Fez of Mahrez Posted 28 August 2006 Share Posted 28 August 2006 I want Kelly to play this; ---------------------Henderson-------------------- Stearman---McCarthy----Kisnorbo-------Kenton --------------------Wesolowski-------------------- Hughes---------------Hume-----------------Porter ----------Fryatt-------------------O'Grady--------- Stick Sheehan in there and you might as well sellotape me up, throw me in a box and post it to the Swan and Rushes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gené and Tonic Posted 28 August 2006 Share Posted 28 August 2006 Yes but that looks a good team! Although I'd swap Hughes for Low Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeyB Posted 28 August 2006 Share Posted 28 August 2006 i could be tempted to play sheehan lb and definitly low rm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 28 August 2006 Share Posted 28 August 2006 I want Kelly to play this; ---------------------Henderson-------------------- Stearman---McCarthy----Kisnorbo-------Kenton --------------------Wesolowski-------------------- Hughes---------------Hume-----------------Porter ----------Fryatt-------------------O'Grady--------- Stick Sheehan in there and you might as well sellotape me up, throw me in a box and post it to the Swan and Rushes. If it helps you retain your sanity, it looks an interesting idea, although, in that formation, I wouldn't half be tempted to play Gradel on the right side of midfield. Then it might just be a cracking team considering how much hassle our middle three could cause with supply lines like that. And Gradel, given space, would be a nightmare for any over-occupied defence, and I mean a nightmare. As I've said before, there's more than one way to face the oppisition when you all but fill the team with good passers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 28 August 2006 Share Posted 28 August 2006 PS: Fez - indulge me on Gradel - bloody hell that's a good side!. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez of Mahrez Posted 28 August 2006 Author Share Posted 28 August 2006 I haven't seen much of Gradel and I really rate Hughes in the right role but I'm willing to accept your vote of confidence based on your support for Levi. Unfortunately people seem to think Josh Low is the answer on the right side. I really, really don't see it but then he is following Maybury, which is a bit like following Keane on a festival bill. He doesn't have to be amazing, just show a bit of attacking intent, and he's won over the fans. I think he showed his bad side on Saturday and people won't be fooled much longer. Such a frustratingly inconsistent player. Personally I think it's worth persisting with Hughes in the hope that he can find that spark he showed when he first joined. If Gradel is the long-term solution then so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexikokopops Posted 28 August 2006 Share Posted 28 August 2006 I haven't seen much of Gradel and I really rate Hughes in the right role but I'm willing to accept your vote of confidence based on your support for Levi. Unfortunately people seem to think Josh Low is the answer on the right side. I really, really don't see it but then he is following Maybury, which is a bit like following Keane on a festival bill. He doesn't have to be amazing, just show a bit of attacking intent, and he's won over the fans. I think he showed his bad side on Saturday and people won't be fooled much longer. Such a frustratingly inconsistent player. Personally I think it's worth persisting with Hughes in the hope that he can find that spark he showed when he first joined. If Gradel is the long-term solution then so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potter3 Posted 28 August 2006 Share Posted 28 August 2006 I haven't seen much of Gradel and I really rate Hughes in the right role but I'm willing to accept your vote of confidence based on your support for Levi. Unfortunately people seem to think Josh Low is the answer on the right side. I really, really don't see it but then he is following Maybury, which is a bit like following Keane on a festival bill. He doesn't have to be amazing, just show a bit of attacking intent, and he's won over the fans. I think he showed his bad side on Saturday and people won't be fooled much longer. Such a frustratingly inconsistent player. Personally I think it's worth persisting with Hughes in the hope that he can find that spark he showed when he first joined. If Gradel is the long-term solution then so be it. He makes abosolutely no runs whatsoever Or he didn't on Tuesday and Saturday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveyJ Posted 28 August 2006 Share Posted 28 August 2006 I haven't seen much of Gradel and I really rate Hughes in the right role but I'm willing to accept your vote of confidence based on your support for Levi. Unfortunately people seem to think Josh Low is the answer on the right side. I really, really don't see it but then he is following Maybury, which is a bit like following Keane on a festival bill. He doesn't have to be amazing, just