Iain Hume

[Ric Flair]

God it's quiet on here these past few days. You wait until Reid takes over, it will be buzzing!!!

Anyway, I thought i'd raise a debate on something that's not been done surprisingly.

Iain Hume. Not having a good season is he? This should be a good opportunity for the posters who think Hume is immortalised by some and has never been as good as some make out. I'm one of the people who thinks Iain Hume is as good as any striker in this league on his day and after last seasons 14 goals in a crap team, I was hoping and expecting him to push on and show himself to be a player who might be able to make the step up to the premiership.

What's happened? Playing him in midfield certainly hasn't helped his confidence of scoring goals that's for sure. I was always sceptical of playing Hume anywhere other than up front, even if he does a job on the wing or in the centre of midfield. Still takes him away from what he does best, which is scores goals and usually in quick succession when he's on form. We miss his goals, but since Allen has left and we've played wing-backs, he's not been the same player, even when he returned to playing up front.

I feared for him under Megson, said so at the time. He's a player who certainly blows hot and cold, but even when he's not scoring he still needs to play as he's one of our most dangerous players. I still think he should be playing alongside Collins John through the middle, but with DJ, Fryatt and Cort knocking about, I think it gives our coaches an excuse to play Hume out of position and when Hume get's frustrated with not scoring goals, he becomes more greedy and that has a detrimental effect on our team.

Get him back up front, it's not as if any of our other strikers have scored goals on a regular basis there this season bar Collins John.

[Fat Ron]

God it's quiet on here these past few days. You wait until Reid takes over, it will be buzzing!!!

Anyway, I thought i'd raise a debate on something that's not been done surprisingly.

Iain Hume. Not having a good season is he? This should be a good opportunity for the posters who think Hume is immortalised by some and has never been as good as some make out. I'm one of the people who thinks Iain Hume is as good as any striker in this league on his day and after last seasons 14 goals in a crap team, I was hoping and expecting him to push on and show himself to be a player who might be able to make the step up to the premiership.

What's happened? Playing him in midfield certainly hasn't helped his confidence of scoring goals that's for sure. I was always sceptical of playing Hume anywhere other than up front, even if he does a job on the wing or in the centre of midfield. Still takes him away from what he does best, which is scores goals and usually in quick succession when he's on form. We miss his goals, but since Allen has left and we've played wing-backs, he's not been the same player, even when he returned to playing up front.

I feared for him under Megson, said so at the time. He's a player who certainly blows hot and cold, but even when he's not scoring he still needs to play as he's one of our most dangerous players. I still think he should be playing alongside Collins John through the middle, but with DJ, Fryatt and Cort knocking about, I think it gives our coaches an excuse to play Hume out of position and when Hume get's frustrated with not scoring goals, he becomes more greedy and that has a detrimental effect on our team.

Get him back up front, it's not as if any of our other strikers have scored goals on a regular basis there this season bar Collins John.

Agreed, he is the best man for the job up top. His Goalscoring record last season should speak for itself..

I also agree however that he isnt having a good season, this could be down to the fact of the upheaval of Managers over and over resulting in a distinct lack of confidence or it could just be that he knows even when he plays half arsed he is still one of, if not the best player in the side!!! (Fulop aside of course )

[Fez of Mahrez]

He's not having a good season, agreed. The S****horpe game as a whole was the worst moment of his City career so far. I've always said I'd prefer him in midfield and I still think there is a case for it. He hasn't played in midfield much recently due to injury or being played up front like at Villa and S****horpe under Megson. When he did play in midfield more recently than that he was excellent - in the second half of that Stoke home game. That position behind the front two in a 3-5-2 is where I'd like to see him on a regular basis but both his effectiveness there and a reduction in calls for him to go back up front would be dependent on the front two actually doing a job - which for me means starting Collins John with either Fryatt or Campbell. Hume alongside Clemence and Wesolowski in a midfield three should on paper be our strongest midfield in my opinion. Alternatively play King with Hume alongside John up front.

[Ric Flair]

He's not having a good season, agreed. The S****horpe game as a whole was the worst moment of his City career so far. I've always said I'd prefer him in midfield and I still think there is a case for it. He hasn't played in midfield much recently due to injury or being played up front like at Villa and S****horpe under Megson. When he did play in midfield more recently than that he was excellent - in the second half of that Stoke home game. That position behind the front two in a 3-5-2 is where I'd like to see him on a regular basis but both his effectiveness there and a reduction in calls for him to go back up front would be dependent on the front two actually doing a job - which for me means starting Collins John with either Fryatt or Campbell. Hume alongside Clemence and Wesolowski in a midfield three should on paper be our strongest midfield in my opinion. Alternatively play King with Hume alongside John up front.

But is he actually any good in midfield? Because quite frankly, his passing isn't one of his strongest assets, certainly not when he's crowded around by opposition. I think some fans (not you Fez) get hoodwinked in to thinking Hume is an ideal attacking midfielder because he likes to drop deep and get the ball ala Rooney. As i've said, Hume can do a job in midfield and if we are blessed with attacking options who are scoring goals then Hume dropping back is potentially a short term option. But for me he's a striker, that's where he'll reach his potential. If he is employed as a midfielder long term, he'll about as effective as Alan Smith has been for Newcastle and Man United.

I would like to add though that Hume in behind the strikers in a passing style of play would probably change my opinion as he'd get more of the ball in attacking positions instead of on the half way line after getting pissed off with McAuley and Kisnorbo for hoofing it.

[davieG]

Wasn't Hume one of those seeking a transfer under Allen -allegedly?

The problem Hume has and it probably applies to all our strikers is we don't play to his strengths, or should I say one of his great strengths, his jumping ability/heading works against him.

He's become the target man for all those long balls we pump up, admittedly he does a good job getting to them, but there is very little benefit derived from them either for the team or Hume himself.

Whilst he remains the recipient of these useless punts he's not in a position to score goals.

[James.]

I'm a massive fan of Hume and I make no apology for it. I think one of his greatest attributes is an ability to galvanise the team. I'd still like to see him play in the hole behind a front two. There was a talk of this awhile ago with me amongst others citing his natural tendency to drift deeper in order to pick up the ball. I think he could link midfield and attack very well. This would mean reverting to a 4-3-1-2 type formation but I see no real issue with having N'Gotty back at right back and Sheehan playing on the left. Without Megson I really see no necessity to stick to his 3-5-2/5-3-2/5-2-1-2/7-3 etc etc.

What we really need is an attacking midfielder to play with Clemence and Wesolowski. I'm not sure who I'd put there but my team would look a little like this:

Fulop

N'Gotty

Kisnorbo

McCauley

Sheehan

Wesolowski

Clemence

Someone

Hume

Fryatt

John

[teblin]

Think i am maybe in the minoity who while think hume is decent, doesn't think he is a great player.

Make to many bad decision, would like to see him in a better side, though i think if we want promotion, hume wouldn't be one of the front two, as he does to much work in the wrong areas.

Whilst other get made scapegoats when having off games, hume and others seem to be able to do no wrong even when they are playing badly, think that winds me up more.

[eaststandtom]

God it's quiet on here these past few days. You wait until Reid takes over, it will be buzzing!!!

Anyway, I thought i'd raise a debate on something that's not been done surprisingly.

Iain Hume. Not having a good season is he? This should be a good opportunity for the posters who think Hume is immortalised by some and has never been as good as some make out. I'm one of the people who thinks Iain Hume is as good as any striker in this league on his day and after last seasons 14 goals in a crap team, I was hoping and expecting him to push on and show himself to be a player who might be able to make the step up to the premiership.

What's happened? Playing him in midfield certainly hasn't helped his confidence of scoring goals that's for sure. I was always sceptical of playing Hume anywhere other than up front, even if he does a job on the wing or in the centre of midfield. Still takes him away from what he does best, which is scores goals and usually in quick succession when he's on form. We miss his goals, but since Allen has left and we've played wing-backs, he's not been the same player, even when he returned to playing up front.

I feared for him under Megson, said so at the time. He's a player who certainly blows hot and cold, but even when he's not scoring he still needs to play as he's one of our most dangerous players. I still think he should be playing alongside Collins John through the middle, but with DJ, Fryatt and Cort knocking about, I think it gives our coaches an excuse to play Hume out of position and when Hume get's frustrated with not scoring goals, he becomes more greedy and that has a detrimental effect on our team.

Get him back up front, it's not as if any of our other strikers have scored goals on a regular basis there this season bar Collins John.

think there are reasons why all of the strikers are having poor seasons.

the rest of the team doesnt provide enough service whether it be 5-3-2 or 4-4-2

any combination of strikers doesnt provide enough flexibilty.

no duo or trio covers all the angles a good strik partnership needs. i think this is why hume and fryatt have been playing in alternative positions.

this would be unneccersary if the team had people doing the work for them ie, crosses into the box, penetrating through balls etc.

fryatt and hume have been given the responsibility to do this now by dropping deeper.

i think both are capable at this and fryatt himself has said he favours this position. hume is capable of attacking from midfield and in fact drops deep very often anyway. hume is a good option for playing at the tip of the diamond in a midfield three providing the midfield behind him is as solid as a rock and the wing back bomb forward with crosses so he has total freedom in his role not to have all the responsibilty to create everything solely going through him.

think players like campbell could benefit from this too. he comes into life in the box (ie, colchester goal, has had at least 2 goal line clearances). he gets into good positions and should score goals but the non existant service from midfield and the wings is responsible i feel. he shouldnt be allowed to touch the ball outside the box and him playing left wing against burnley was nothing short of a joke

in a 4-4-2 hume has been good and contributes more generally to the whole team. he can cross, tackle, shoot and score.

the watford game hume did all of these things from right wing.

he is probably the one player who has this flexibilty which we are lacking so to pin him down as simply a centre forward isnt right i feel.

he will still score if he is attacking from any labelled position.

i would like to see him be more consistent though. he has the ability and should stand out more from the rest of our shower

[Fez of Mahrez]

But is he actually any good in midfield? Because quite frankly, his passing isn't one of his strongest assets, certainly not when he's crowded around by opposition. I think some fans (not you Fez) get hoodwinked in to thinking Hume is an ideal attacking midfielder because he likes to drop deep and get the ball ala Rooney. As i've said, Hume can do a job in midfield and if we are blessed with attacking options who are scoring goals then Hume dropping back is potentially a short term option. But for me he's a striker, that's where he'll reach his potential. If he is employed as a midfielder long term, he'll about as effective as Alan Smith has been for Newcastle and Man United.

I would like to add though that Hume in behind the strikers in a passing style of play would probably change my opinion as he'd get more of the ball in attacking positions instead of on the half way line after getting pissed off with McAuley and Kisnorbo for hoofing it.

That pretty much sums it up. In my view if you're going to fantasise about what team you would field, you might as well go the whole hog and fantasise about the football you'd ask them to play as well.

Unfortunately the more I see of players like Fryatt, Stearman, Sheehan, Kisnorbo, McAuley, Hume and even Wesolowski - the more I wonder whether they are actually good enough to get promotion from this division, whatever system they're used in. People are starting to moan about Clemence but he was surrounded by top-quality players last season, players with movement and quality on the ball. You look at him picking the ball up in midfield just inside the opposition half at the Walkers this season and the options for him must look pathetic in comparison.

Got a bit sidetracked there. Iain Hume. Canadian. Good goal against Watford. Not done much else this season.

[mancunianfox]

Whats with the sudden obsessions with three central midfielders but we won't get anywhere in this division unless we play with two wide midfielders. I don't know if anyone else has noticed this but we are not the only team in the division with dodgy fullbacks. We aren't going to exploit this by flooding the centre of the pitch...I don't really see any justification for it at all. There are no teams to be frightened of in this league.

As for Hume I think his best position is up front because he plays with more confidence there. The problem is that he is not really a natural striker yet he doesn't have the intelligence required in his play to play 'in the hole' and link the attack and midfield. He is not the answer simply because he is not creative enough. We really should be upto the two wide midfielders to link the attack and the midfield not Iain Hume.

[eaststandtom]

I'm a massive fan of Hume and I make no apology for it. I think one of his greatest attributes is an ability to galvanise the team. I'd still like to see him play in the hole behind a front two. There was a talk of this awhile ago with me amongst others citing his natural tendency to drift deeper in order to pick up the ball. I think he could link midfield and attack very well. This would mean reverting to a 4-3-1-2 type formation but I see no real issue with having N'Gotty back at right back and Sheehan playing on the left. Without Megson I really see no necessity to stick to his 3-5-2/5-3-2/5-2-1-2/7-3 etc etc.

What we really need is an attacking midfielder to play with Clemence and Wesolowski. I'm not sure who I'd put there but my team would look a little like this:

Fulop

N'Gotty

Kisnorbo

McCauley

Sheehan

Wesolowski

Clemence

Someone

Hume

Fryatt

John

if only that bugger wesolowskit wasnt injured all the time we might have a settled midfield who got into as rhthym of playing together

gotta stick with 5-3-2 id say simply because mcauley and kisnorbo arent reliable enough together in a 4-4-2

its the spencer prior factor. take him out and walsh and elliot wouldnt have been as imposing

fulop

????? mcauley ngotty kisnorbo sheehan

clemence wesolowski

hume

fryatt/campbell ??????????

[Fez of Mahrez]

That's two people in a row that have left James Chambers out of the team! Why on earth do people keep doing this?! In the Watford and Forest (1st) games, the only two games this season where he's played right-back, he's looked fantastic. We've got a proven quality player in Chambers and we've played him out of position all season. If you're talking about your perfect team then he HAS to play right-back/right wing-back. He's one of the best in the entire division.

For what it's worth, if we're continuing with 3-5-2 I'm going for;

Fulop

Kisnorbo McAuley N'Gotty

Chambers Wesolowski Clemence Sheehan

Hume

Campbell John

[Lovejoy]

His time will come!

[James.]

That's two people in a row that have left James Chambers out of the team! Why on earth do people keep doing this?! In the Watford and Forest (1st) games, the only two games this season where he's played right-back, he's looked fantastic. We've got a proven quality player in Chambers and we've played him out of position all season. If you're talking about your perfect team then he HAS to play right-back/right wing-back. He's one of the best in the entire division.

For what it's worth, if we're continuing with 3-5-2 I'm going for;

Fulop

Kisnorbo McAuley N'Gotty

Chambers Wesolowski Clemence Sheehan

Hume

Campbell John

Ha. I knew I was missing someone. And I even had a player called "Someone" in my team - although you wouldn't play Chambers in a 3 man midfield. That'd be crazy.

Anyway, that team looks good IF we stuck to 3-5-2. And it's also one of the only ways of accommodating Chambers if we play our 3 established centre backs.

Also, in that formation Hume still plays where I personally want to see him. I'm just not convinced our wing backs would do their job sufficiently enough to stop the midfield being left stranded and 5 in defence.

In short, f**k knows.

[Fez of Mahrez]

Ha. I knew I was missing someone. And I even had a player called "Someone" in my team - although you wouldn't play Chambers in a 3 man midfield. That'd be crazy.

Anyway, that team looks good IF we stuck to 3-5-2. And it's also one of the only ways of accommodating Chambers if we play our 3 established centre backs.

Also, in that formation Hume still plays where I personally want to see him. I'm just not convinced our wing backs would do their job sufficiently enough to stop the midfield being left stranded and 5 in defence.

In short, f**k knows.

Well we know Chambers will get forward. Sheehan I still don't really like at all but he's improved defensively over the season. To be honest we haven't got one good left-sided player let alone two.

[Tevez]

Hume in midfield isn't happening, get him back upfront.

[Thracian]

The problem with Hume seems to be that the club want to play him but don't know where. And I am sure that's part political.

He was top scorer last season with 13 goals playing basically up front.

With a supposedly better team it was not unreasonable to expect he'd score 16/17 goals.

But we play him in midfield or sit him on the bench and sacrifice those goals for people who've given no indication that they can score more.

Before you can decide about Hume we need a manager. A man who knows what he wants and is prepared to take the difficult decisions necessary to get it.

Once that manager decides his preferred system it will be easier to decide what to do with Hume.

I wouldn't even consider 5-3-2 any more because Stearman is not showing any signs of being effective as a genuine wing-back and three centre-backs is seriously limiting our creative options.

That basically leaves 4-4-2 or 4-3-3 and the choice between them depends on whether we have people who can operate properly as wingers.

Frankly we haven't. We have one or two who could go on the bench but no-one who I believe is a Championship standard winger.

That leaves 4-3-3.

Our biggest creative strength is Alan Sheehan so any system has to play to that strength for a start. That would mean McAuley/Kisnorbo at centre-back because they are the most dangerous at set pieces where they'd be helped by one big striker and one midfielder who can join the attack aerially - the only choices being Andy King or, perhaps Iain Hume.

Next we have to use Campbell's speed and elusiveness which means having people who can thread the ball forward on the floor - people like King and Wesolowski.

Finally we need someone to disrupt organised defences with their speed, trickery and strength to get into the box. People like Hume, Hammond and Hayes.

What would that leave in a 4-3-3 and would Hume be a part of it? I think he would.

In something based on:

Fulop;

Chambers, McAuley, Kisnorbo, Sheehan;

Wesolowski, King, Hayes;

Hume/Hammond, Cort/John, Campbell/Fryatt.

Additional subs would be chosen from Clemence, Ashley Chambers (or Gradel if he ever returns) and N'Gotty/Stearman.

To me that would play to our strengths. Particularly having three strikers because no two alone offer enough.

[Fat Ron]

The problem with Hume seems to be that the club want to play him but don't know where. And I am sure that's part political.

He was top scorer last season with 13 goals playing basically up front.

With a supposedly better team it was not unreasonable to expect he'd score 16/17 goals.

But we play him in midfield or sit him on the bench and sacrifice those goals for people who've given no indication that they can score more.

Before you can decide about Hume we need a manager. A man who knows what he wants and is prepared to take the difficult decisions necessary to get it.

Once that manager decides his preferred system it will be easier to decide what to do with Hume.

I wouldn't even consider 5-3-2 any more because Stearman is not showing any signs of being effective as a genuine wing-back and three centre-backs is seriously limiting our creative options.

That basically leaves 4-4-2 or 4-3-3 and the choice between them depends on whether we have people who can operate properly as wingers.

Frankly we haven't. We have one or two who could go on the bench but no-one who I believe is a Championship standard winger.

That leaves 4-3-3.

Our biggest creative strength is Alan Sheehan so any system has to play to that strength for a start. That would mean McAuley/Kisnorbo at centre-back because they are the most dangerous at set pieces where they'd be helped by one big striker and one midfielder who can join the attack aerially - the only choices being Andy King or, perhaps Iain Hume.

Next we have to use Campbell's speed and elusiveness which means having people who can thread the ball forward on the floor - people like King and Wesolowski.

Finally we need someone to disrupt organised defences with their speed, trickery and strength to get into the box. People like Hume, Hammond and Hayes.

What would that leave in a 4-3-3 and would Hume be a part of it? I think he would.

In something based on:

Fulop;

Chambers, McAuley, Kisnorbo, Sheehan;

Wesolowski, King, Hayes;

Hume/Hammond, Cort/John, Campbell/Fryatt.

Additional subs would be chosen from Clemence, Ashley Chambers (or Gradel if he ever returns) and N'Gotty/Stearman.

To me that would play to our strengths. Particularly having three strikers because no two alone offer enough.

No N'Gotty or Clem....

Is Hammond still here???

[Babylon]

Sod hume, why isn't Kaebi playing.

[Ric Flair]

The problem with Hume seems to be that the club want to play him but don't know where. And I am sure that's part political.

He was top scorer last season with 13 goals playing basically up front.

With a supposedly better team it was not unreasonable to expect he'd score 16/17 goals.

But we play him in midfield or sit him on the bench and sacrifice those goals for people who've given no indication that they can score more.

Before you can decide about Hume we need a manager. A man who knows what he wants and is prepared to take the difficult decisions necessary to get it.

Once that manager decides his preferred system it will be easier to decide what to do with Hume.

I wouldn't even consider 5-3-2 any more because Stearman is not showing any signs of being effective as a genuine wing-back and three centre-backs is seriously limiting our creative options.

That basically leaves 4-4-2 or 4-3-3 and the choice between them depends on whether we have people who can operate properly as wingers.

Frankly we haven't. We have one or two who could go on the bench but no-one who I believe is a Championship standard winger.

That leaves 4-3-3.

Our biggest creative strength is Alan Sheehan so any system has to play to that strength for a start. That would mean McAuley/Kisnorbo at centre-back because they are the most dangerous at set pieces where they'd be helped by one big striker and one midfielder who can join the attack aerially - the only choices being Andy King or, perhaps Iain Hume.

Next we have to use Campbell's speed and elusiveness which means having people who can thread the ball forward on the floor - people like King and Wesolowski.

Finally we need someone to disrupt organised defences with their speed, trickery and strength to get into the box. People like Hume, Hammond and Hayes.

What would that leave in a 4-3-3 and would Hume be a part of it? I think he would.

In something based on:

Fulop;

Chambers, McAuley, Kisnorbo, Sheehan;

Wesolowski, King, Hayes;

Hume/Hammond, Cort/John, Campbell/Fryatt.

Additional subs would be chosen from Clemence, Ashley Chambers (or Gradel if he ever returns) and N'Gotty/Stearman.

To me that would play to our strengths. Particularly having three strikers because no two alone offer enough.

I'm stunned.

[Fat Ron]

I'm stunned.

I'm actually quite impressed with the knowledge and the fact that he has turned a Thread about Hume into a Sheehan conflict.

Thats a fine art..

Although, I am gutted that he hasnt included Clem...

[teblin]

The problem with Hume seems to be that the club want to play him but don't know where. And I am sure that's part political.

He was top scorer last season with 13 goals playing basically up front.

With a supposedly better team it was not unreasonable to expect he'd score 16/17 goals.

But we play him in midfield or sit him on the bench and sacrifice those goals for people who've given no indication that they can score more.

Before you can decide about Hume we need a manager. A man who knows what he wants and is prepared to take the difficult decisions necessary to get it.

Once that manager decides his preferred system it will be easier to decide what to do with Hume.

I wouldn't even consider 5-3-2 any more because Stearman is not showing any signs of being effective as a genuine wing-back and three centre-backs is seriously limiting our creative options.

That basically leaves 4-4-2 or 4-3-3 and the choice between them depends on whether we have people who can operate properly as wingers.

Frankly we haven't. We have one or two who could go on the bench but no-one who I believe is a Championship standard winger.

That leaves 4-3-3.

Our biggest creative strength is Alan Sheehan so any system has to play to that strength for a start. That would mean McAuley/Kisnorbo at centre-back because they are the most dangerous at set pieces where they'd be helped by one big striker and one midfielder who can join the attack aerially - the only choices being Andy King or, perhaps Iain Hume.

Next we have to use Campbell's speed and elusiveness which means having people who can thread the ball forward on the floor - people like King and Wesolowski.

Finally we need someone to disrupt organised defences with their speed, trickery and strength to get into the box. People like Hume, Hammond and Hayes.

What would that leave in a 4-3-3 and would Hume be a part of it? I think he would.

In something based on:

Fulop;

Chambers, McAuley, Kisnorbo, Sheehan;

Wesolowski, King, Hayes;

Hume/Hammond, Cort/John, Campbell/Fryatt.

Additional subs would be chosen from Clemence, Ashley Chambers (or Gradel if he ever returns) and N'Gotty/Stearman.

To me that would play to our strengths. Particularly having three strikers because no two alone offer enough.

clemence is about the best player at the club get real!

[eaststandtom]

The problem with Hume seems to be that the club want to play him but don't know where. And I am sure that's part political.

He was top scorer last season with 13 goals playing basically up front.

With a supposedly better team it was not unreasonable to expect he'd score 16/17 goals.

But we play him in midfield or sit him on the bench and sacrifice those goals for people who've given no indication that they can score more.

Before you can decide about Hume we need a manager. A man who knows what he wants and is prepared to take the difficult decisions necessary to get it.

Once that manager decides his preferred system it will be easier to decide what to do with Hume.

I wouldn't even consider 5-3-2 any more because Stearman is not showing any signs of being effective as a genuine wing-back and three centre-backs is seriously limiting our creative options.

That basically leaves 4-4-2 or 4-3-3 and the choice between them depends on whether we have people who can operate properly as wingers.

Frankly we haven't. We have one or two who could go on the bench but no-one who I believe is a Championship standard winger.

That leaves 4-3-3.

Our biggest creative strength is Alan Sheehan so any system has to play to that strength for a start. That would mean McAuley/Kisnorbo at centre-back because they are the most dangerous at set pieces where they'd be helped by one big striker and one midfielder who can join the attack aerially - the only choices being Andy King or, perhaps Iain Hume.

Next we have to use Campbell's speed and elusiveness which means having people who can thread the ball forward on the floor - people like King and Wesolowski.

Finally we need someone to disrupt organised defences with their speed, trickery and strength to get into the box. People like Hume, Hammond and Hayes.

What would that leave in a 4-3-3 and would Hume be a part of it? I think he would.

In something based on:

Fulop;

Chambers, McAuley, Kisnorbo, Sheehan;

Wesolowski, King, Hayes;

Hume/Hammond, Cort/John, Campbell/Fryatt.

Additional subs would be chosen from Clemence, Ashley Chambers (or Gradel if he ever returns) and N'Gotty/Stearman.

To me that would play to our strengths. Particularly having three strikers because no two alone offer enough.

we never created anything anyway but now have a solid defence!

[Thracian]

clemence is about the best player at the club get real!

As many people have said, but I've only seen it in patches. Clemence seems very much like the Wesolowski and I don't see why you'd use them both in a side that's crying out for more creativity and more shooting power.

I've picked Weso ahead of Clemence because he seems to take control more but there's really not much in it, especially if Clemence could start shooting on target instead of anywhere but.

King I've chosen because he is quite good in the air both defensively and in attack when he gets the chance. He also seems able to follow attacks through right into the box given licence and I think that is something we've desperately missed for a long time.

As I've mentioned previously it is not always about "best players" but about the best combination of players. Surely fans can see that we don't have the balance right and that our strikers really are suffering from a lack of quality service - both from the flanks and from midfield - and a lack of general support going forwards.

It is imperative we get more people into the opposition box if we are ever going to challenge for a top six place. Eight draws in 15 games is tells its own story as does our poor scorin record of fewer goals than game in League matches.

Indeed we score at almost twice the rate in Cup games and that perhaps shows as much as anything how cautious/fearful we are of pushing forward in the Championship. It isn't that we can't do it but that we don't.

The reason I think we are so poor at home is that, as a team, we don't attack in numbers, we don't commit ourselves and we therefore don't create any atmosphere. Once we do that the crowd will rouse themselves and the noise will help generate some impetus.

That won't normally happen without the team makes it happen - as Martin Allen rightly said.

[Tommy G]

Clem unfortunately is surviving on his reputation at the min. He came to the club expecting to be a star 'the next muzzy izzet' bla bla bla. Weso anyday