Craig Posted 20 September 2006 Posted 20 September 2006 We can't let him go. Not only is he class, but he's the joker of the pack. He's too important with regards to team spirit to just let go. For example, last night when the were warming up, he kept playing tricks on Josh Low, pulling his shirt, tapping him on the back and looking away. Then he started on Dave Rennie, where he put his bib over his head. He really is a top lad and seems to be crucial for our team spirit. He doesn't look unhappy either. Anyone else think this?
Maybes Posted 20 September 2006 Posted 20 September 2006 He looked like he enjoyed scoring very much as he saluted us travelling fans
Master Fox Posted 20 September 2006 Posted 20 September 2006 I think all this talk of him leaving is a load of tripe! He's not going anywhere
Wils Posted 20 September 2006 Posted 20 September 2006 I think all this talk of him leaving is a load of tripe! He's not going anywhere Let hope it is.
Bert Posted 20 September 2006 Posted 20 September 2006 He's here 'til January anyway. But i agree craig, he's our most technically gifted player, works hard for the team, seems to enjoy playing for us and very rarely has a poor game. Last night, when the ref gave their penalty Hume was fuming as Elvis had just been fouled and nothing was given, he went over to the lino and had a right ol' rant, and his face went bright red! You don't do stuff like that if you're unhappy imo.
Ric Flair Posted 20 September 2006 Posted 20 September 2006 We can't let him go. Not only is he class, but he's the joker of the pack. He's too important with regards to team spirit to just let go. For example, last night when the were warming up, he kept playing tricks on Josh Low, pulling his shirt, tapping him on the back and looking away. Then he started on Dave Rennie, where he put his bib over his head. He really is a top lad and seems to be crucial for our team spirit. He doesn't look unhappy either. Anyone else think this? Definately, his performance last night restored my complete faith in his ability and his attitude to want to play for us. Was desperate to score and when he scored the penalty he was so relieved. You can tell he wants to play all the while, that's fair enough and I think he knows he's got to always been on top of his game to be in the team. I don't think he wants out at all, just wants to be a success here. One of the best players we've got, he must stay and he must play.
Bert Posted 20 September 2006 Posted 20 September 2006 Definately, his performance last night restored my complete faith in his ability and his attitude to want to play for us. Was desperate to score and when he scored the penalty he was so relieved. You can tell he wants to play all the while, that's fair enough and I think he knows he's got to always been on top of his game to be in the team. I don't think he wants out at all, just wants to be a success here. One of the best players we've got, he must stay and he must play. Spot on Ric. He must start on Saturday.
Fez of Mahrez Posted 20 September 2006 Posted 20 September 2006 Sometimes you hardly notice he's on the pitch. Luton away being a prime example. I don't think we should get carried away because he scared a couple of Hereford defenders. He needs to get himself involved against Championship teams on a consistent basis. I like him and I think the energy he offers the team is invaluable but he has to get into the game more when things aren't going his way because Fryatt and O'Grady offer stiff competition at the moment. There's not much between the three of them when you consider their respective qualities.
Thracian Posted 20 September 2006 Posted 20 September 2006 Remarked on it at the game - he looked perky as you could wish. He, O'Grady and Fryatt have to play together City's Three Musketeers. Nor can I see the problem cos Kelly doesn't really play wingers - he just pretends to and deploys em as midfield players who go wide occasionally. Porter can do that on either flank if RK's not got the confidence to play two wide and really stretch the opposition.
Maybes Posted 20 September 2006 Posted 20 September 2006 Remarked on it at the game - he looked perky as you could wish. He, O'Grady and Fryatt have to play together City's Three Musketeers. Nor can I see the problem cos Kelly doesn't really play wingers - he just pretends to and deploys em as midfield players who go wide occasionally. Porter can do that on either flank if RK's not got the confidence to play two wide and really stretch the opposition. Levi porter is a revolation.
