Fez of Mahrez Posted 13 July 2007 Posted 13 July 2007 MA has quite a selection headache in some positions doesn't he.GK - Nielsen, not much debate there DR - Chambers/Stearman, likely to start with Chambers DC - Kisnorbo/McAuley/N'Gotty DC - Kisnorbo/McAuley/N'Gotty DL - Mattock MR - Kaebi MC - Kishishev/Wesolowski MC - Clemence/Hellings ML - Hayes/Porter FC - Hume/Fryatt FC - Cort/Sappleton I find it funny that we've signed 11 players yet still the whole left side looks incredibly weak. It makes me wonder whether he will play either Chambers or Kaebi on the left at all. Maybe he rates Mattock and Porter highly enough to pencil them in as first-choice left-sided players. Or maybe there will be two more signings on the left side. Interesting times ahead.
Joe. Posted 13 July 2007 Posted 13 July 2007 I'm really hoping McAuley doesn't spend the season on the bench. Last season he was terrific on a regular basis and doesn't deserve to warm the bench next season like I fear will happen. It's obvious Kisnorbo's going to make the starting lineup because he's virtually untouchable and I'd guess Allen would choose N'Gotty purely because of his previous.
Toby or not Toby Posted 13 July 2007 Posted 13 July 2007 I find it funny that we've signed 11 players yet still the whole left side looks incredibly weak. It makes me wonder whether he will play either Chambers or Kaebi on the left at all. Maybe he rates Mattock and Porter highly enough to pencil them in as first-choice left-sided players. Or maybe there will be two more signings on the left side.Interesting times ahead. Also is there another left sided player coming out of the academy other than Mattock that could come into contention?
Lillehamring Posted 13 July 2007 Posted 13 July 2007 I find it funny that we've signed 11 players yet still the whole left side looks incredibly weak. It makes me wonder whether he will play either Chambers or Kaebi on the left at all. Maybe he rates Mattock and Porter highly enough to pencil them in as first-choice left-sided players. Or maybe there will be two more signings on the left side.Interesting times ahead. no reason why he wouldn't, a lot of folks here laugh at the thought of porter, but i think he will be great in our new midfield and apparently has looked great in pre-season, as for mattock, again, why not if he can cut it let him paly... question is, who backs up - hayes? need a couple more i guess.
Thracian Posted 13 July 2007 Posted 13 July 2007 I'm really hoping McAuley doesn't spend the season on the bench. Last season he was terrific on a regular basis and doesn't deserve to warm the bench next season like I fear will happen.It's obvious Kisnorbo's going to make the starting lineup because he's virtually untouchable and I'd guess Allen would choose N'Gotty purely because of his previous. Not to me it isn't. Kisnorbo has always seemed over-rated. Breaking up attacks and being brave is only part of a centre-back's job. Distributing the ball is another part and Kissa's well short in that department. He's also short of pace. McAuley has a pace problem too but his passing is sound and he's okay in the air. Both can score at set-pieces so, on balance, both have everything to play for. Kisnorbo has a country mile to go before he should ever be considered untouchable or even one of our better centre-backs over the years.
Kent Fox Posted 13 July 2007 Posted 13 July 2007 Have either N'Gotty, Kisnorbo or Macauley any experience of playing left side? I don't think he'll play Kaabi on the left. All the video's I've seen show him on the right, but Chambers is a good call. And not knowing a great deal about Sergio make me wonder whether he's likely to be a left side contender.
OzFox311 Posted 13 July 2007 Posted 13 July 2007 GK - Nielsen DR - Chambers DC - McAuley DC - N'Gotty DL - Mattock MR - Kaebi MC - Kishishev/Wesolowski MC - Clemence ML - Hayes FC - Hume FC - Cort I think that's the side we'll start off with... after watching Paddy's ball watching moments in Asia, he will need a good pre- season of training before he can even be half considered for a place in the starting line up. I think the rest of the team will be those we have bought mixed with a few of the originals, I think Hume has a bit of potential and hopefully Allen can get that out of him.. It's a good side, and much better than last season, great to see what you can do when you have someone who knows how to run the joint owning it...
Manwell Pablo Posted 13 July 2007 Posted 13 July 2007 I'm really hoping McAuley doesn't spend the season on the bench. Last season he was terrific on a regular basis and doesn't deserve to warm the bench next season like I fear will happen.It's obvious Kisnorbo's going to make the starting lineup because he's virtually untouchable and I'd guess Allen would choose N'Gotty purely because of his previous. The Iraqi's dont seem to think so.
Lichfieldfox. Posted 13 July 2007 Posted 13 July 2007 Not easy but based on what I've read so far: GK - Nielsen DR - Kaebi DC - McAuley DC - N'Gotty DL - Chambers MR - Newton MC - Kishishev MC - Clemence ML - Hayes/Hellings or Porter FC - Hume FC - Cort Bench: Logan Mattock Stearman Wesolowski Fryatt
sdb Posted 13 July 2007 Posted 13 July 2007 Promotion 07/08; here goes: ----------------NEILSEN------------------ ----N'GOTTI---MCAULLEY---KISNORBO---- KAEBI------------------------------------MATTOCK ---------KISHISHEV------CLEMENCE---------- -------------------HUME---------------------- ------------FRYATT----CAMPBELL---------- DELICIOUS. SUBS: HENDO, STEARMAN/CHAMBERS, PORTER, HELLINGS, CORT I know Campbell isn't here but i think he's on his way, McLeod if not. Yes Hume should be in an advanced position but i think there he can get in the right positions, as well as create chances for more than just his strike partner. If we sign a good attacking midfielder then i'd put him back upfront but at the mo we lack creativity in the centre of midfield. That'll get us 4th or 5th and promotion via the play offs against Southampton - ive seen it
Kent Fox Posted 13 July 2007 Posted 13 July 2007 At the moment, with what we have got so far, I think I prefer the 3-5-2 formations. They just look like they mean business.
General Smuts Posted 13 July 2007 Posted 13 July 2007 At the moment, with what we have got so far, I think I prefer the 3-5-2 formations.They just look like they mean business. Seconded Summat like ... ----------------NEILSEN------------------ ------N'GOTTY---MCAULEY---KISNORBO------ KAEBI------------------------------------CHAMBERS ---------KISHISHEV------CLEMENCE---------- ----------------------HUME---------------------- ------------FRYATT-------CAMPBELL---------- DELICIOUS. SUBS: HENDO, STEARMAN/MATTOCK, PORTER, WESO/HELLINGS, CORT/DODDS I like the look of Hume behind a 2 man strike force aswell actually and i think a fit Carl Cort would push DJ and Fryatt for places as would Louis Dodds.
Mark Posted 13 July 2007 Posted 13 July 2007 McAuley still featuring in alot of peoples selections despite his OG's last year and lack of pace. Either he is overrated by 90% of people on this forum or I've completely misjudged this player. Starting with three center backs with no pace isn't doing it for me either. GK - Nielsen DR - Chambers DC - N'Gotty DC - Kisnorbo DL - Mattock MR - Kaebi MC - Wesolowski MC - Clemence ML - Hayes / Hellings FC - Hume FC - Campbell [assuming he signs] Bench: Henderson, Kishishev, Stearman, Gradel, Cort/Sappleton/Fryatt Unless Hayes or Hellings (does anyone know his preferred position?) are something special our left side is very weak compared to the right.
sdb Posted 13 July 2007 Posted 13 July 2007 SecondedSummat like ... ----------------NEILSEN------------------ ------N'GOTTY---MCAULEY---KISNORBO------ KAEBI------------------------------------CHAMBERS ---------KISHISHEV------CLEMENCE---------- ----------------------HUME---------------------- ------------FRYATT-------CAMPBELL---------- DELICIOUS. SUBS: HENDO, STEARMAN/MATTOCK, PORTER, WESO/HELLINGS, CORT/DODDS I like the look of Hume behind a 2 man strike force aswell actually and i think a fit Carl Cort would push DJ and Fryatt for places as would Louis Dodds.
MC Prussian Posted 14 July 2007 Posted 14 July 2007 With the players we have, I'd go for a 3-5-2 (or a 3-4-3), as well: GK Nielsen RDF Kisnorbo CDF N'Gotty LDF McAuley RWD Kaebi LWD Chambers DM Kishishev DM Clemence OM Hume FW Fryatt FW Campbell Subs: Henderson, Stearman, Porter, Wesolowski, Cort We need Hume behind the strikers as an offensive midfielder, he's NO pure striker imo.
bringbackWalshie Posted 14 July 2007 Posted 14 July 2007 Thank allah that people are now believing we should play a 3-5-2. Others laughed at my suggestions when i first mentioned it. A CB's lack pace isn't issue if we play three of them. elliott taggart walsh had no pace but where successful in a quality strong system
foxaholic Posted 14 July 2007 Posted 14 July 2007 kisha would be there fo' sho' you must be as old as me . Surely dougan frank worthington or linekar should be in as striker or if old enough arthur rowley and what about jack froggart
foxaholic Posted 14 July 2007 Posted 14 July 2007 what about mattock I assume you forgot him well in front of porter stearman rest spot on
Bluefoxtim Posted 14 July 2007 Posted 14 July 2007 How some people are saying that we have enough strikers is beyond me. Out of the ones we have, Hume, Fryatt and Cort are the ones who can be considered decent. Although playing with them 3 all season will not get us even close to promotion. Even if (when) we get DJ, we will still need another quality striker.
Lisburn Fox Posted 14 July 2007 Posted 14 July 2007 Promotion 07/08; here goes:----------------NEILSEN------------------ ----N'GOTTI---MCAULLEY---KISNORBO---- KAEBI------------------------------------MATTOCK ---------KISHISHEV------CLEMENCE---------- -------------------HUME---------------------- ------------FRYATT----CAMPBELL---------- DELICIOUS. SUBS: HENDO, STEARMAN/CHAMBERS, PORTER, HELLINGS, CORT I know Campbell isn't here but i think he's on his way, McLeod if not. Yes Hume should be in an advanced position but i think there he can get in the right positions, as well as create chances for more than just his strike partner. If we sign a good attacking midfielder then i'd put him back upfront but at the mo we lack creativity in the centre of midfield. That'll get us 4th or 5th and promotion via the play offs against Southampton - ive seen it I have the same with Chambers for Mattock to start with I think 3 5 2 is the way forward this team is versitile and can change 4 4 2 or 4 3 3 if the need arises. Sappleton/Cort if no Cambell do not want McLeod.
Thracian Posted 14 July 2007 Posted 14 July 2007 This is not easy but based on performances/ fitness levels/presumed form at this time. Logan; J.Chambers, N'Gotty, Stearman, Mattock; Kishishev, Clemence; Porter Ka'ebi, Hume, Campbell Subs: Henderson, McAuley, Wesolowski, Gradel, In form striker. Despite the above there are several fringe players I am loathe to leave out and the picture may well change as more games are played.
MBK Posted 14 July 2007 Posted 14 July 2007 This is not easy but based on performances/ fitness levels/presumed form at this time. Logan; J.Chambers, N'Gotty, Stearman, Mattock; Kishishev, Clemence; Porter Gradel. Hume, Campbell Subs: Henderson, McAuley, Wesolowski, Ka'ebi, In form striker. Despite the above there are several fringe players I am loathe to leave out and the picture may well change as more games are played. What would be the formation in strict 442
Thracian Posted 14 July 2007 Posted 14 July 2007 What would be the formation in strict 442 No I'd play 4-3-3 with Porter having licence to roam and special responsibility for creating chances and linking up play. Chambers and Mattock are well capable of supporting attacks and providing some width while Porter would obviously have licence to provide width on the left if he so wishes. People have talked about Hume playing "in the hole" but I think Porter is well suited to precisely that position and Hume would be able then to concentrate on his striking duties with Gradel and Porter likely to increase the number of chances he gets. Stearman is energetic and skilled enough to help in defensive midfield when we attack giving us a team that is genuinely capable of pushing forward without losing shape.
Manwell Pablo Posted 14 July 2007 Posted 14 July 2007 No I'd play 4-3-3 with Porter having licence to roam and special responsibility for creating chances and linking up play. Chambers and Mattock are well capable of supporting attacks and providing some width while Porter would obviously have licence to provide width on the left if he so wishes. People have talked about Hume playing "in the hole" but I think Porter is well suited to precisely that position and Hume would be able then to concentrate on his striking duties with Gradel and Porter likely to increase the number of chances he gets. Stearman is energetic and skilled enough to help in defensive midfield when we attack giving us a team that is genuinely capable of pushing forward without losing shape. well no one cares what you'd play, all due respect. MA is a strict 4-4-2 man.
Thracian Posted 14 July 2007 Posted 14 July 2007 well no one cares what you'd play, all due respect. MA is a strict 4-4-2 man. It makes no sense to me improvising on your team make up when you don't have to.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.