Mark De Vries

[He's not bald]

Thank god not everyone in here has slipped into a state of total amnesia!

Was beginning to think this thread was like the start of "dawn of the dead"

[Raj]

OK OK i realise alot of people dont like MdV but i dont think he was given a fair crack.

Kisnorbo was useless when he came but the gaffers stuck with him,and as the song in L1 goes...and now he's alright!

Im sur MdVwill be an asset next season

BUT i am willing to accept that i may be talking bollox too!!!!

[Thracian]

Seems to me that no two of our forwards are "good enough".

If your team has outstandingly creative players - either on the flanks or in midfield you can perhaps do well by keeping possession and passing your way to goals along the floor ... a la Arsenal. In many ways it would be my preferred appraoch.

But we don't seem to have or use such players and until such times as we do it appears to me that whatever combination we use is lacking in some way...

For instance: Hume with Fryatt/Campbell/Odhiambo/McKay = lack of aerial threat/ability to hold the ball up.

MDV with Hume/Fryatt/Cambell/Odhiambo/McKay with MDV = lack of sufficient scoring potential.

To my mind the best way to change this would be to use three strikers.

Together Hume/Campbell/DeVries might well manage our necessary 45 goals a season.

But to use all three would either necessitate 4-2-4 or 4-3-3. We are simply not good enough for 3-4-3.

If we were brave enough to use 4-2-4 with wing-backs we could use the non-defensive Gradel out wide and increase our goals/assists ratio considerably - but at some risk.

Or we could be more cautious and use the defence-capable Porter/Newton/Hayes in a fairly free role as the fourth forard attacking player.

The question then would be whether any two of our main central midfielders, Clemence, Wesolowski and Kishishev would be strong enough to cope and that would depend on the ability and athleticism of our supporting defenders.

Although we grabbed an early goal it was fairly pointed out that we fielded far too defensive a starting line up today with only perhaps 5 potential scorers in the side, giving half a point each for Stearman and McAuley, Weso and Clemence. It's just not enough and not for the first time under Martin Allen.

But, if we played:

Logan,

Stearman/Ka'ebi, N'Gotty, Stearman/McAuley, Sheehan;

Clemence, Wesolowski,

Hume, DeVries, Campbell, Porter/Gradel.

we would probably have seven potential scorers.

That would probably ensure our reaching the goals target we needed for a top six place but the question would remain, would our defence be good enough?.

Used at home I think so, for various reasons. Playing away it might be more prudent to play 4-3-3 and include Kishishev.

IE:

Logan,

Stearman, N'Gotty, McAuley, Mattock;

Wesolowski, Clemence, Kishishev;

Hume, Campbell, Porter.

The above retains just about enough potential scorers but would be better defensively, flexible and well able to retain possession.

[Fez of Mahrez]

That's just 4-4-2.

EDIT: Just seen the bit about how it would be more prudent to play 4-3-3 away from home. Hilarious.

[Raj]

This was my first friendly of the season so can anybody tell me if MA has used Hume/Campbell up front?

(if so how did they do?)

Cheers

[Toby or not Toby]

That's just 4-4-2.

[TheBlinding]

I can't believe you are seriously suggesting playing 4 upfront

Edit: And with Sheenan and Kaabi at full back, the two most attacking.

[Flynny]

Thrac, Porter isn't a forward. If you want to play a forward in a 4-3-3 or a 4-2-4 who'll link with midfield, Hume can play that role excellently, leaving room for both a proven goalscoring in Hume himself and an out-and-out goalscorer such as Fryatt, DJ, or MDV.

[Flynny]

Was beginning to think this thread was like the start of "dawn of the dead"

Did you just try to switch to an alternate account to agree with yourself and fook it up?

[Thracian]

Thrac, Porter isn't a forward. If you want to play a forward in a 4-3-3 or a 4-2-4 who'll link with midfield, Hume can play that role excellently, leaving room for both a proven goalscoring in Hume himself and an out-and-out goalscorer such as Fryatt, DJ, or MDV.

Perhaps my change explains it better. Porter would be free to play either flank or in the centre. Hume is capable of the role but it blunts his striking ability as happened so often last season when so much of his energy was necessarily absorbed foraging in midfield.

[Flynny]

Perhaps my change explains it better. Porter would be free to play either flank or in the centre. Hume is capable of the role but it blunts his striking ability as happened so often last season when so much of his energy was necessarily absorbed foraging in midfield.

At least Hume HAS the striking ability, though, whilst Porter doesn't. Hume plays deep anyway and can be employed on a flank too if need be. Just as versatile, but Hume is the better player.

[Thracian]

At least Hume HAS the striking ability, though, whilst Porter doesn't. Hume plays deep anyway and can be employed on a flank too if need be. Just as versatile, but Hume is the better player.

They are totally different but at the moment Porter rarely gets chance to use his ability to score goals. Porter has good shooting technique and is perfectly capable of six-eight goals a season but he won't get them being wide on the wing because he's not a pace and trickery winger like Gradel, nor does he have that player's range of shots and instinct for goal.

But one of the most noticeable things today was how much more movement there is in the Leicester attack - it was all-but static last season - and if Porter can get amongst all that more often and get himself involved with the close passing he'll score some, no problem.

[Flynny]

They are totally different but at the moment Porter rarely gets chance to use his ability to score goals. Porter has good shooting technique and is perfectly capable of six-eight goals a season but he won't get them being wide on the wing because he's not a pace and trickery winger like Gradel, nor does he have that player's range of shots and instinct for goal.

But one of the most noticeable things today was how much more movement there is in the Leicester attack - it was all-but static last season - and if Porter can get amongst all that more often and get himself involved with the close passing he'll score some, no problem.

Yes, but would he be better than Hume if employed in that position? That's all I'm asking.

[Thracian]

I can't believe you are seriously suggesting playing 4 upfront

Edit: And with Sheenan and Kaabi at full back, the two most attacking.

"Why's that?

[Matt]

MdV and Hume/DJ.

I think the BIG man and quick nippy man may cause problems to teams.

But im MdV biased,having met the bloke i realise what a gentleman he is, and i want him to prove his (Many) critics wrong.

Mind you that leaves Finally Fit Fryatt doesn't it???

Rob Kelly was a nice bloke, He wasn't up to the job though was he?

The players, The staff are paid to do a job, they may be nice people, but there paid to do a job, if there not doing there job, if there not producing the goods there out, I'm sorry, it's harsh but it's true!

I'm sure there plenty of Leicester fans who are nice gentlemen...They don't get the chance to put the shirt on and play though do they?! And even if they did get the chance to play it doesn't make them good football players because there "gentlemen" does it?!

I hope if De Vries given the chance (Which IMO he shouldn't really be given a chance...he's had his chance) does prove us wrong, I hope he proves me wrong, I hope the players who embaressed the club with there preformances last season prove me wrong...

[Thracian]

Yes, but would he be better than Hume if employed in that position? That's all I'm asking.

In some ways perhaps, but not in others and you would have to see to be sure.

But Hume seems to have set out to be one of our main strikers this season and as several posters have already mentioned, if he can score 14 goals in such a creatively barren side as last season's he should surely be able to score four or five more in the current team.

And that being the case I wouldn't want to discourage him at all or affect his impetus by squeezing him slightly further back.

It is often the case that given difficult decisions people want to push good and effective players into an alternative position simply to accomodate others.

But to me, if it's not bust don't fix it. Forty goals from two strikers (one being Hume on the form he's in) and we'll be an important halfway towards our requirements. If Hume slips back into a supporting position then we might get fewer goals from him and also be left needing to find two 20-a-season guys instead of one.

[Jonbluefox9]

I'd start with MDV next week. He brings something different to the other strikers at the club. No, he doesn't win many headers but he's awkward to play against and even if he doesn't chip in with a goal or two he may create more space for Hume to finish by drawing the attention of opposing defenders.

[Chocolate Teapot]

Do people think we will score enough goals with De Vries and Hume up front!? We have to play Dudley as he is the one striker who will get us 20 goals a season. No matter how much De vries has changed he's never going to score enough goals to get promoted. Hume peaked last season and I think 14/15 goals is about his limit.

I cannot believe that people think we will get promoted with de vries up front need to think again, lower to mid table possibly, but not promotion and that is what we all want. I don't know why I'm even saying this though as we have 4 better options.

[Milky]

Hume and DJ

[Cobbo]

MDV does things that some strikers dream of doing.

Get over it - he's here to stay

[davieG]

Do people think we will score enough goals with De Vries and Hume up front!? We have to play Dudley as he is the one striker who will get us 20 goals a season. No matter how much De vries has changed he's never going to score enough goals to get promoted. Hume peaked last season and I think 14/15 goals is about his limit.

I cannot believe that people think we will get promoted with de vries up front need to think again, lower to mid table possibly, but not promotion and that is what we all want. I don't know why I'm even saying this though as we have 4 better options.

Dudley did himself no favours today missing a couple of easy chances and getting embroiled in some petty physicals which in a proper league game would have got him at least a booking.

[Milky]

Dudley did himself no favours today missing a couple of easy chances and getting embroiled in some petty physicals which in a proper league game would have got him at least a booking.

At least Dudley had a shot. Has De Vries actually had a shot in the pre season games? I honestly can't remember one, apart from the "goal" against hinckely.

[Master Fox]

I reckon a bigger club in the prem might come in for MDV

[Flynny]

It is often the case that given difficult decisions people want to push good and effective players into an alternative position

Is that not what you're doing by playing Porter as a forward, though? I see what you're saying, but I don't agree, and probably don't rate Porter quite as highly as you. Who does?

I reckon a bigger club in the prem might come in for MDV

Are you taking the piss?

[Thracian]

Do people think we will score enough goals with De Vries and Hume up front!? We have to play Dudley as he is the one striker who will get us 20 goals a season. No matter how much De vries has changed he's never going to score enough goals to get promoted. Hume peaked last season and I think 14/15 goals is about his limit.

I cannot believe that people think we will get promoted with de vries up front need to think again, lower to mid table possibly, but not promotion and that is what we all want. I don't know why I'm even saying this though as we have 4 better options.

Just imagining for a moment three or even four up front I could see scoring along the following lines:

Hume 18-19 goals (Four/five more than last season is not an unreastonable expectation).

Campbell 18 goals (He surely cannot keep missing from the excellent positions he gets into. And his goals ratio suggests he can finish.

MDV 12-16 goals (He got eight I think in his half-season two years ago - when the team was much worst - and he scored plenty for Hearts)

Taking the lesser figures that's 48 goals out of 80-odd needed for a realistic chance of a top six place.

Unless it changes (presumably for the better), Fryatt, Odhiambo, McKay and Cort would be the substitute striking options.

Given 30 such appearances I could see Fryatt getting 6-8 goals now he looks fitter and Odhiambo the same...total 12. I doubt it would be less from any other striker signings.

This would mean a another 20 would be required from our centre-backs, midfielders and wingers...some 8 players at 2.5 goals apiece. I don't think that's an especially unrealistic expectation if we pick the right people.