Head Honcho Posted 20 September 2006 Posted 20 September 2006 He's here 'til January anyway. But i agree craig, he's our most technically gifted player, works hard for the team, seems to enjoy playing for us and very rarely has a poor game. Last night, when the ref gave their penalty Hume was fuming as Elvis had just been fouled and nothing was given, he went over to the lino and had a right ol' rant, and his face went bright red! You don't do stuff like that if you're unhappy imo. Couldn't he go on loan somewhere?
Ric Flair Posted 20 September 2006 Posted 20 September 2006 Sometimes you hardly notice he's on the pitch. Luton away being a prime example. I don't think we should get carried away because he scared a couple of Hereford defenders. He needs to get himself involved against Championship teams on a consistent basis. I like him and I think the energy he offers the team is invaluable but he has to get into the game more when things aren't going his way because Fryatt and O'Grady offer stiff competition at the moment. There's not much between the three of them when you consider their respective qualities. If you compare him to our other strikers, all of them have quiet games due to the way we play and the fact we aren't that strong a team in this league at the minute. I have found that Hume plays his best football at home, not sure why. Probably because we are crap away from home and most of our players aren't as effective again due to the system we play - hoof ball!. But as you say, he's got to earn the right to play. O'Grady is now strongly pushing for the first team spot and Fryatt is our best striker so the pressure is on Hume. But when Hume is in the zone, he's almost un-playable against if the rest of our team support him.
Fez of Mahrez Posted 20 September 2006 Posted 20 September 2006 If you compare him to our other strikers, all of them have quiet games due to the way we play and the fact we aren't that strong a team in this league at the minute. I have found that Hume plays his best football at home, not sure why. Probably because we are crap away from home and most of our players aren't as effective again due to the system we play - hoof ball!. But as you say, he's got to earn the right to play. O'Grady is now strongly pushing for the first team spot and Fryatt is our best striker so the pressure is on Hume. But when Hume is in the zone, he's almost un-playable against if the rest of our team support him. Definitely, that's probably what I was trying to say actually. He has to get more involved and that means getting in the game away from home. I think Weso could be the key to us getting the ball in midfield more and feeding Fryatt and Hume properly rather than just punting it up to opposition centre-backs away from home.
Ric Flair Posted 20 September 2006 Posted 20 September 2006 Definitely, that's probably what I was trying to say actually. He has to get more involved and that means getting in the game away from home. I think Weso could be the key to us getting the ball in midfield more and feeding Fryatt and Hume properly rather than just punting it up to opposition centre-backs away from home. Your right. Weso is the catalyst for proper football being played I believe, by that I mean actually giving our most expensive players (our strikers) genuine through balls to hurt teams and win us matches.
Thracian Posted 20 September 2006 Posted 20 September 2006 We make problems for ourselves. You cannot isolate strikers from other attackers. Just play all three, plus Gradel and Porter on the wings and Weso in midfield then sit back to watch the fireworks. We're stuck on the slipway like the Great Eastern. Alternatively give Porter licence to roam onto either flank and put Williams/Johnson with Weso and Hume in midfield.
Head Honcho Posted 20 September 2006 Posted 20 September 2006 I'd like to see him on the wing or with Weso in centre midfield-there I've said it
Fez of Mahrez Posted 20 September 2006 Posted 20 September 2006 I'd like to see him on the wing or with Weso in centre midfield-there I've said it It's the way forward.
Head Honcho Posted 20 September 2006 Posted 20 September 2006 We make problems for ourselves. You cannot isolate strikers from other attackers. Just play all three, plus Gradel and Porter on the wings and Weso in midfield then sit back to watch the fireworks We're stuck on the slipway like the Great Eastern. Or alternatively give Porter licence to roam onto either flank and put Williams/Johnson with Weso and Hume in midfield. Great minds think alike! Only yours 2 minutes quicker
Ric Flair Posted 20 September 2006 Posted 20 September 2006 The thing is we're 20th, we're going nowhere fast. Try a 5 man forward line and see what happens, if we absolutely pummel a team it would hardly do us any harm. It might make the fans expect us to do it every week, but we've tried the cautious approach and we lose more matches than we win. Perhaps away from home pitching up with 3 strikers and two attacking wingers might lead to us getting pummeled ourselves but if your losing i'd rather have 5 attackers on the pitch than 2 and a small chance of getting anything out of the game.
