Sheffield Wednesday Match Thread!

[Hullfox]

I've no idea how any two forwards are expected to do well in a team full of defenders and people moved out of position to accomodate defenders. But I agree about the beer.

Thrach, you're missing the point I was making.

Put team selection to one side for the minute. Regardless of the 11 that start, we are on occasion going to play badly - that's football.

What pisses me off is not the fact that people are playing out of position but (and I refer to my earlier post) for my money two of those guys were not even trying.

That to me is unforgiveable.

As I'm sure one of your old sparring partners Mr Shankley or Mr Clough once said "tactics don't lose games, players do."

[SydneyFC]

Andy Johnson was an absoloute donkey! A game to forget in many ways.

[Thracian]

Thrach, you're missing the point I was making.

Put team selection to one side for the minute. Regardless of the 11 that start, we are on occasion going to play badly - that's football.

What pisses me off is not the fact that people are playing out of position but (and I refer to my earlier post) for my money two of those guys were not even trying.

That to me is unforgiveable.

As I'm sure one of your old sparring partners Mr Shankley or Mr Clough once said "tactics don't lose games, players do."

Judging by your ratings I presume you mean Johnson and Hammond. And believe me, if that's your honest assessment from being there I don't doubt you for a second.

We sometimes disagree but, rather like Babylon, don't ever mistake that for the idea that I disregard what you have to say. Quite the contrary. I have enormous respect for what both of you say.

I've expressed the belief that Hammond's pace is important. Results would suggest that's the truth. But if he's not committed to using that pace I would first ask why but would have no problem looking at alternatives.

And what do I find. Fryatt. A guy who's shown no form or fitness for most of this season. But by far the best option and then what? Our next best striker - perhaps even our best striker of all given chance - is 100 miles away at Northwich Victoria at a time when our only other option in Chris O'Grady (not the most natural predator anyway) is injured.

It doesn't make sense to me. By now we should have two strikers and two covering strikers available at any one time. Hammond, as an option, would best be played fairly wide right in a fluid 4-4-2 as I've suggested loads of times, rather than as an out and out striker.

As for Johnson, he's not worth any words. Whatever you'd want to do with him, I agree. So long as it doesn't mean keeping him in the team.

The only thing I'd really take issue with is that tactics don't lose games. I think they do and players are more likely to underperform if the tactics don't suit them. Even brilliant players struggle in unfamilar places and I am surprised Kelly doesn't stick to his self-professed simplicity. Round pegs for round holes unless there is no alternative.

If RK wants to keep certain players in the team because he believes they're the best available, he has to see if there's a change of formation that would suit them. If not, he's snookered.

By example: Stearman can play midfield but not right wing. So 4-3-3 might be possible. But that requires a wing back and we haven't got one. So it would be back to 4-4-2 with Hammond, Sylla, Gradel or Low on the right. Which "winger" is open to endless debate.