Thetownend.com

As far as I'm aware everyone is fit, we have no suspensions and the signing of Peacock seems imminent, we've got the entire squad to choose from.



subs:
Bulman
Smith
Nicolau
Holgate
Fallon

Doubt you'll see O'Hanlon

Seems ok.  I'd like Gurns back at full-back, as Jenks has been a bit suspect.

Did Holgate used to be a right winger at any point in his career?

Oh yeah, good point. Replace Seano with Charlie then.

I've never seen Holgate play out wide but I'm sure he has done.

Comyn Platt in for Sean, get Jamie "frodo" Cureton out and play Fallon and Peacock up from assuming he signs.

"LETS PLAY HOOFBALL"

Peacock hasn't played for a few weeks so I think he'll be on the bench. (if he signs)

Thats probably a fair point. I just dont like Cureton

As far as I know Holgate has never been a right winger in real life only in CM/FM!!

Evans

Lapham (wb)
Gurney
Ifil
CCP
Nicholas (wb)

Miglioranzi
Smith
Brown

Peacock (if he signs)
Holgate

Subs
Bulman
Jenkins
Pook
Fallon
Cureton

I dont believe our wingers have enough quality for a 4-4-2 and most of the time our full backs (esp Nicho) look much more dangerous going forward.

I'd get Ifil to man mark James Hayter who always scores against us

Ah, thats the ticket. Well done, VD.

the selection of Lapham and Holgate in that side is non-sensical for a must win game.

why not? at least they would want it, unlike the players I have dropped

Fallon & Curetons mind are both else where and they have been poor recently.

Shakes is terrible.

Holgate is a damn good player, can use his feet well and can pass the ball. He changed the game at Chesterfield

Lapham has always looked good, and Jenks gets older, slower and worse as each game goes by....

And Fallon, sub??? I don't think so.

Few reason

1. He is really off form and doesnt look committed
2. I think he thinks (or knows) he will be the first name of the team sheet no matter how poor he was previous game
3. His mind is clearly away from STFC right now
4. Bournemouth have probably identified him as the dangerman and are making extra preperation to mark him out the game, because if he doesnt score we dont score therefore we dont win.
5. Changing this would hopefully fool them.

indeed. He looks like he might stitch us up with the contract, but he's still our no 1 striker and needs to play regardless. His form has dipped of late but I dont think its been bad enough to require dropping



Shakes has shown signs of improvement of late. Holgate looks a decent player, but if we have 3 fit senior strikers then he should be on the bench.

The inclussion of Lapham is just fucking random. "here, VD says have a start - on you go lad"

I agree that cureton is a usless hobbit though

 :Ride On Fatbury's Lovestick:  Yes, lets con them by not playing our most dangerous striker and replacing him with a talented but physically weak 19 year old.

What a fucking plan that is :roll:

Any other genius plans? like drop Evans who they will have recognised to be a good keeper and play a 15yr old in the hope that Hayter gets complacent?

Shakes was awful saturday, he has improved recently but still isnt providing enough quality deliveries. We arent created enough and having a winger that cant cross isnt helping matters

Holgate is decent player, just because our 3 other strikers are more 'senior' doesnt make them better.

Lapham is not random, I needed a right wing back. First choice would have been Gurney who I moved into the middle because of O'Hanlons injury. Jack Smith is also injured. That leaves Lapham or Jenks...and Jenks hasnt looked good enough recently.

so you included him to fit into that formation as the only other viable option?

fuck that. 4-4-2 please, even if our wingers cant cross

I was only agreeing on formation...

what players would you pick then DB?

Isn't Smith fit now? I thought he was available for Gillingham except for the suspension, maybe I misunderstood.

Lapham's not a bad player but I'd rather see Jenkins or Gurney ahead of him at right-back or right-wingback, experience is important in big games and every game is huge for us.

I don't see the sense in changing formation, the players have adapted to 4-4-2 and we do have decent quality from crosses on the left, it's just the right which is weak. I really hate 5-3-2 as well.

However, I'd put Cureton in ahead of Fallon to partner Peacock on the basis that nobody can play with Fallon. Therefore, it's worth giving that partnership a try before Cureton buggers off somewhere else.

I'd pick Smith as RWB as Sonic said, as i don't *think* he's injured.

Up front I'd play Peacock with Cureton or Holgate.

I thought Smith was injured  :oops:

If not, he'd obviously be my right wing back instead of Lapham.

Id still put Holgate in over Fallon & Cureton *IF* Peacock signs...

Not a fan of the 5 at the back, I feel you need a very special player to be a good wing back, and the chaos that ensued on sat with the second goal was testament to it.  Unless you are a top player you can't adapt to the system, you either get full backs struggling to attack and beat a man, as often a full back's crosses come when the winger has drawn a man and created space, and in my experience wingers can't defend (cough aaron brown cough).

with the signing of Jarrett, I'd put him in ahead of Shakes, thus meaning we've got 3 new signings in the starting lineup (or 5 if you include the loanees who signed permenantly).

A change could do us good...



subs:
Bulman
Smith
Shakes
Holgate
Fallon

I'd go:

Evans

Smith - Ifil - CCP - Nicholas

Shakes - Gurns - Migs - Brown

Fallon - Peacock

I wonder if Iffy remembers that Gurns is a fullback?

Id go with Evans
Jenks Gurney Ifil Nicho
Migz P. Smith CCP
Peacock Fallon Cureton

Subs Bulman J.Smith Shakes Brown Holgate/Jarrett

CCP on the left wing  :soapy tit wank:

nope its a 4-3-3 formation

3 central midfielders

I think this is the team we are most likely to see:

My guess:

I pretty much agree with Sonics formation however with CCP.

Fallon should def be sub though as all the points DV made (not commited etc.) were spot on.

fallon will start. so will CCP, otherwise i agree with sonic. peacock probably won't start though.