Hull Pre-Match

[Bert]

Leicester City pair Stephen Clemence and Jamie Clapham are back in training and hope to play this weekend.

Clemence has missed City's last three games with a thigh injury and Clapham has been out with a groin strain.

Foxes manager Ian Holloway thinks the two could be involved in City's Championship clash with play-off hopefuls Hull on Saturday.

"They'll be training Tuesday," he told BBC Radio Leicester. "We'll be looking at what we've got to do very closely."

He added: "I'll be giving them plan A, plan B, plan C so they know exactly switches and changes that we might need to do with the team that's going to be playing.

"I'll leave the subs until probably Friday maybe even Saturday morning before I tell them - keeps everybody on their toes."

[Ric Flair]

Oooh how exciting Ollie.

[ASH17LCFC]

Same team surely

Rule 1. Never change a winning team unless your Arsenal.

[Manwell Pablo]

Will be a tough game this. I might go Phil Brown spotting in Ciros on the friday before see if I can have another conversation with the great man.

And maybe drug him/hypnotise him.

Ric you do hypntisem don't you? We'll get him, hypnotise him, and tell him to play Jay Jay in goal and Nick Barmby at centre half.

Where was I? Ah yes, tough game, we will lose.

[Thracian]

Oooh how exciting Ollie.

Well, by the way the fans reacted before the WBA game, most would sooner have Clapham than Mattock although my view is we scored four goals against WBA, with Mattock playing a part in two I believe, and that's unlikely to have happened with Clapham despite his defensive consistency.

As for Clemence where would he justifiably go in the team except perhaps on the bench?

Mind you I'm glad Holloway's talking about initial plans plus alternatives. More attending to the sort of detail I've mentioned which is promisng.

[ASH17LCFC]

Well, by the way the fans reacted before the WBA game, most would sooner have Clapham than Mattock although my view is we scored four goals against WBA, with Mattock playing a part in two I believe, and that's unlikely to have happened with Clapham despite his defensive consistency.

As for Clemence where would he justifiably go in the team except perhaps on the bench?

The guy in the Mercury only gave Mattock a 6 though.

[Manwell Pablo]

Well, by the way the fans reacted before the WBA game, most would sooner have Clapham than Mattock although my view is we scored four goals against WBA, with Mattock playing a part in two I believe, and that's unlikely to have happened with Clapham despite his defensive consistency.

As for Clemence where would he justifiably go in the team except perhaps on the bench?

Have to agree. Although I bet you he starts. Captin marvelous that he is.

[Thracian]

The guy in the Mercury only gave Mattock a 6 though.

I've not counted how many fans on here have rated the players but I'm bloody sure I know who I'd trust most to present a fair overall impression (except in the case of newly signed foreigners ) and it's not the man from the Mercury.

[SamL]

The guy in the Mercury only gave Mattock a 6 though.

Don't believe everything you read. He supplied a dream of a cross for Mcauley to score and played very solidly defensively.

Don't change a winning team.

[Ric Flair]

Well, by the way the fans reacted before the WBA game, most would sooner have Clapham than Mattock although my view is we scored four goals against WBA, with Mattock playing a part in two I believe, and that's unlikely to have happened with Clapham despite his defensive consistency.

As for Clemence where would he justifiably go in the team except perhaps on the bench?

Mind you I'm glad Holloway's talking about initial plans plus alternatives. More attending to the sort of detail I've mentioned which is promisng.

I'm not sure why you've quoted me. I was taking the michael by saying it was exciting, Ollie made it out to be some sort of orienteering style exercise the players will be going on over the next few days with all these plans and keeping them on their toes.

Mattock shouldn't be dropped, I rate him very highly and it appears he's now adding the ability to create goals as well as his defensive duties, something that will make him undroppable in your eyes and I agree right now. Clapham has been a calming influence for us at times and I like him in and around the squad though.

I wouldn't make too many changes for Saturday, although i'd like to see Etuhu back starting, but in the formation we played against WBA, it would be difficult unless he dropped a striker and played him in and around the forward area, a bit like the role Miller plays for West Brom.

[FleckneyFox]

Clapham & Mattock down the left? Because lets face it Hayles is no winger and Mattocks looked half decent down the wing last couple of games.

[SamL]

Clapham & Mattock down the left? Because lets face it Hayles is no winger and Mattocks looked half decent down the wing last couple of games.

We all dream of a team of Barry Hayles.

[Thracian]

I'm not sure why you've quoted me. I was taking the michael by saying it was exciting, Ollie made it out to be some sort of orienteering style exercise the players will be going on over the next few days with all these plans and keeping them on their toes.

Mattock shouldn't be dropped, I rate him very highly and it appears he's now adding the ability to create goals as well as his defensive duties, something that will make him undroppable in your eyes and I agree right now. Clapham has been a calming influence for us at times and I like him in and around the squad though.

I wouldn't make too many changes for Saturday, although i'd like to see Etuhu back starting, but in the formation we played against WBA, it would be difficult unless he dropped a striker and played him in and around the forward area, a bit like the role Miller plays for West Brom.

I quite agree about Mattock. Even if he sticks with a 4-3-3 and plays Hendrie and Oakley either side of a holding player I'd use Mattock at left wing back.

We need to use the three attackers again - two has so rarely been enough and with Howard being a certainty that leaves two other choices.

Personally I'd go with DJ and Fryatt but that's just because I think it gives us most variety and I'm sure a case could be made for Hayles and Hume.

But I've long wondered if our team is most suited to 4-3-3 and to me it's the best way of having sufficient scoring potential, particularly as N'Gotty holding central midfield allows use of Kisnorbo/McAuley attacking free-kicks/corners which I think we've missed.

I'd have Etuhu on the bench. Wingers often benefit a bit when the game slows anyway and I think when we only play two in central midfield no-one really attacks with conviction, being afraid of being caught on the fast counter.

So for me:

Henderson,

Stearman, McAuley, Kisnorbo, Mattock;

Oakley, N'Gotty, Hendrie;

Fryatt,

Campbell, Howard.

Subs: Chambers, Clapham, Etuhu, Clemence, Hayles.

Were it my decision I'd have King followed by Weso on the bench instead of Clemence, King because he could easily play the holding role if N'Gotty tires yet also provide extra attacking impetus if necessary. But we all know that won't happen so I've left Clemence in situ.

[Koke]

I quite agree about Mattock. Even if he sticks with a 4-3-3 and plays Hendrie and Oakley either side of a holding player I'd use Mattock at left wing back.

We need to use the three attackers again - two has so rarely been enough and with Howard being a certainty that leaves two other choices.

Personally I'd go with DJ and Fryatt but that's just because I think it gives us most variety and I'm sure a case could be made for Hayles and Hume.

But I've long wondered if our team is most suited to 4-3-3 and to me it's the best way of having sufficient scoring potential, particularly as N'Gotty holding central midfield allows use of Kisnorbo/McAuley attacking free-kicks/corners which I think we've missed.

I'd have Etuhu on the bench. Wingers often benefit a bit when the game slows anyway and I think when we only play two in central midfield no-one really attacks with conviction, being afraid of being caught on the fast counter.

So for me:

Henderson,

Stearman, McAuley, Kisnorbo, Mattock;

Oakley, N'Gotty, Hendrie;

Fryatt,

Campbell, Howard.

Subs: Chambers, Clapham, Etuhu, Clemence, Hayles.

Were it my decision I'd have King instead of Clemence on the bench because he could easily play the holding role if N'Gotty tires yet also provide extra attacking impetus if necessary. But it won't happen so I've left Clemence in situ.

I believe Weso can do the N'Gotty job quite effectively. N'Gotty is an intelligent footballer and reads the game so well but I don't like us having 5 defenders on the field in a home game.

Edit: Just realized Weso is injured, what do I know

[Thracian]

I believe Weso can do the N'Gotty job quite effectively. N'Gotty is an intelligent footballer and reads the game so well but I don't like us having 5 defenders on the field in a home game.

With Stearman/Mattock playing as wing-backs - and both have shown some creativity of late - and the almost MON-type aerial potential of Kisnorbo/McAuley/Howard/and even N'Gotty from set pieces I don't see it as over defensive if it releases attacking midfielders and if we have three genuine strikers.

By my own method of calculation it gives us 7 potential scorers which is as good as we're likely to manage.

I agree Weso can do N'Gotty's job to a point but he's not so good aerially as either N'Gotty or King and doesn't have the attacking or shooting ability of King.

[Joe.]

Another big, big game for both teams.

Please don't bring back Clemence or Clapham Ollie, it should be a virtually unchanged team for me, possibly with the exception of bringing Hume in for Fryatt. That'd make much more sense to me.

But I have the feeling the untouchable Clemence will be back, and if he is I'm hoping it's not going to be in a 4-4-2. Wouldn't mind him coming in so much if it became a 4-4-3 mind.

[Thracian]

Another big, big game for both teams.

Please don't bring back Clemence or Clapham Ollie, it should be a virtually unchanged team for me, possibly with the exception of bringing Hume in for Fryatt. That'd make much more sense to me.

But I have the feeling the untouchable Clemence will be back, and if he is I'm hoping it's not going to be in a 4-4-2. Wouldn't mind him coming in so much if it became a 4-4-3 mind.

Do you think we can get away with it?

[Dr The Singh]

Do you think we can get away with it?

The formation was key to the success at West Brom, but we were the away team and expected the baggies to blast forward. It may not work with a team who are willing to defend, hence the 4-3-3 formation used in the second half would work.

I would like him to play the same team but Ollie has options, it will be interesting to see what Ollie does!!

Mattock should play, he didn't have that bad of a game against west brom, he came up against the best player in the division and got whipped, there's no harm in that, he needs to learn from it!!!

[lildave3]

Etuhu for Fryatt, otherwise same team for me.

[ASH17LCFC]

Etuhu for Fryatt, otherwise same team for me.

You don't change a winning team.

[Joe.]

You don't change a winning team.

If it can be improved then yes surely?

[lildave3]

You don't change a winning team.

Evidently I do.

[Mort]

Same team surely

Rule 1. Never change a winning team unless your Arsenal.

5-2-3

Against Hull? At Home? ...just because it's a winning team, ok it was against WestBrom, but also against ten and then nine men, that shouldnt distract from the fact the formation and the team selection were not the deciding factors on Saturday... if you ask me had we persisted with that formation against 11 men the result could have been very different.

The big leason from Saturday was Hendrie, Howard and Hayles' contributions and the effective way N'Gotty was able to get forward... but playing Hull at home is a very different proposition to playing WestBrom away and will require a different approach.

[RowlattsFox]

......................Henderson

Stearman....McAuley...Kisnorbo...Mattock

........................N'Gotty..........................

Etuhu...............Oakley.............Hendrie

.................Fryatt.......Howard..............

Subs: Clapham, Clemence, Hume, Hayles, Campbell

In the past Holloway has stuck the same side out after a victory so I wouldn't be surprised to see no changes but I would bring Etuhu in for Hayles just to add a bit of pace to the side. I would give Hendrie the licence to roam a little aslong as he gets back into position. I'd rather have Clemence or Wesolowski in the "N'Gotty" role but they've both been injured and its a risk to throw either of them in after no reserve games, especially Weso.

[Ozwin]

I like the 5-3-2 formation. Use it attackingly at home and you're in for a winner I think.