Mark Posted 15 March 2008 Posted 15 March 2008 Dear oh dear, he's out of ideas and is trying the Megson system, and how void of any pace is that team. Why harp on about wingers for months on end and completely change it when he's brought them in? Seems to me he's sealed his fate but we live in hope.
sdb Posted 15 March 2008 Posted 15 March 2008 I'm loving all that pace agreed it is slow to say the least but it looks quite solid. hopefully hayles and howard can bully their defence. i sense some hooof!!!
Raj Posted 15 March 2008 Posted 15 March 2008 Howard and Hayles upfront! I'll eat my words if i have to,but i have more chance of shagging Cherly Cole than them 2 worrying the WBA defence!
Jack Posted 15 March 2008 Posted 15 March 2008 City: Henderson, N'Gotty, Kisnorbo, McAuley, Stearman, Oakley, Fryatt, Hendrie, Mattock, Howard, Hayles.Subs: Campbell, Hume, Wesolowski, Etuhu, Chambers. 5-3-2 written all over it. DEFEND!!! Everyone with a little bit of pace has been left on the bench You can't go to a place like the Hawthorns and go there with a mentallity to defend, you are inviting pressure from the start and with a strike force like they have, they will punish us.
Father Ted Posted 15 March 2008 Posted 15 March 2008 Ollie OUT! Donkey and Bazza upfront - you must be having a laugh!! And to drop Dj, our best player in recent games is a joke. And there is no real point playing 5-3-2 because we're gonna lose anyway with players like Donkey being picked every game - it's not good for the morale of the team!
Thracian Posted 15 March 2008 Posted 15 March 2008 I'm loving all that pace :D So much for the Mercury's hint at radical changes. That's exactly as I predicted except he's gone five at the back. Just what you'd do when you're desperate to score enough goals to win matches. We conceded one significant chance against Southampton away with four defenders. Why would you need five? Even the one chance was of our making not theirs. And is there any change in our central midfield? No way. Chosen Men. I can just imagine those two driving forward into the box for long. Contain and try to pinch one tactics. And, as you suggest, how do you pinch one with no pace? Of course we could get lucky. But we need to get lucky twice. Having a five man back line won't help a defence that's already sound as it will ever be. No Kingy - just another essentially combative midfielder and no Beswick to unlock their backline. Well, it's not impressing me.
Mark Posted 15 March 2008 Posted 15 March 2008 Just when we've started to create chances and play reasonably well it's all change, I can only think Ollie knows it's his last chance and has gone all out to avoid defeat at any cost. We have the best defence in the league anyway, what difference will an extra defender make?
Uncle Albert Posted 15 March 2008 Posted 15 March 2008 :D So much for the Mercury's hint at radical changes. That's exactly as I predicted except he's gone five at the back. Just what you'd do when you're desperate to score enough goals to win matches. We conceded one significant chance against Southampton away with four defenders. Why would you need five? Even the one chance was of our making not theirs. And is there any change in our central midfield? No way. Chosen Men. I can just imagine those two driving forward into the box for long. Contain and try to pinch one tactics. And, as you suggest, how do you pinch one with no pace? Of course we could get lucky. But we need to get lucky twice. Having a five man back line won't help a defence that's already sound as it will ever be. You thought he was going to start Bazza? Bloody Hell.
Smiffy Posted 15 March 2008 Posted 15 March 2008 After seeing that lineup I'm not even sure I want to listen anymore. St Patty's day Parade and big piss-up looking more appetizing!
sdb Posted 15 March 2008 Posted 15 March 2008 people are being too harsh. don't for a second think that i beleive we'll win (!) but 3 at the back is very logical (especially as they're 3 of our best players) and 2 fat lumps up top can be effective in this league, especially away from home against a better team. at least there is pace on the bench which could prove priceless later in the game. hume, as much as i like him, had to be dropped (surely the moaners on here can be positive about that?!) and etuhu couldn't be relied upon in this formation. dj's been crap too. howard's selection is the only dissapointment - the full backs will have their work cut out but what other options were there in that position??
Mort Posted 15 March 2008 Posted 15 March 2008 Howard and Hayles up front?!... five defenders, fryatt our only other attacking outlet? this is going to be any ugly, ugly game!
