Joe. Posted 3 February 2008 Posted 3 February 2008 This should be a tasty game. Plymouth will be well up for getting one over on Holloway and he'll be the same. I see no reason why we can't win it, but I'm going for a draw.
Jackirius Posted 3 February 2008 Posted 3 February 2008 how can you not have hume in the team he is total ledge and i think that mattock should start tthen get subbed he is class player just on bad bit of form, give him time oh yeh are we playing them on tues btw(i live in norwich)
alanf0x Posted 3 February 2008 Posted 3 February 2008 how can you not have hume in the team he is total ledge and i think that mattock should start tthen get subbed he is class player just on bad bit of form, give him timeoh yeh are we playing them on tues btw(i live in norwich) Start Clapham if fit, watched Mattock closely on saturday, was very poor, dont think he opened his mouth in the first half, didn't look confident. Will be a quality player in time, just a little inexperienced at present.
Flynny Posted 3 February 2008 Posted 3 February 2008 Alnwick N'Gotty----Stearman-----Kisnorbo-----ClaphamBori-------Wesolowski--------Oakley-------MattockHayles------DJ I don't see it happening but it's the team I'd play.
Joe. Posted 3 February 2008 Posted 3 February 2008 Alnwick Stearman McAuley Kisnorbo Mattock Bori Clemence Oakley Lackzo Howard DJ
Flynny Posted 3 February 2008 Posted 3 February 2008 AlnwickStearman McAuley Kisnorbo Mattock Bori Clemence Oakley Lackzo Howard DJ A team without Baz is no team at all.
Joe. Posted 3 February 2008 Posted 3 February 2008 A team without Baz is no team at all. It was a tough decision I know. I think Barry's actually been playing well for us but I have a real feeling that DJ could do some damage to Plymouth's defense. I wouldn't complain if Barry started though at all.
Flynny Posted 3 February 2008 Posted 3 February 2008 It was a tough decision I know.I think Barry's actually been playing well for us but I have a real feeling that DJ could do some damage to Plymouth's defense. I wouldn't complain if Barry started though at all. I like Bazza instead of Howard. Howard's the better finisher but Hayles has all his other strengths and isn't slow with it.
Joe. Posted 3 February 2008 Posted 3 February 2008 I like Bazza instead of Howard. Howard's the better finisher but Hayles has all his other strengths and isn't slow with it. To be honest I think he'll stick with Howard and Hayles anyway. He thinks Howard's the best striker in the division and Hayles is playing well enough to keep his place at the moment. As for Hume he doesn't really deserve a start I don't think, especially if it's the right wing.
Flynny Posted 3 February 2008 Posted 3 February 2008 To be honest I think he'll stick with Howard and Hayles anyway. He thinks Howard's the best striker in the division and Hayles is playing well enough to keep his place at the moment. As for Hume he doesn't really deserve a start I don't think, especially if it's the right wing. I suspect he might too but I don't know why. I also don't know why our midfield is incapable of doing anything except head-tennis at the minute. It was just Clemence at first but on Saturday Oakley was at it too.
Joe. Posted 3 February 2008 Posted 3 February 2008 I suspect he might too but I don't know why.I also don't know why our midfield is incapable of doing anything except head-tennis at the minute. It was just Clemence at first but on Saturday Oakley was at it too. For me he's got to change things around in midfield. I'd definitely keep Oakley and Clemence because they are by far our best central midfielders we've got here. But on the wings its a bit different. I'd still be inclined to play Lackzo purely because we don't actually have anybody else who could successfully play there. And I'd have no hesitations in dropping Hume at right wing for Bori, he's just not cut out for it I'm afraid. Another possible change could be Mattock at left back, and I suspect Clapham could possibly be starting on Saturday. Ollie might also want to either move Hume up front, or even DJ but like I said before I can't seem him switching things around up there.
Flynny Posted 3 February 2008 Posted 3 February 2008 But on the wings its a bit different. I'd still be inclined to play Lackzo purely because we don't actually have anybody else who could successfully play there. See I think half the reason he's signed Clapham is so he has the option of Mattock on the left-wing, especially as an option in away games. Bori looks good for right-mid, definitely, but Lackszo looks raw and poorly-disciplined positionally.
lildave3 Posted 3 February 2008 Posted 3 February 2008 See I think half the reason he's signed Clapham is so he has the option of Mattock on the left-wing, especially as an option in away games. Bori looks good for right-mid, definitely, but Lackszo looks raw and poorly-disciplined positionally. I wouldn't mind that at all.
RowlattsFox Posted 3 February 2008 Posted 3 February 2008 Although Hayles and Howard have done ok, both have scored our recent goals, I still don't think there a very good partnership. Ollie has said in interviews that he didnt want to play Howard and Hayles together so i'm suprised he has done in the last few games when we have other options. One of them needs to drop too the bench and for me that would be Hayles, Campbell alongside Howard would offer us a lot more imo, if we going to hoof if too Howard then we need someone on the shoulders of the defenders and Campbell will do that. I think stearman is suspended so I would go for: ........................Alnwick Chambers..Kisnorbo..McAuley..Mattock .....Bori..Oakley..Clemence..Laczko ............Campbell...Howard Subs: N'Gotty, Clapham, Wesolowski, Hayles, Hume At this moment in time i'm not looking forward to the game, I can't help but think we are due a home defeat and its already written in the script that Ollie will lose to Plymouth.
Plymouth Pete Posted 4 February 2008 Posted 4 February 2008 Pretty sad to see a club with their best chance of promotion to throw it away... Will you be there on Saturday? Unfortunately cant make it, there are a number planning to come, would guess around 2000. Recent events have eased the hatred, you dont get so many idiots on here now.
Plymouth Pete Posted 4 February 2008 Posted 4 February 2008 Thinking about please dont play Bazza, he is bound to score against his previous club, probally by bouncing it off hie posterior!
Bert Posted 4 February 2008 Posted 4 February 2008 Unfortunately cant make it, there are a number planning to come, would guess around 2000. Recent events have eased the hatred, you dont get so many idiots on here now. Thought you had awesome away support and was going to bring 3000 odd?
Jackirius Posted 4 February 2008 Posted 4 February 2008 need a new cb to cover kisnorbo or mcauly when they injured cause ngotty is pants
SamL Posted 4 February 2008 Posted 4 February 2008 need a new cb to cover kisnorbo or mcauly when they injured cause ngotty is pants A very mature comment. What reason do you have to suggest this?
Sods Posted 4 February 2008 Posted 4 February 2008 I would go with. Alnwick Stearman Clapham McAuley Kisnorbo Bori Oakley Clemence Mattock Howard Hayles
Manwell Pablo Posted 4 February 2008 Posted 4 February 2008 Team V Hull McCormick, Connolly, Timar, Doumbe, Sawyer, Clark (Jutkiewicz 79), Summerfield (Abdou 56), Nalis, Halmosi, MacLean, Fallon (Easter 56). If we don't beat that on our own patch then we really are shit.
ArgyleRoss Posted 4 February 2008 Posted 4 February 2008 Thought you had awesome away support and was going to bring 3000 odd? We'll bring far more than the 877 fans you bought to Home Park!
James. Posted 4 February 2008 Posted 4 February 2008 We'll bring far more than the 877 fans you bought to Home Park! Yes you will. It's amazing how bitterness can translate into apparent loyalty.
Fez of Mahrez Posted 4 February 2008 Posted 4 February 2008 We'll bring far more than the 877 fans you bought to Home Park! You've got to go a million miles to get to any away game. And yes, I did go.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.