DV
Has also heard this
Offline
Posts: 33875
Joseph McLaughlin
|
 |
« on: Friday, September 2, 2005, 11:20:17 » |
|
Who would you play and in what formation.
I certainly wouldnt go 4-5-1 FACT! Too negative, not enough chances and we are going to steal a 1-0 win.
4-4-2
Heaton
Gurney Collins Ifil Smith
Heath Pook Miglioranzi Whalley
Roberts Fallon
Christian Roberts (bar wycombe) has looked rather good and dangerous, he has to start as he just adds that something else. Something we have clearly been lacking away from home recently....last 7 without an away goal is it?
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Piemonte
|
 |
« Reply #1 on: Friday, September 2, 2005, 11:21:59 » |
|
theres not much natural width to that midfield VD..........
I'd play shakes for his pace on the counter attack
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Kinky Tom
Snow Master Sandwich King.
Online
Posts: 9043
|
 |
« Reply #2 on: Friday, September 2, 2005, 11:22:28 » |
|
No Shakes?
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
adje
Offline
Posts: 14806
|
 |
« Reply #3 on: Friday, September 2, 2005, 11:23:55 » |
|
Hi Kinky-my ears are still ringing!Agreed Shakes must play!
|
|
|
Logged
|
quot;Molten memories splashing down upon the rooves of Swindon Town"
|
|
|
DV
Has also heard this
Offline
Posts: 33875
Joseph McLaughlin
|
 |
« Reply #4 on: Friday, September 2, 2005, 11:24:02 » |
|
theres not much natural width to that midfield VD..........
I'd play shakes for his pace on the counter attack I wouldnt play Shakes due to his inability to keep the ball on the pitch Heath did well down the left against Tranmere, his crossing wasnt good because he always went outside onto his left footed, which isnt his strongest. Whalley wont add much width at all, but he can at least produce some quality deliveries hopefully. I've yet to see a decent cross all season, no good having all these good strikers with no decent service, that is the reason we should have fought harder to keeper Summerbee
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
McLovin
|
 |
« Reply #5 on: Friday, September 2, 2005, 11:24:22 » |
|
I'd play the exact same team, only i'd play Shakes instead of Migz; on the wing obviously.
I'd also start with Thorpe. Cureton's done nowt. Now let the whinging fucker have a go alongside Fallon, then if he cocks it up, banish him to the reserves until next transfer window.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
DV
Has also heard this
Offline
Posts: 33875
Joseph McLaughlin
|
 |
« Reply #6 on: Friday, September 2, 2005, 11:25:59 » |
|
Shakes was awful against Tranmere, Ben Wells got in more crosses in 5minutes than Shakes has all season. No end product, our strikers need feeding!
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
le god cuervo
Offline
Posts: 1168
|
 |
« Reply #7 on: Friday, September 2, 2005, 11:52:16 » |
|
shakes is better off the bench.
i would play (442):
--------------heaton----------------
gurney--collins-----ifil-------smith
heath--pook--miglioranzi--nicolau
--------roberts----fallon-------------
bench: bulman, jenkins, whalley, shakes, thorpe/cureton
if king sticks with 4-5-1 he is a prick
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Sippo
Living in the 80s
Offline
Posts: 15614
I ain't gettin on no plane fool
|
 |
« Reply #8 on: Friday, September 2, 2005, 11:52:20 » |
|
It wouldn't surprise me if King plays 4-5-1 again :evil:
|
|
|
Logged
|
If my calculations are correct, when this baby hits 88 miles per hour, you're gonna see some serious shit...
|
|
|
McLovin
|
 |
« Reply #9 on: Friday, September 2, 2005, 11:56:00 » |
|
King: "oooh, we did look hard to beat though..." King's Mum: "you still lost though" King: "oh yeah..."
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
sonicyouth
Offline
Posts: 22352
|
 |
« Reply #10 on: Friday, September 2, 2005, 12:18:18 » |
|
Nicholas and Jenkins are both fit again, so that gives us another option. I'd play: Heaton Gurney Collins Ifil Smith Shakes Migs Pook Nicolau Fallon Heath
subs: Bulman Jenkins McDermott Whalley Roberts It's tough choosing the central midfielders! I'd never have thought I'd be saying that. Heath impressed me against Tranmere but I think he's simply not got the crossing ability to play out wide, so I'd try him up front (his natural position) and see what happens. Difficult to drop Gurney for Jenkins but they both lack match fitness anyway. I hate to think what King will play...
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia
Offline
Posts: 34913
|
 |
« Reply #11 on: Friday, September 2, 2005, 12:29:42 » |
|
King will stick with the 4-5-1.....
As far a he's concerned Tranmere was a decent show....
Walsall seem to be an attacking outfit.....but likely to concede even to our shot shy shower.....
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
sonicyouth
Offline
Posts: 22352
|
 |
« Reply #12 on: Friday, September 2, 2005, 12:31:03 » |
|
It was a decent show, we just lacked the punch up front.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia
Offline
Posts: 34913
|
 |
« Reply #13 on: Friday, September 2, 2005, 12:32:49 » |
|
It was a decent show, we just lacked the punch up front. That's why he'll stick with it, and hope Walsall's ineptitude at the back will let us sneak a goal somehow.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
unclemark
Offline
Posts: 690
|
 |
« Reply #14 on: Friday, September 2, 2005, 12:34:29 » |
|
I think we shoud play an attacking 4-4-2 and get that first away goal of the season.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|