©™



« Reply #7 on: Saturday, August 17, 2019, 23:39:13 »

Isgrove is too good for L2.
Logged

I like it firm and fruity.
RedRag


+19/-13
Offline Offline

Posts: 1967





Ignore
« Reply #8 on: Sunday, August 18, 2019, 00:12:35 »

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: Sunday, August 18, 2019, 00:23:11 by RedRag » Logged
DV Canio
Rock, paper, scissors, lizard, Spock


+8/-108
Offline Offline

Posts: 25608


Joseph McLaughlin




Ignore
« Reply #9 on: Sunday, August 18, 2019, 00:22:20 »

Getting results with one up front - so no need to change it to accommodate both strikers just yet.
Logged
RedRag


+19/-13
Offline Offline

Posts: 1967





Ignore
« Reply #10 on: Sunday, August 18, 2019, 00:28:26 »

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


+61/-10090
Offline Offline

Posts: 27022


FUCK YEAH! ©™



« Reply #11 on: Sunday, August 18, 2019, 00:30:53 »

Getting results with one up front - so no need to change it to accommodate both strikers just yet.

Fair point, but hypothetically speaking... ?
Logged

I like it firm and fruity.
DV Canio
Rock, paper, scissors, lizard, Spock


+8/-108
Offline Offline

Posts: 25608


Joseph McLaughlin




Ignore
« Reply #12 on: Sunday, August 18, 2019, 00:58:48 »

Fair point, but hypothetically speaking... ?

Shouldn’t tamper with formations and such like till we are mathematically safe
Logged
DV Canio
Rock, paper, scissors, lizard, Spock


+8/-108
Offline Offline

Posts: 25608


Joseph McLaughlin




Ignore
« Reply #13 on: Sunday, August 18, 2019, 01:05:11 »

Also, which is better?

Playing them both upfront getting 10 goals each or playing one over the other and he gets 20 goals  Hmmm
Logged
The Artist Formerly Known as Audrey


+76/-102
Offline Offline

Posts: 5024




Ignore
« Reply #14 on: Sunday, August 18, 2019, 04:42:56 »

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
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
Print
Jump to: