Maybes Posted 26 September 2006 Posted 26 September 2006 I agree with the fact that despite Elvis being crap usually, he should be in the team but on the right wing. It would hopefully give a fresh approach and add some goals. I would stick with 4-4-2 with this team: Logan Stearman, McCarthy, McAuley, Possibly Sheehan/Tiatto Hammond, Hughes, Williams (when he's fit), Porter O'Grady (for the big man approach), Hume/ Fryatt Excuse me?? Why on earth would you want to play tiatto. Clearly darren kenton.
Finn Claw Posted 26 September 2006 Posted 26 September 2006 Hammond cannot play as an effective centre forward so how you think he would do a good job on the right wing is beyond me. He can't control a ball and doesn't look for a pass, he would hit all his cross into the box without looking who to pass too. If you want a pacey winger then why not just play Gradel. Hume may not have his pace but has a much better football brain if you have to have an established first teamer at right wing and Hume is not upfront then i'd put him there.
lookwhaticando Posted 26 September 2006 Posted 26 September 2006 Excuse me?? Why on earth would you want to play tiatto. Clearly darren kenton. Left foot players in left sided positions? We don't actually have many LB's apart from Sheehan and Mattock (I'm stunned that he was overlooked by Thracian, mind ). Tiatto is more of a LB than Nissa is though, and he's probably a bit faster... even if his hamstrings only last him 30 minutes at a time.
Thracian Posted 26 September 2006 Author Posted 26 September 2006 Hammond cannot play as an effective centre forward so how you think he would do a good job on the right wing is beyond me. He can't control a ball and doesn't look for a pass, he would hit all his cross into the box without looking who to pass too. If you want a pacey winger then why not just play Gradel. Hume may not have his pace but has a much better football brain if you have to have an established first teamer at right wing and Hume is not upfront then i'd put him there. Because he'll have more space to run into. Gradel would be fine but I'd rather have him come in off the bench until I knew he could cope. Hume needs to link up from midfield because he's the only one who could do it and still attack the box. That's not to say he wouldn't interchange a bit with Hammond and that both couldn't interchange with Porter. In fact that would be another benefit. Kelly likes multi-purpose players and he'd have at least three in that midfield. PS: Hammond's goal at Hereford and his pass for Porter's penalty were just about as good as it gets from Leicester this season. That's not to dispute what you say about his control but to point out that he can do it.
lookwhaticando Posted 26 September 2006 Posted 26 September 2006 You're right about multi-purpose players, Thracian. I mean, even Hughes serves two purposes... midfield dynamo and... hat stand.
The People's Hero Posted 26 September 2006 Posted 26 September 2006 Sorry... Should the thread title be Hammond is overpaid or should it be Hammond is overrated? A pesky mod (or some other cad) appears to have modified it to 'overlooked'!!
bald reynard Posted 26 September 2006 Posted 26 September 2006 Left foot players in left sided positions? We don't actually have many LB's apart from Sheehan and Mattock (I'm stunned that he was overlooked by Thracian, mind ). Tiatto is more of a LB than Nissa is though, and he's probably a bit faster... even if his hamstrings only last him 30 minutes at a time. There is such a thing as the Loan system - we got rid (POSSIBLY temporarily) of Sheehan - we COULD sign another, decent, left back - along with a decent MIDFIELD (4 players at least - what's the maximum amount of players you can get on loan ?!)
Thracian Posted 26 September 2006 Author Posted 26 September 2006 You're right about multi-purpose players, Thracian. I mean, even Hughes serves two purposes... midfield dynamo and... hat stand. Sometimes you can be very harsh.
Fez of Mahrez Posted 26 September 2006 Posted 26 September 2006 There is such a thing as the Loan system - we got rid (POSSIBLY temporarily) of Sheehan - we COULD sign another, decent, left back - along with a decent MIDFIELD (4 players at least - what's the maximum amount of players you can get on loan ?!) Manwell? Question for you?
gatesheadfox Posted 26 September 2006 Posted 26 September 2006 There is such a thing as the Loan system - we got rid (POSSIBLY temporarily) of Sheehan - we COULD sign another, decent, left back - along with a decent MIDFIELD (4 players at least - what's the maximum amount of players you can get on loan ?!) none if you are as skint as ourselves
Finn Claw Posted 26 September 2006 Posted 26 September 2006 PS: Hammond's goal at Hereford and his pass for Porter's penalty were just about as good as it gets from Leicester this season. That's not to dispute what you say about his control but to point out that he can do it. We beat hereford comfortably with an (argueably) weakened side, Birmingham will be much better than Hereford and i think a reasonably good full back with some pace will be able to shut hammond out of the game.
lookwhaticando Posted 26 September 2006 Posted 26 September 2006 There is such a thing as the Loan system - we got rid (POSSIBLY temporarily) of Sheehan - we COULD sign another, decent, left back - along with a decent MIDFIELD (4 players at least - what's the maximum amount of players you can get on loan ?!) Sheehan's on peanuts - he's only made a couple of first team appearances... and he did go to Mansfield, hardly the biggest spending team around... so shipping him out for a month has done us no real benefit on the incoming loan front - unless you're planning on loaning someone back from Mansfield? Sometimes you can be very harsh. Sometimes.
Manwell Pablo Posted 26 September 2006 Posted 26 September 2006 Manwell? Question for you? 8, four on short terms, 4 on long terms. We can't afford one so it's irrelavent. EDIT: Sheehans wages equate to penuts in footballing terms, even Mansfield can afford them FFS, we're saving harldy anything.
Fez of Mahrez Posted 26 September 2006 Posted 26 September 2006 8, four on short terms, 4 on long terms. We can't afford one so it's irrelavent. EDIT: Sheehans wages equate to penuts in footballing terms, even Mansfield can afford them FFS, we're saving harldy anything. I was meaning more the loan/money situation in a jokey way but it's been covered in another thread (in large type)
lookwhaticando Posted 26 September 2006 Posted 26 September 2006 8, four on short terms, 4 on long terms. We can't afford one so it's irrelavent. EDIT: Sheehans wages equate to penuts in footballing terms, even Mansfield can afford them FFS, we're saving harldy anything. Good argument for getting rid of Nissa and using Sheehan instead - he's younger, quicker, cheaper.
harpendenfox Posted 26 September 2006 Posted 26 September 2006 I was just about to post and say that I feel that Elvis has never looked the business to me when I read on the OS that he scored twice in a reserves game this afternoon. Still totally unconvinced, but I do know that strikers need confidence, and as he might just have a bot of confidence it might well be worth giving him a try on Saturday. Still feel we're clutching at straws, but I guess that's the reality of the situation. I think Fryatt, Hume and O'Grady are all decent players, but they must be suffering from an almost complete lack of confidence.
lookwhaticando Posted 26 September 2006 Posted 26 September 2006 Hammond is the solution to our lack of an attacking left back! It's obvious really.
Thracian Posted 26 September 2006 Author Posted 26 September 2006 What about that.....Sylla scored. That's a collectors item.
Joe. Posted 26 September 2006 Posted 26 September 2006 I hadn't thought of that one -12 players! But if you're sure we can get away with it .....I still wouldn't want Hughes. It's not 12 players! Either Hum or Fryatt up alongside O'Grady and Tiatto or Sheehan at left back
Joe. Posted 26 September 2006 Posted 26 September 2006 Excuse me?? Why on earth would you want to play tiatto. Clearly darren kenton. Kenton, despite me being impressed with him is NOT a left back. He is a centre back clearly. I think wing backs could solve lots of our problems creativity wise. I do think that Tiatto is shocking but what other options do we have?
Thracian Posted 26 September 2006 Author Posted 26 September 2006 Kenton, despite me being impressed with him is NOT a left back. He is a centre back clearly. I think wing backs could solve lots of our problems creativity wise. I do think that Tiatto is shocking but what other options do we have? Don't get me started...
harpendenfox Posted 26 September 2006 Posted 26 September 2006 The fact that Sylla scored perhaps devalues Hammond's brace. We were playing Cov reserves. Perhaps all will be revealed and we'll be told that Coventry "took the opportunity to give a debut to a pair of promising youngsters at centre-back. Richard Ellis (14) is a regular for Earlsdon Swifts, and Todd Smith (11) has been a regular for Kenilworth Tornadoes this season after taking up football in August".
Steven Posted 26 September 2006 Posted 26 September 2006 More in Mickeh's age range. The fact that Sylla scored perhaps devalues Hammond's brace. We were playing Cov reserves. Perhaps all will be revealed and we'll be told that Coventry "took the opportunity to give a debut to a pair of promising players at centre-back. Richard Ellis (34) is a regular for Earlsdon Swifts, and Todd Smith (31) has been a regular for Kenilworth Tornadoes this season after taking up football in August".
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.