Dunc Posted 20 September 2006 Posted 20 September 2006 We make problems for ourselves. You cannot isolate strikers from other attackers. Just play all three, plus Gradel and Porter on the wings and Weso in midfield then sit back to watch the fireworks. We're stuck on the slipway like the Great Eastern. Alternatively give Porter licence to roam onto either flank and put Williams/Johnson with Weso and Hume in midfield. Just go the whole hog and bring back 2-3-5 formations. Incidentally, if we had Porter, Hume & Weso in midfield we'd probably have the smallest side since Willy Wonka's Factory 5-a-side team. I would however enjoy watching the clean sheets we'd get with a midfield of Weso, Porter and Gradel.
Thracian Posted 20 September 2006 Posted 20 September 2006 Just go the whole hog and bring back 2-3-5 formations. Incidentally, if we had Porter, Hume & Weso in midfield we'd probably have the smallest side since Willy Wonka's Factory 5-a-side team. I would however enjoy watching the clean sheets we'd get with a midfield of Weso, Porter and Gradel. Even fielding the biggest team on our staff, we'd be useless playing aerial football so the more we get the ball on the ground the better. There's over 12 months evidence to say we don't get many clean sheets anyway and have conceded goals at one and a bit per match over that period. Time we made sure we score some instead of chasing the impossible dream of endless clean sheets using championship defenders who would be playing in the Premiership if they were that good. We've only scored five in eight League matches and it doesn't take a genius to work out where we're failing.
Dunc Posted 20 September 2006 Posted 20 September 2006 Surely the counter argument is that if we played 3 inexperienced players in midfield in a 433 formation as you suggest, we'd concede more than we score. You seem to forget that the opposition also tends to have some time in possession as well. Plus we'd be back to conceding goal after goal from set pieces and I personally don't think we'd have the ball to attack because they'd be short of what is required in a 3.
davieG Posted 20 September 2006 Posted 20 September 2006 Surely the counter argument is that if we played 3 inexperienced players in midfield in a 433 formation as you suggest, we'd concede more than we score. You seem to forget that the opposition also tends to have some time in possession as well.Plus we'd be back to conceding goal after goal from set pieces and I personally don't think we'd have the ball to attack because they'd be short of what is required in a 3. Not that I'm agreeing or disagreeing with Thrac but do you think our current midfield, select who you want contribute in any way to our defending of set pieces or scoring from them for that matter?
Dunc Posted 20 September 2006 Posted 20 September 2006 Well I'd say that Hughes and Johnson and Low certainly provide more of an aerial challenge for opponents than Weso and Porter and Gradel. Plus Williams adds height too. I'm of the opinion that we play 4 centre halves across the back because of our inability to defend set pieces and so if Thrac picked the team we'd have 3 players over 6 foot I think.
Thracian Posted 20 September 2006 Posted 20 September 2006 Surely the counter argument is that if we played 3 inexperienced players in midfield in a 433 formation as you suggest, we'd concede more than we score. You seem to forget that the opposition also tends to have some time in possession as well. Plus we'd be back to conceding goal after goal from set pieces and I personally don't think we'd have the ball to attack because they'd be short of what is required in a 3. In fact I think we've conceded fewer goals from set pieces this season playing a smaller side and for one particular reason. Kelly has gold the team loud and clear not to concede silly free kicks in dangerous places and go giving corners away for nothing. That, together with a generally solid back four aerially (while Kisnorbo's around) has meant for a pretty solid look. My formation would remain 4-4-2 - Hume would play midfield behind the front two because we have no-one breaking through into the penalty area from midfield to help our forwards. The big point about the players I choose is that they can retain the ball. Porter, Weso, O'Grady are probably the best players in the club at retaining possession. It is ironic that when we had defensive formations at the start of the season we scored none and conceded three. It was only when we went defensive at West Brom we conceded two goals. The facts speak for themselves really. No matter how good our back four, the best way to defend is at the other end.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.