Thracian Posted 15 March 2008 Posted 15 March 2008 You thought he was going to start Bazza? Bloody Hell. So predictable. When in doubt get the old uns out.
Raj Posted 15 March 2008 Posted 15 March 2008 Seems to be like the last throw of the dice by a desperate man. Hoping fans favourite Fatty Fryatt can salvage Ollies career. He hasnt even used him for more than cameo appearances so far yet he thinks he can do a job for him at one of the best teams in the Division. Dear oh Dear!!!!!! P.S...I REALLY hope i eat my words at the end of the game. If not...its Bye bye Ollie!!!
Guest shearfox Posted 15 March 2008 Posted 15 March 2008 Howard starting again his the one thats missed more chances than anyone else recently. It should be Hayles and DJ/Hume upfront, I hope to be proven wrong but I can't see goals coming from that forward line against a side like West Brom.
The Reverend Posted 15 March 2008 Posted 15 March 2008 Can i just say, i've just seen Saints' goal on tuesday, what the fcuk was Hendo doing? His fault. And the Fryatt miss? Dear God. Du du du du du du!
The Reverend Posted 15 March 2008 Posted 15 March 2008 Why Fryatt behind the front 2 and not Hume? Hume is the one everyone wants to see behind the front two, he's the one with a brain, who can link play, who has a fierce shot and can finish. Fryatt is not.
StroudFox Posted 15 March 2008 Posted 15 March 2008 :D So much for the Mercury's hint at radical changes. That's exactly as I predicted except he's gone five at the back. Just what you'd do when you're desperate to score enough goals to win matches. We conceded one significant chance against Southampton away with four defenders. Why would you need five? Even the one chance was of our making not theirs. And is there any change in our central midfield? No way. Chosen Men. I can just imagine those two driving forward into the box for long. Contain and try to pinch one tactics. And, as you suggest, how do you pinch one with no pace? Of course we could get lucky. But we need to get lucky twice. Having a five man back line won't help a defence that's already sound as it will ever be. No Kingy - just another essentially combative midfielder and no Beswick to unlock their backline. Well, it's not impressing me. See so he has made changes!! That was the point I made first!!
Thracian Posted 15 March 2008 Posted 15 March 2008 I'd have thought pace was absolutely vital with WBA having played a game one day later than City in the week. As it is we also seem to have made changes to personnel and to system on the back of what has been basically good performances and where our real needs have been for positive motivation and a little bit more creative potential. Where's the creative potential or the pace? If WBA go tight on Hendrie and/or Oakley they'll strangle us at source and have us at their mercy, apart from our last line of three slowish central defenders.
Jack Posted 15 March 2008 Posted 15 March 2008 Why Fryatt behind the front 2 and not Hume? Hume is the one everyone wants to see behind the front two, he's the one with a brain, who can link play, who has a fierce shot and can finish. Fryatt is not. I agree, If he chooses to play Fryatt then play the lad up front.
Mort Posted 15 March 2008 Posted 15 March 2008 That line-ups a 4-3-1-2. Slow but positive. My main worry is that while its hardly Megson-esqu, just think Fryatt, Hales and Howard upfront simply doesn't pose a serious problem for a team like WestBrom... would of course love to be wrong, and DJ and Hume can still be brought on (at least in the past when he's been dropped Hume has come back the stronger - but Fryatt up front is just a joke, comes down to a question of options though, i suppose).
Flynny Posted 15 March 2008 Posted 15 March 2008 Why Fryatt behind the front 2 and not Hume? Hume is the one everyone wants to see behind the front two, he's the one with a brain, who can link play, who has a fierce shot and can finish. Fryatt is not. Sadly thats probably his worst trait, not his best. Fryatt is playing behind the front two because he can run with the ball and take the ball past people but very rarely runs past the edge of the 18-yard box. It could (COULD) work quite nicely. Rather see Hume/Hayles or Hume/Deej up front though, I do think he's our only real goalscorer in recent years.
LENNY GLOVER Posted 15 March 2008 Posted 15 March 2008 Preston drew today 0-0 another point further from us
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.