davieG Posted 29 October 2005 Posted 29 October 2005 De vries suspended... The only bloody game i'm gonna get to see! Well plenty will get their wish to see Hammond & Hume up front, unless of course he plays Dubs up there.
Thracian Posted 29 October 2005 Posted 29 October 2005 So, how would you change the team at half time Thracian? It bothers me because with no Sheehan we have no one to supply quality passes from width in the absence of Hammill. Indeed we seem to have no left side penetration and Maybury is having his hands full with Calum. That's why, with his free kicks as well, Sheehan offers so much and when he's not there we are limited. Anyway I'd get Smith on for Sylla, Tiatto on for Kisnorbo to give us something from the left flank and play Hume and Hammond up front. Not the ideal way - I'd have gone three up front from the start - but without Sheehan we'll have to stick with 4-4-2 and hope that trickery and pace do the trick up front. Douglas, Maybury, McCarthy, Gerrbrand, Nils; Smith, Joey, Tiatto, Hammill; Hammond, Hume.
Lester LXXIV Posted 29 October 2005 Posted 29 October 2005 It bothers me because with no Sheehan we have no one to supply quality passes from width in the absence of Hammill. Indeed we seem to have no left side penetration and Maybury is having his hands full with Calum. That's why, with his free kicks as well, Sheehan offers so much and when he's not there we are limited. Anyway I'd get Smith on for Sylla, Tiatto on for Kisnorbo to give us something from the left flank and play Hume and Hammond up front. Not the ideal way - I'd have gone three up front from the start - but without Sheehan we'll have to stick with 4-4-2 and hope that trickery and pace do the trick up front. Douglas, Maybury, McCarthy, Gerrbrand, Nils; Smith, Joey, Tiatto, Hammill; Hammond, Hume. But tiatto doesn't give us width, rather have hammond on the right and smith on the left...
Jimmy Posted 29 October 2005 Posted 29 October 2005 3 subs at half time, thats tempting fate and with our louck we'd get an injury
Thracian Posted 29 October 2005 Posted 29 October 2005 I imagine Levein is feeling moderately satisfied that he has kept Preston quiet at home, gone in 0-0 at half-time and can now install plan two for the second half. My point though is that Preston have had three clear chances to nil which COULD easily have put the match out of reach by now. It was exactly the same against Derby who might have turned round two goals ahead BEFORE we mounted any sort of response. Our defending seems adequate but we seem to totally lack smoothness and cohesion in our attacking play. Where were the eight-10 pass moves?. Where was the wing play that justifies playing Sylla and Hammill. It was there because they play as pivoting midfielders. Commentator talked of "the worst 45 minutes of the season" and what is worse we are not being forced to play this way, we are electing to do so.
goldenfox Posted 29 October 2005 Posted 29 October 2005 Crewe 1-1 Palace WHoythe hell is that leicester reject on your screen pic
Gené and Tonic Posted 29 October 2005 Posted 29 October 2005 If we draw this game it will be because of Leveins tactics when we could so easily have played a better team and won it.
cisono Posted 29 October 2005 Posted 29 October 2005 Wheey, Ryan Smith! At last an attacking option is chosen...
lookwhaticando Posted 29 October 2005 Posted 29 October 2005 misheard it Smith on Let's have a goal Smithy. Not too good a goal, we want to be able to buy you from Arsenal soon
Lester LXXIV Posted 29 October 2005 Posted 29 October 2005 C'Mon Smudger!!! Prove yer point... :fox: :fox:
Thracian Posted 29 October 2005 Posted 29 October 2005 Smith for Hammill. Attacker for attacker. Still not as positive as I would like but it should be an improvement.. We should be increasing our attacking numbers not keeping them the same.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.