show a bit of attacking intent, and he's won over the fans. I think he showed his bad side on Saturday and people won't be fooled much longer. Such a frustratingly inconsistent player. Personally I think it's worth persisting with Hughes in the hope that he can find that spark he showed when he first joined. If Gradel is the long-term solution then so be it. From what I've seen Low looks like he can be a threat, whereas Hughes always seems to be promising and on the verge of being a very good player but never manages it. I'm coming to the conclusion that he isn't good enough. I'd persist with Low for a bit longer, if it doesn't work out Hughes is not too bad a replacement, but I think other players could play on the right better; Stearman; Hume; O'Grady; even Hammond? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 28 August 2006 Share Posted 28 August 2006 I haven't seen much of Gradel and I really rate Hughes in the right role but I'm willing to accept your vote of confidence based on your support for Levi. Unfortunately people seem to think Josh Low is the answer on the right side. I really, really don't see it but then he is following Maybury, which is a bit like following Keane on a festival bill. He doesn't have to be amazing, just show a bit of attacking intent, and he's won over the fans. I think he showed his bad side on Saturday and people won't be fooled much longer. Such a frustratingly inconsistent player. Personally I think it's worth persisting with Hughes in the hope that he can find that spark he showed when he first joined. If Gradel is the long-term solution then so be it. I've seen Hughes on the right and he's a bit lost. Much better in the centre. But from what I've seen of Low, he's a bit luke warm. Not a bad player, certainly better than what we had, but Gradel is what I'd call a genuine winger. He's right in the full-backs face. He's quick, he's tricky and he knows exactly where the goal is. Low possibly plays the averages more and, of course, gets a few useful flick on with his head which you can forget with Gradel cos he'd need a ladder. But if I were young again I sure know which one I'd sooner mark and it wouldn't be Gradel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Dog Posted 28 August 2006 Share Posted 28 August 2006 Henderson Kenton McCarthy Kisnorbo Sheehan Wesolowski Williams Johnson Low Porter O'Grady Is that the worst looking team ever? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookwhaticando Posted 28 August 2006 Share Posted 28 August 2006 So, apart from the lack of Gradel and Sheehan in your side, the conversion process is almost complete. You must be most pleased, Thracian Personally, I think switch O'Grady to the wing (played there some for R&D didn't he?) - put Hughes in the middle in place of Hume and push Hume up front to pair with Fryatt. Gradel could be tried in place of O'Grady - perhaps try him out as an impact player for the last 30 minutes... Or we could do something completely outrageous and go for 3-4-3 or something and allow us to use Fryatt, Hume and O'Grady up front together. It's the stuff of dreams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 28 August 2006 Share Posted 28 August 2006 So, apart from the lack of Gradel and Sheehan in your side, the conversion process is almost complete. You must be most pleased, Thracian Personally, I think switch O'Grady to the wing (played there some for R&D didn't he?) - put Hughes in the middle in place of Hume and push Hume up front to pair with Fryatt. Gradel could be tried in place of O'Grady - perhaps try him out as an impact player for the last 30 minutes... Or we could do something completely outrageous and go for 3-4-3 or something and allow us to use Fryatt, Hume and O'Grady up front together. It's the stuff of dreams If only. Talking about a team like that and being lucky enough to see it happen are two different things. And I've not given up on Sheehan, it's just that I accept Kenton might be safer with so many youngsters in our theoretical side. Even so, at least the prospect of such a line-up shows that City are not entirely without the potential to play some real football and quite soon if the boss has the nerve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manwell Pablo Posted 28 August 2006 Share Posted 28 August 2006 So, apart from the lack of Gradel and Sheehan in your side, the conversion process is almost complete. You must be most pleased, Thracian Personally, I think switch O'Grady to the wing (played there some for R&D didn't he?) - put Hughes in the middle in place of Hume and push Hume up front to pair with Fryatt. Gradel could be tried in place of O'Grady - perhaps try him out as an impact player for the last 30 minutes... Or we could do something completely outrageous and go for 3-4-3 or something and allow us to use Fryatt, Hume and O'Grady up front together. It's the stuff of dreams Exactly, however he gets the side he wants and immediatley starts complaining about functional football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 28 August 2006 Share Posted 28 August 2006 Stick Sheehan in there and you might as well sellotape me up, throw me in a box and post it to the Swan and Rushes. Was in there myself, pre-match. I would like to say that I do not drink beer. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benji Posted 28 August 2006 Share Posted 28 August 2006 Was in there myself, pre-match. I would like to say that I do not drink beer. Thank you. What? and you and Thracian didn't have a friendly chat about our side? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 28 August 2006 Share Posted 28 August 2006 What? and you and Thracian didn't have a friendly chat about our side? Apparently not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 28 August 2006 Share Posted 28 August 2006 Apparently not. You probably won't believe it but you'd have been welcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
escape2victory Posted 29 August 2006 Share Posted 29 August 2006 I dont think we can play two out and out wingers and get away with it, especially away from home. Our central midfield isnt strong enough to cope and I fear we would get over run, like alot of away games last season, when we had Sylla and Smith on the wings. If we r going to play Porter on the left I feel that we need Hughes tucked in on the right to help the midfield. Width can still be achieved from Kenton overlapping or Hume drifting wide. If you look at our two best home performances last season, Tottenham and Crystal Palace, Hughes played tucked in on the right and scored in both games, just a coincidence ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 29 August 2006 Share Posted 29 August 2006 I dont think we can play two out and out wingers and get away with it, especially away from home. Our central midfield isnt strong enough to cope and I fear we would get over run, like alot of away games last season, when we had Sylla and Smith on the wings. If we r going to play Porter on the left I feel that we need Hughes tucked in on the right to help the midfield. Width can still be achieved from Kenton overlapping or Hume drifting wide. If you look at our two best home performances last season, Tottenham and Crystal Palace, Hughes played tucked in on the right and scored in both games, just a coincidence ?? Trouble is when Hughes plays on the right side of midfield he's clearly lacking - and no better than Maybury in many ways. Hughes' only big strength is his engine and perhaps the fact that he doesn't do much dramatically wrong when he's in possession. So what do you lose by playing a specialist wide right? Sylla didn't work because no-one understood what he was likely to do, he didn't get his head up early or often enough to see the pictures, he wasn't a great passer and he didn't threaten to score or make goals. That's not the case with Low. He sees other players, controls the ball, passes it and has the ability to attack and put crosses in, even to score occasionally. I'd have no particular objection to Low playing but simply think that Gradel is even more dangerous. You mention Porter and, interestingly he is the person who combats your argument because Porter is a great reader of situations and is one of the few people who have an engine to match Hughes and the ability to cover around into midfield when necessary and to do so with confidence and comfort. Were Ryan Smith the left winger I would not even contemplate that idea. But if you doubt me watch Porter next time out. Unlike so many wingers, he doesn't find covering and supporting to be any sort of chore. He gets back onto his own goalline, the edge of the penalty area, deep midfield to block shots or help play us out of trouble, it doesn't matter to him. In the modern zonal covering system, players movements are fluid and the good ones, the natural passers, are reliable in any position. So long as the left back recognises Porter's moves inside and reacts to them, width need not be lost either. It does, however, emphasise the need for the full-back, be it Kenton, Sheehan or anyone else, to be keen to attack and support. No my main reservation about our midfield would be the overall lack of height if Gradel, Weso, Hume and Porter played. I think we'd be okay with our fast covering, with O'Grady helping out at set pieces and the fact that we'd probably give very few unnecessary free-kicks and corners away. But the team would have to be aware of the potential problem. Even away from home I'd have no additional fears because our returns from such games have been poor since the beginning of last April and haven't averaged a point a game for over a season, which is no advert for defensive line-ups. In fact there's not a lot of lose, really, we'd just need one away win in three to improve. On balance I think the wingers and three potential strikers would be extremely potent on the counter attack, especially with so many passers to feed em properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.0e7438f54a80a2f2566907f77fd7a32a.thumb.png.0ea5e31693d284629c473304eabd4568.png)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.